Ballentine et al v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department et al

Filing 284

ORDER Granting 283 Stipulation to Continue Trial. Calendar Call set for 7/5/2023 at 09:00 AM in LV Courtroom 6C before Judge Andrew P. Gordon. Jury Trial set for 7/10/2023 at 09:00 AM in LV Courtroom 6C before Judge Andrew P. Gordon. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 2/22/2023. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LOE)

Download PDF
Case 2:14-cv-01584-APG-EJY Document 284 Filed 02/22/23 Page 1 of 2 10001 Park Run Drive Las Vegas, Nevada 89145 (702) 382-0711 FAX: (702) 382-5816 MARQUIS AURBACH 1 Marquis Aurbach Craig R. Anderson, Esq. 2 Nevada Bar No. 6882 10001 Park Run Drive 3 Las Vegas, Nevada 89145 Telephone: (702) 382-0711 4 Facsimile: (702) 382-5816 canderson@maclaw.com 5 Attorneys for Defendants 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 BRIAN BALLENTINE, an individual; Case Number: CATALINO DAZO, an individual; KELLY 2:14-cv-01584-APG-EJY 9 PATTERSON, an individual; and GAIL SACCO, an individual, 10 STIPULATION AND ORDER TO Plaintiffs, CONTINUE TRIAL 11 vs. (FIRST REQUEST) 12 LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE 13 DEPARTMENT, in its official capacity; DETECTIVE CHRISTOPHER T. TUCKER, 14 as an individual and in his official capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Date of Trial: 4/10/23 15 Detective; SERGEANT MIKE WALLACE, Time of Trial: 9:00 a.m. as an individual and in his official capacity as 16 a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Sergeant; and LIEUTENANT JOHN 17 LIBERTY, as an individual and in his official capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police 18 Department Lieutenant, 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Defendants. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Plaintiffs Brian Ballentine, Catalino Dazo and Kelly Patterson (“Plaintiffs”), by and through their attorney of record, Margaret A. McLetchie, Esq. of McLetchie Law and Defendant Christopher Tucker (“Defendant Tucker”), by and through his attorney of record, Craig R. Anderson, Esq. of Marquis Aurbach, that the trial currently scheduled to begin on April 10, 2023, (ECF No. 269), be continued to the Court’s July 2023 stack. This Stipulation is entered into for the following reasons: 28 Page 1 of 2 MAC:05166-824 4998782_1 2/21/2023 1:07 PM Case 2:14-cv-01584-APG-EJY Document 284 Filed 02/22/23 Page 2 of 2 1 1. Defense counsel has recently learned that Defendant Tucker has military 2 obligations during the current trial dates. 3 2. In addition, despite Defendant Tucker informing the Ninth Circuit Court of 4 Appeals of the current trial date, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has set oral argument in 5 Richards v. LVMPD, 22-15475, for April 12, 2023 in San Francisco, California. Therefore, 6 defense counsel will be unavailable on April 11 or 12, 2023. 7 3. Due to the above conflicts, the parties have met, conferred and agree that a new 8 trial date be set on the Court’s July 2023 trial stack. 9 10 10001 Park Run Drive Las Vegas, Nevada 89145 (702) 382-0711 FAX: (702) 382-5816 MARQUIS AURBACH 11 12 13 14 15 4. This is the first stipulation filed to continue the trial date. IT IS SO STIPULATED this 21st day of February, 2023. MARQUIS AURBACH MCLETCHIE LAW By: s/Craig R. Anderson Craig R. Anderson, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 6882 10001 Park Run Drive Las Vegas, Nevada 89145 Attorney for Defendant Tucker By: s/Margaret A. McLetchie Margaret A. McLetchie, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 10931 602 South Tenth Street Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Attorney for Plaintiffs 16 17 18 19 20 ORDER IT IS SO ORDERED that the trial date of April 10, 2023 be vacated and 21 rescheduled to July 10, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. Calendar call is continued to July 5, 2023 at 9:00 22 a.m. in Las Vegas courtroom 6C. 23 24 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED: February 22, 2023 Dated:__________________ ________________________ ANDREW P. GORDON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 27 28 Page 2 of 2 MAC:05166-824 4998782_1 2/21/2023 1:07 PM

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?