Walker et al v. North Las Vegas Police Department et al

Filing 136

ORDER Granting 135 Stipulation for Extension of Time re 132 Objections re LR IB 3-1 or Motion for District Judge to Reconsider Order (First Request). Replies due by 5/30/2017. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 5/23/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Margaret A. McLetchie, NBN 10931 Alina M. Shell, NBN 11711 MCLETCHIE SHELL LLC 701 East Bridger Ave., Suite 520 Las Vegas, NV 89101 Telephone: (702)728-5300 Jennifer L. Braster, NBN 9982 NAYLOR & BRASTER 1050 Indigo Drive, Suite 200 Las Vegas, NV 89145 Telephone (702) 420-7000 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 DISTRICT OF NEVADA ATTORNEYS AT LAW 701 EAST BRIDGER AVE., SUITE 520 LAS VEGAS, NV 89101 (702)728-5300 (T) / (702)425-8220 (F) WWW.NVLITIGATION.COM 12 13 THOMAS WALKER, an individual, and CATHY CATALDO, an individual 14 15 Plaintiffs, vs. 16 17 18 19 20 CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS, a Municipal Corporation, OFFICER PAUL MAALOUF, individually and in his official capacity as a North Las Vegas Police Department Officer, OFFICER TRAVIS SNYDER, individually and in his official capacity as a North Las Vegas Police Department Officer, Case. No.: 2:14-cv-01475-JAD-NJK STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE PLAINTIFFS’ REPLY TO CITY OF HENDERSON’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST TO RECONDISER MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S ORDER ON MOTION TO QUASH (ECF No. 125) [ECF No. 135] 21 Defendants. 22 Plaintiffs, 23 THOMAS WALKER and CATHY CATALDO (hereinafter 24 “Plaintiffs”), by and through their attorneys of record, Margaret A. McLetchie and Alina M. 25 Shell of McLetchie Shell, LLC and Jennifer L. Braster of Naylor & Braster, and City of 26 Henderson, by and through its counsel of record, Josh M. Reid, Esq. and Nancy D. Savage, 27 Esq., of the City of Henderson’s City Attorney’s Office, hereby stipulate and agree as 28 follows: 1 1 IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED to by the Parties that the time for Plaintiffs 2 to file their Reply to City of Henderson’s Response to Plaintiffs’ Request to Reconsider 3 Magistrate Judge’s Order on Motion to Quash Non-Party Subpoena (ECF No. 125) in the 4 above entitled matter shall be extended for eight days from May 22, 2017, which would now 5 6 7 8 make the Reply due by May 30, 2017. This stipulation is made because counsel for Plaintiffs had an opening brief on May 17, 2017 with the Nevada Supreme Court in James v. State, Case No. 71935. Counsel for plaintiffs also had a reply brief due that same day with the Nevada Supreme Court in Richard 9 v. State, Case No. 71288. Additionally, counsel for Plaintiffs was required to travel to 10 11 ATTORNEYS AT LAW 701 EAST BRIDGER AVE., SUITE 520 LAS VEGAS, NV 89101 (702)728-5300 (T) / (702)425-8220 (F) WWW.NVLITIGATION.COM 12 13 14 15 Lovelock, Nevada from May 19, 2017 through May 20, 2017 to visit a client in another matter in which counsel is appointed post-conviction counsel. In addition, Plaintiffs are conducting depositions of the North Las Vegas Police Department’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6) witnesses May 23, 2017, through May 25, 2017. As such, the stipulation for an extension of time is not for any improper purpose or for the purpose of delay. 16 DATED this ____ day of May, 2017. DATED this ____ day of May, 2017. 17 MCLETCHIE SHELL, LLC CITY OF HENDERSON By: /s/ Alina M. Shell Margaret A. McLetchie, NBN 10931 Alina M. Shell, NBN 11711 701 East Bridger Ave., Suite 520 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 By: /s/ Nancy D. Savage Josh M. Reid, NBN 7497 Nancy D. Savage, NBN 392 240 Water Street, MSC 144 Henderson, NV 89015 Attorneys for Non-Party City of Henderson 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NAYLOR & BRASTER Jennifer L. Braster, NBN 9982 1050 Indigo Drive, Suite 200 Las Vegas, NV 89145 Attorneys for Plaintiffs ORDER 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 27 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 28 DATED: May 23, 2017 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?