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

Filing 289

ORDER Granting 288 Stipulation to Continue. Calendar Call set for 4/2/2024 at 09:00 AM in LV Courtroom 6C before Judge Andrew P. Gordon. Jury Trial set for 4/8/2024 at 09:00 AM in LV Courtroom 6C before Judge Andrew P. Gordon. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 9/25/2023. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - RGDG)

Download PDF
Case 2:14-cv-01584-APG-EJY Document 289 Filed 09/25/23 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. (SECOND 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: 12/04/23 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 28 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 December 4, 2023, (ECF No. 287), be continued to the Court’s March and/or April 2024 stacks. This Stipulation is entered into for the following reasons: 1. The parties have met and conferred regarding trial readiness. Page 1 of 2 MAC:05166-824 5226527_2 9/22/2023 1:17 PM Case 2:14-cv-01584-APG-EJY Document 289 Filed 09/25/23 Page 2 of 2 1 2. Although the parties agree that the case is ready for trial, Defendants’ expert 2 witness is unavailable during the month of December 2023. 3 3. Counsel for Defendants have a trial scheduled for January 2024 in the Eighth 4 Judicial District Court. 5 4. Counsel for Plaintiffs also have conflicts in December 2023 and January 2024, 6 including but not limited to several matters where discovery is scheduled to close in that time 7 period. 8 5. Due to the above conflicts, the parties have met, conferred and agree that a new 10001 Park Run Drive Las Vegas, Nevada 89145 (702) 382-0711 FAX: (702) 382-5816 MARQUIS AURBACH 9 trial date be set on the Court’s March and/or April 2024 trial stacks. 10 6. 11 IT IS SO STIPULATED this 22nd day of September, 2023. 12 13 14 15 16 This is the second stipulation filed to continue the trial date. 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 17 18 19 20 ORDER 21 IT IS SO ORDERED that the November 28, 2023 calendar call is vacated and 22 continued to April 2, 2024 at 9:00 a.m, and the trial date of December 4, 2023 be vacated and 23 continued to April 8, 2024 at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 6C. 24 25 26 27 ANDREW P. GORDON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DATED: September 25, 2023 28 Page 2 of 2 MAC:05166-824 5226527_2 9/22/2023 1:17 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?