Irish-Miller v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department et al

Filing 52

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that 40 Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 41 Motion for Summary Judgment without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants D. Denton , Ryan Fryman, C. Hartfield, D. Viskoc, R. Wright, and Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department shall have 7 days to renew their motion for summary judgment by filing a motion consistent with this order. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 7/21/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

JUSTIN D. IRISH-MILLER,

8

Plaintiff(s),

9
10
11

Case No. 2:14-CV-1654 JCM (NJK)
ORDER

v.
LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE
DEPARTMENT, et al.,
Defendant(s).

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Presently before the court are defendants D. Denton, Ryan Fryman, C. Hartfield, D.
Viskoc, R. Wright, and Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department’s motions for summary
judgment. (ECF Nos. 40, 41). Plaintiff Justin D. Irish-Miller filed responses (ECF Nos. 43, 44),
and defendants filed replies. (ECF Nos. 49, 51).
Defendants filed two motions for summary judgment on the same day. (ECF Nos. 40, 41).
Both motions are approximately thirty pages in length. (See id.) The first motion addresses
plaintiff’s Monell claim, state law claims, and punitive damages claims. (See ECF No. 40). The
second motion addresses plaintiff’s remaining claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (See ECF No. 41).
Defendants’ two motions are effectively one sixty-page motion requesting summary judgment on
all of plaintiff’s claims. (See ECF No. 40 at 2, n. 1).
Local Rule (“LR”) 7-3(a)1 governs the page limits for motions for summary judgment. See
D. NEV. R. 7-3(a). “Motions for summary judgment and responses to motions for summary

26
1

27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

At the time the motions were filed, a previous version of the local rules was in effect. In
that version, LR 7-4 governed the page limits for all motions. The previous version of the rule set
the same limits on motions for summary judgment. This order will cite to the new rules, effective
May 1, 2016. The parties shall comply with the versions of the rules now in effect, i.e. the version
effective May 1, 2016, from this point forward.

1

judgment are limited to 30 pages, excluding exhibits.” Id. “Replies in support of a motion for

2

summary judgment are limited to 20 pages.” Id.

3

The court will not allow defendants to skirt the page limit requirements set out in LR

4

7-3(a) by filing what is in actuality one impermissibly lengthy motion as two separate motions.

5

Defendants should have either filed one motion that complied with LR 7-3(a) or filed a motion for

6

leave to exceed the limits, consistent with LR 7-3(c). See D. NEV. R. 7-3(c).

7

The court will therefore deny both of defendants’ motions without prejudice to refiling one

8

motion consistent with the local rules, as amended May 1, 2016, within seven (7) days of entry of

9

this order. Pursuant to LR 7-3(c), a motion to exceed page limits will be looked upon with disfavor

10

and will not stay the seven-day deadline set herein. See id. Continued failure to follow the rules or

11

failure to comply with this order will result in denial of any noncompliant motion for summary

12

judgment with prejudice. See D. NEV. R. IA 11-8(c) and (d).

13

Accordingly,

14

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that defendants D. Denton,

15

Ryan Fryman, C. Hartfield, D. Viskoc, R. Wright, and Las Vegas Metropolitan Police

16

Department’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 40) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED

17

without prejudice to refiling a motion consistent with this order.

18

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants D. Denton, Ryan Fryman, C. Hartfield, D.

19

Viskoc, R. Wright, and Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department’s motion for summary

20

judgment (ECF No. 41) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED without prejudice to refiling a motion

21

consistent with this order.

22

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants D. Denton, Ryan Fryman, C. Hartfield, D.

23

Viskoc, R. Wright, and Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department shall have seven (7) days to

24

renew their motion for summary judgment by filing a motion consistent with this order.

25

DATED July 21, 2016.

26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-