Maunder v. The Primadonna Company, LLC

Filing 14

ORDER Granting 13 Stipulation for Exception to Attendance Requirements for Early Neutral Evaluation.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 6/30/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)

Download PDF
Case 2:15-cv-00918-RFB-GWF Document 13 Filed 06/29/15 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WENDY M. KRINCEK, ESQ., Bar #6417 KAITLYN M. BURKE, ESQ., Bar #13454 LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 3960 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 300 Las Vegas, NV 89169-5937 Telephone: 702.862.8800 Fax No.: 702.862.8811 e-mail: wkrincek@littler.com e-mail: kmburke@littler.com Attorneys for Defendant THE PRIMADONNA COMPANY, LLC 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 10 11 SUSAN D. MAUNDER, an individual; 12 Plaintiff, 13 vs. 14 THE PRIMADONNA COMPANY, LLC a/k/a and d/b/a PRIMM VALLEY RESORTS; EMPLOYEE(S) / AGENT(S) DOES 1-10; and ROE CORPORATIONS 11-20, inclusive, 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3960 Howard Hughes Parkway Suite 300 Las Vegas, NV 89169-5937 702.862.8800 Defendants. Case No. 2:15-cv-00918-RFB-GWF STIPULATION FOR EXCEPTION TO ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR EARLY NEUTRAL EVALUATION SESSION ENE DATE: July 30, 2015 ENE TIME: 9:00 a.m. MAGISTRATE JUDGE C.W. HOFFMAN, JR. Defendant, The Primadonna Company, LLC (“Primadonna”), and Plaintiff, Susan D. Maunder (“Plaintiff”), by and through their respective attorneys of record, hereby submit this Stipulation respectfully requesting an exemption from the Early Neutral Evaluation (“ENE”) attendance requirements for Defendant’s insurance representative. The Order Scheduling Early Neutral Evaluation (“ENE”) Session (Dkt. #11) sets the ENE for July 30, 2015. It requires a representative of the insurance carrier with authority to settle this matter up to the full amount of the claim to be present. Defendant requests an exception to this requirement because although Defendant has an employment practices liability insurance policy, that coverage is subject to a $250,000 retention. Based on the information presently available regarding Plaintiff and Case 2:15-cv-00918-RFB-GWF Document 13 Filed 06/29/15 Page 2 of 2 1 her allegations in this lawsuit, there is no reasonable good faith possibility that Plaintiff’s claims 2 could exceed the retention level at this time. Indeed, Plaintiff’s initial disclosures include a damages 3 calculation of $29,433.64 in lost wages taking into account mitigation efforts. In light of the status 4 of the litigation and the relative settlement posture of this matter, it is Defendant’s belief that the 5 insurance coverage will not have any effect on the settlement negotiations at the ENE. 6 Additionally, Defendant will have a company representative available at the ENE session 7 who will fully and effectively participate in the settlement discussion and will have binding authority 8 to settle this matter on behalf of Defendant. Further, Defendant’s insurance representative will be 9 availability telephonically during the ENE if necessary. Accordingly, the parties respectfully request 10 that an Order be issued granting permission for Defendant’s insurance representative to be exempt 11 from personal attendance at the ENE scheduled for July 30, 2015. 12 13 14 Dated: June 29, 2015 Dated: June 29, 2015 Respectfully submitted, Respectfully submitted, _/s/ Christian Gabroy, Esq.____________ CHRISTIAN GABROY, ESQ. GABROY LAW OFFICES __/s/ Kaitlyn M. Burke, Esq._________________ WENDY M. KRINCEK, ESQ. KAITLYN M. BURKE, ESQ. LITTLER MENDELSON 15 16 17 18 Attorney for Plaintiff SUSAN D. MAUNDER 19 20 21 22 Attorneys for Defendant THE PRIMADONNA COMPANY, LLC ORDER IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: June_____, 2015 DATED: June 30, 2015 23 _______________________________________ THE HONORABLE C.W. HOFFMAN, JR. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 24 25 Firmwide:134354893.1 058279.1014 26 27 28 LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3960 Howard Hughes Parkway Suite 300 Las Vegas, NV 89169-5937 702.862.8800 2.

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?