Harris v. City of Henderson et al

Filing 107

ORDER granting 106 Stipulation, granting 93 Objection, granting 103 Motion for Reconsideration; Motions due one week after issuance of this order. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due two weeks after the issuance of this order. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 1/19/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM) Modified on 1/19/2018 (JM).

Case 2:15-cv-00337-GMN-PAL Document 106 Filed 01/16/18 Page 1 of 5

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

LYSSA S. ANDERSON
Nevada Bar No. 5781
RYAN W. DANIELS
Nevada Bar No. 13094
KAEMPFER CROWELL
1980 Festival Plaza Drive, Suite 650
Las Vegas, Nevada 89135
Telephone: [phone]
Fax:
[phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE
DEPARTMENT, SHERIFF DOUGLAS
GILLESPIE and OFFICER SCOTT NIELSON

9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
11
HARVESTER HARRIS,

Case No. 2:15-cv-00337-GMN-PAL

12
Plaintiff,
13

vs.

14

CITY OF HENDERSON; a political
subdivision of the State of Nevada; LAS
VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE
DEPARTMENT, a political subdivision of the
State of Nevada; SHERIFF DOUG
GILLESPIE, individually; CHIEF PATRICK
MOERS, individually; OFFICER SCOTT
NIELSON, P#4408, individually;
DETECTIVE PERDUE, individually; DOE
OFFICERS III-X; and JOHN DOES I-X,
inclusive,

15
16
17
18
19
20

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
EXTEND DEADLINE TO SUBMIT
JOINT PRE-TRIAL ORDER
PURSUANT TO ECF NO. 102
(First Request)

Defendants.

KAEMPFER CROWELL

1980 Festival Plaza Drive
Suite 250
Las Vegas, Nevada 89113

21
22

The above-referenced parties, by and through their counsel of record, hereby request that

23

the current deadline for the parties to submit a Joint Pre-Trial Order, January 16, 2018, pursuant

24

201780116 SAO to Extend JPO Deadline.docx 6943.86

Page 1 of 5

Case 2:15-cv-00337-GMN-PAL Document 106 Filed 01/16/18 Page 2 of 5

1

to ECF No. 102, be extended and/or stay pending a ruling on Defendants’ pending Motion for

2

Reconsideration. [ECF No. 103].

3
4
5
6

1.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY.
A.

The Motions to Dismiss.

Plaintiff filed his original Complaint in this action on February 15, 2015, naming the City of
Henderson, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (“LVMPD”), Sheriff Doug Gillespie and Chief
Patrick Moers. [ECF No. 1]. The City of Henderson and Chief Moers filed a Motion to Dismiss. [ECF

7
No. 12]. Similarly, LVMPD and Sheriff Gillespie also filed a Motion to Dismiss. [ECF No. 13]. In

8
responding to the Motions to Dismiss, Plaintiff sought leave to amend his Complaint. As such, the Court

9
10

denied the Motions to Dismiss and granted Plaintiff leave to amend his Complaint. [ECF No. 26].
The First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) was filed and also named Officer Scott Nielson and

11

Detective Purdue. [ECF No. 28]. LVMPD and Sheriff Gillespie again filed a Motion to Dismiss the

12

FAC. [ECF No. 31]. The City of Henderson, Chief Moers and Detective Purdue also filed a Motion to

13

Dismiss. [ECF No. 39]. Officer Nielson filed an Answer. [ECF No. 37]. This Court granted LVMPD

14

and Sheriff’s Gillespie’s Motion to Dismiss, in part. [ECF No. 44]. All claims against Sheriff Gillespie

15

were dismissed and certain claims against LVMPD were dismissed. The Court then granted City of

16
17

Henderson, Chief Moers and Detective Purdue’s Motion to Dismiss and gave Plaintiff leave to file a
Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”). [ECF No. 50].
Plaintiff filed the SAC on July 5, 2016. [ECF No. 53]. LVMPD and Sheriff Gillespie again filed

18
a Motion to Dismiss the SAC; or portions thereof. [ECF No. 55]. LVMPD and Officer Nielson also filed

19
an Answer. [ECF No. 54]. Likewise, again, the City of Henderson, Chief Moers and Detective Purdue

20

KAEMPFER CROWELL

1980 Festival Plaza Drive
Suite 250
Las Vegas, Nevada 89113

21

filed a Motion to Dismiss. [ECF No. 56].
B.

