Williams v. United Services Automobile Association

Filing 22

ORDER Granting 21 Stipulation to Extend Discovery Deadline. Discovery due by 3/10/2016. Motions due by 4/11/2016. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 5/11/2016. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 9/21/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DC)

Case 2:14-cv-02092-GMN-GWF Document 21 Filed 09/18/15 Page 1 of 6

1 ROBERT W. FREEMAN, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 003062
2 E-Mail: [e-mail]
PAMELA L. MCGAHA, ESQ.
3 Nevada Bar No. 008181
Email: [e-mail]
4 LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
6385 S. Rainbow Boulevard, Suite 600
5 Las Vegas, Nevada 89118
Telephone: [phone]
6 Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
7 United Services Automobile
Association Casualty Insurance Company
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
10
11
12
13
14

ROOSEVELT WILLIAMS, individually,

CASE NO. 2:14-cv-02092-GMN-GWF

Plaintiff,

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND
DISCOVERY DEADLINE

vs.

(THIRD REQUEST)

UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE
15 ASSOCIATION; DOES 1 through 10, ROE
ENTITIES 11 through 20, inclusive jointly
16 and severally,
17
18
19
20
21

Defendants.
Pursuant to LR 6-1 and LR 26-4, the parties, by and through their respective
counsel of record, hereby stipulate and request that this Court extend discovery in the
above-captioned case ninety (90) days, up to and including March 11, 2016. In addition,

22 the parties request that the dispositive motions and pretrial order deadlines be extended
23 for an additional ninety (90) days as outlined herein. In support of this Stipulation and
24 Request, the parties state as follows:
25

1.

26
27

LEWIS

Court.
2.

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

On December 11, 2014, Defendant filed its Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint

28

BRISBOIS

BISGAARD
& SMITH LLP

On December 11, 2014, Defendant removed the instant action to Federal

4845-1592-5032.1

1

Case 2:14-cv-02092-GMN-GWF Document 21 Filed 09/18/15 Page 2 of 6

1
2
3

with Federal Court.
3.

On December 29, 2014, Defendant filed its Statement Regarding Removal.

4.

On February 2, 2015, the parties prepared and the Court then entered a

4
5
6

Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order (the Order).
5.

disclosures.

7
8

6.

7.

11

2015; however, Plaintiff did not provide signed medical authorizations until

13

August 12, 2015. Plaintiff has agreed to provide supplemental responses to

14

his Interrogatories identifying medical providers he treated with prior to the

15

subject accident, so Defendant can utilize the medical authorization.

16
8.

On April 16, 2015, Plaintiff served written discovery on Defendant.
Defendant served its responses to Plaintiff’s Discovery on May 14, 2015.

18
19

On March 20, 2015, Defendant served written discovery on Plaintiff.
Plaintiff served his responses to Defendant’s Discovery request on May 6,

12

17

On March 10, Defendant served it’s initial document and witness
disclosures.

9
10

On February 3, 2015, Plaintiff served his initial document and witness

9.

Defendant took the deposition of Dr. Leo Germin on August 11, 2015.

20 DISCOVERY REMAINING
21
22
23
24

1.

Defendant will take the deposition of Plaintiff; however, due to the apparent

grave medical condition of Plaintiff (due to illness unrelated to the subject accident), and
from which is not expected to recover, the parties are required to explore alternate means

25 of completing his deposition.
26

Plaintiff will take the deposition of Defendant’s representatives.

27

LEWIS

2.
3.

The parties will collect Plaintiff’s medical and billing records related to

28 medical treatment following the accident, as well as medical records for medical

BRISBOIS

BISGAARD
& SMITH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

4845-1592-5032.1

2

Case 2:14-cv-02092-GMN-GWF Document 21 Filed 09/18/15 Page 3 of 6

1 treatment Plaintiff underwent prior to the subject accident.
2
3
4
5
6

4.

The parties will take the depositions of the designated expert witnesses.

5.

The parties will take the depositions of Plaintiff’s medical providers once

Defendant is able to obtain the medical records.
6.

through discovery.

7
8

The parties will take the depositions of any and all other witnesses garnered

This Request for an extension of time is not sought for any improper purpose or

9 other purpose of delay. Rather, it is sought by the parties solely for the purpose of
10 allowing sufficient time to conduct discovery.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

LEWIS

WHY REMAINING DISCOVERY HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED
The parties have exchanged written discovery requests. Defendant received a
signed medical authorization on August 12, 2015; however, Plaintiff has not yet provided
information related to medical providers he sought treatment with prior to the subject
accident. Defendant is of the understanding that Plaintiff is currently in a declining state
of health, so significant, that he is confined to his home with in-home medical services
attending to his needs. The reason for his declining health appears to be unrelated to
injuries sustained in the accident, but instead, related to a long standing medical
condition/illness. It is the parties’ understanding that Plaintiff’s current state of health may
have had some impact on his ability to provide a complete history of his medical
treatment prior to and subsequent to the subject accident as requested by way of
Defendant’s written discovery. However, Plaintiff’s counsel is working with Plaintiff to
obtain sufficient medical information to allow Defendant to utilize the medical
authorization to obtain pertinent pre-accident medical records. Plaintiff’s prior medical
condition is particularly important in this case because he is alleging significant
neurological injuries as a result of the subject accident.
Defendant has requested Plaintiff supplement his discovery responses with

