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)
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?