Discovery.

22

The initial Scheduling Order was entered in this matter on June 24, 2015. [ECF No. 23]. The

23

parties engaged in and conducted extensive discovery – all during the pendency of the various Motions to

24

Dismiss. They exchanged written discovery, provided numerous Rule 26 Disclosures, served multiple

201780116 SAO to Extend JPO Deadline.docx 6943.86

Page 2 of 5

Case 2:15-cv-00337-GMN-PAL Document 106 Filed 01/16/18 Page 3 of 5

1

third-party subpoenas and took several depositions. The parties sought an extension of the discovery

2

deadlines on four (4) different occasions, ECF Nos. 32, 42, 47 and 51. The final Scheduling Order, ECF

3
4

No. 52, provided a close of discovery deadline of October 3, 2016 and a dispositive motion deadline of
November 2, 2016.
C.

After Discovery Closed.

5
At the close of discovery, as the dispositive motion deadline was approaching, the Court had not

6
yet ruled on the pending Motions to Dismiss, ECF Nos. 55 and 56. The parties sought a thirty (30) day

7
8

extension of the dispositive motion deadline and presented in their Stipulation that the Motions were fully
briefed and pending. [ECF No. 64]. On December 1, 2016, the City of Henderson, Chief Moers and

9

Detective Purdue filed their Motion for Summary Judgment. [ECF No. 66]. Likewise, on December 2,

10

2016, LVMPD and Officer Nielson each also filed Motions for Summary Judgment. [ECF Nos. 67 and

11

68]. On January 23, 2017, Plaintiff filed oppositions to the Motions for Summary Judgment. [ECF Nos.

12

74 and 75].

13
14
15

Four (4) days later, the Court entered its order on the pending Motions to Dismiss the SAC.
[ECF No. 78]. The Court granted the Motion to Dismiss against City of Henderson, Chief Moers and
Detective Purdue in its entirety and granted the Motion to Dismiss Sheriff Gillespie and the state law
claims against LVMPD. The Court gave Plaintiff leave to file a Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”) to

16
reassert his claims against Detective Perdue.

17
On February 17, 2017, Plaintiff filed his TAC, only naming LVMPD, Officer Nielson, City of

18
19

Henderson and Detective Purdue. [ECF No. 82]. LVMPD and Officer Nielson filed an Answer to the
TAC, [ECF No. 84], and City of Henderson and Detective Purdue filed a Motion to Dismiss, [ECF No.

KAEMPFER CROWELL

85]. At this time, the dispositive motions filed by City of Henderson, LVMPD and Officer Nielson were

21
1980 Festival Plaza Drive
Suite 250
Las Vegas, Nevada 89113

20

fully briefed and pending.

22

On April 5, 2017, the Court issued a Minute Order granting City of Henderson and Detective

23

Purdue’s Motion to Dismiss and denying all pending Motions for Summary Judgment, [ECF Nos. 66, 67

24

ad 68], as moot. LVMPD and Officer Neilson’s Motions for Summary Judgment were never decided by

201780116 SAO to Extend JPO Deadline.docx 6943.86

Page 3 of 5

Case 2:15-cv-00337-GMN-PAL Document 106 Filed 01/16/18 Page 4 of 5

1

the Court.