28

BRISBOIS

BISGAARD
& SMITH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

4845-1592-5032.1

3

Case 2:14-cv-02092-GMN-GWF Document 21 Filed 09/18/15 Page 4 of 6

1 information related to his prior medical condition so the status of Plaintiff’s pre-accident
2 medical condition can be understood. Defendant also intended to obtain and/or confirm
3 this information at Plaintiff’s deposition. However, the parties became aware recently of
4 the serious nature of Plaintiff’s declining health which prevents him from leaving his
5 house to attend a deposition. Moreover, it appears Plaintiff’s condition requires only a
6 limited period of time in which he could sit for a deposition in his home. Accordingly, the
7 parties are in the process of determining the best means possible to obtain pertinent
8 information from Plaintiff while accommodating his health needs.
9

The parties anticipate that Defendant will collect Plaintiff’s medical records once a

10 list of medical providers are provided to Defendant. Since Plaintiff is alleging significant
11 neurological injuries as a result of the accident, in addition to neck and back injuries, it will
12 be necessary for all medical records to be obtained in order for Defendant to adequately
13 assess expert retention for this case. Thus, the parties are requesting an extension to the
14 deadline in which to designate experts for this case. Plaintiff has requested to take the
15 deposition of one or more of Defendant’s employees involved in handling Plaintiff’s
16 underinsured motorist claim (“UIM claim”) and the parties will need to coordinate dates for
17 these depositions. Defendant’s employees are located out of state, so it will require travel
18 by the parties for the depositions. Once Plaintiff’s medical records are obtained, the
19 parties may need to schedule the depositions of certain of Plaintiff’s treating physicians
20 as well as the depositions of any expert witnesses. The parties have already completed
21 the deposition of Plaintiff’s neurologist, Dr. Leo Germin.
22

The parties have conferred regarding discovery for this case and the issues made

23 known recently regarding the state of Plaintiff’s declining health which complicates
24 discovery for this case.

It appears the parties can work together to complete the

25 discovery requested with additional time allowed by this court.
26

Extension or Modification of The Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. LR 26-4

27 governs modifications or extension of this discovery plan and scheduling order. Any

LEWIS

28 stipulation or motion must be made no later than twenty-one (21) days before the

BRISBOIS

BISGAARD
& SMITH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

4845-1592-5032.1

4

Case 2:14-cv-02092-GMN-GWF Document 21 Filed 09/18/15 Page 5 of 6

1 expiration of the subject deadline, and comply fully with LR 26-4.
2

The following is a list of the current discovery deadlines and the parties’ proposed

3 extended deadlines.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Scheduled Event

Current Deadline

Proposed Deadline

Discovery Cut-off

December 11, 2015

March 10, 2016

Expert Disclosure pursuant to
Fed R. Civ. P. 26 (a)(2)

October 9, 2015

January 7, 2016

Rebuttal Expert Disclosure
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
26(a)(2)

November 11, 2015

February 8, 2016

Interim Status Report

October 9, 2015

January 7, 2016

Dispositive Motions

January 12, 2016

April 11, 2016, or at least
thirty (30) days after the
close of discovery

Joint Pretrial Order

February 10, 2016

May 11, 2016, or at least
thirty (30) days after the
decision of last Dispositive
Motions

11
12
13
14

This Request for an extension of time is not sought for any improper purpose or

15

16 other purpose of delay. Rather, it is sought by the parties solely for the purpose of
17 allowing sufficient time to conduct discovery in this case and adequately prepare their
18 respective cases for trial.
This is the third request for extension of time in this matter. The parties

19

20 respectfully submit that the reasons set forth above constitute compelling reasons and
21 good cause for the short extension.
22 / / /
23
24
25
26
27

LEWIS

///
///
///
///

28 / / /

BRISBOIS

BISGAARD
& SMITH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

4845-1592-5032.1

5

Case 2:14-cv-02092-GMN-GWF Document 21 Filed 09/18/15 Page 6 of 6

1

WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request that this Court extend the discovery

2 period by ninety days (90) days from the current deadline of December 11, 2015 up to
3
4

and including March 10, 2016 and the other discovery dates as outlined in accordance
with the table above.

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

DATED this 18th day of September, 2015.

DATED this 18th day of September, 2015.

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH

RICHARD HARRIS LAW FIRM

/s/ Pamela L. McGaha
Robert W. Freeman, Jr., Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 3062
Pamela L. McGaha, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 8181
6385 S. Rainbow Blvd., Suite 600
Las Vegas, Nevada 89118
Attorneys for Defendant
United Services Automobile
Association Casualty Insurance
Company

/a/ A.J. Sharp
A.J. Sharp, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 11457
801 S. Fourth Street
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Attorneys for Plaintiff

14
ORDER

15
IT IS SO ORDERED.

16
17

Dated this ___ day of ______________, 2015.
this 21st day of September, 2015.

18
______________________________
_______________________________
U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
GEORGE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
U.S. FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

LEWIS

28

BRISBOIS

BISGAARD
& SMITH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

4845-1592-5032.1

6