2

extremely ill and filed a Motion to Withdraw which was granted. [ECF Nos. 89 and 90].
On October 10, 2017 the Court issued a formal written Order granting City of Henderson and

3
4

As the Court is aware, shortly thereafter, Plaintiff’s then Counsel, Cal Potter became

Detective Purdue’s Motion to Dismiss. [ECF No. 92]. The Order then directed LVMPD and Officer
Nielson to file a Joint Pre-Trial Order by December 4, 2017. LVMPD and Officer Nielson filed a Motion

5
for Reconsideration; asking the Court to reconsider the requirement that the parties file a Joint Pre-Trial

6
Order and allow the parties to file their dispositive motions and the Court to decide them. [ECF No. 93].

7
8
9

Plaintiff filed a Motion for Settlement Conference and a request for additional time to secure Counsel1.
[ECF No. 95]. Plaintiff filed a response to the Motion for Reconsideration, agreeing that the dispositive
motions could be ruled on by the Court. [ECF No. 98].

10

On November 15, 2017 Judge Leen granted Plaintiff additional time to retain Counsel, until

11

December 22, 2017; but denied Plaintiff’s request for a settlement conference; acknowledging LVMPD

12

and Officer Nielson’s pending Motion for Reconsideration. [ECF No. 101]. On December 6, 2017,

13

Judge Navarro issued a Minute Order re-setting the deadline for the parties to submit a Pre-Trial Order to

14
15

January 16, 2018. [ECF No. 102]. The Minute Order, however, did not acknowledge the pending Motion
for Reconsideration. In an abundance of caution, LVMPD and Officer Nielson again filed a Motion for
Reconsideration; requesting the Court reconsider the previously fully briefed dispositive motions. [ECF

16
No. 103]. Plaintiff filed a response, [ECF No. 104], and the Motion is fully briefed and pending.

17
2.

18
19

ACTION REQUIRED TO BE TAKEN BY THE COURT:

The parties’ instant request is that the current deadline for the parties to submit a Joint Pre-Trial
Order of January 16, 2018 be extended and/or vacated at this time. The parties ask that the Court rule on

KAEMPFER CROWELL

the pending Motion for Reconsideration [ECF No. 103], before requiring the parties submit a Joint Pre-

21
1980 Festival Plaza Drive
Suite 250
Las Vegas, Nevada 89113

20

Trial Order. Moreover, Plaintiff still has not located or associated an experienced § 1983 attorney.

22

///

23
24

1

Although Plaintiff is also represented by attorney Jay Kenyon, in Plaintiff’s request, Mr. Kenyon represents to the
Court that he is not an experienced § 1983 attorney and he is attempting to locate an attorney with said experience to
represent Plaintiff.

201780116 SAO to Extend JPO Deadline.docx 6943.86

Page 4 of 5

Case 2:15-cv-00337-GMN-PAL Document 106 Filed 01/16/18 Page 5 of 5

1
2
3

As such, the parties request the instant deadline be stayed/vacated in the best interests of the
parties and this Court.

DATED this 16th day of January, 2018.

4

KAEMPFER CROWELL

YAN KENSON

5

By: /s/ Lyssa S. Anderson
LYSSA S. ANDERSON
Nevada Bar No. 5781
1980 Festival Plaza Drive, #650
Las Vegas, Nevada 89135
Attorneys for Defendants

By:

6
7

/s/ Jay A. Kenyon
Jay A. Kenyon, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 6376
7881 West Charleston Blvd., #165
Las Vegas, NV 89117
Attorney for Plaintiff

8
9
ORDER

10
11
12
13

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the remaining Defendants' Objections, (ECF No. 93), and
Motion for Reconsideration, (ECF No. 103), are GRANTED. The parties are given leave to
refile their summary judgment motions a week after the issuance of this Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties' stipulation, (ECF No. 106), is GRANTED. The
parties shall file their joint pretrial order two weeks after the issuance of this Order.

14
15

19
DATED this _______ day of January, 2018.

16
Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

17
18
19
20

KAEMPFER CROWELL

1980 Festival Plaza Drive
Suite 250
Las Vegas, Nevada 89113

21
22
23
24

201780116 SAO to Extend JPO Deadline.docx 6943.86

Page 5 of 5