Boland et al v. Merrick Bank

Filing 31

ORDER Granting 29 Stipulation to Stay Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 4/13/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

Download PDF
Case 2:16-cv-02706-APG-GWF Document 29 Filed 04/12/17 Page 1 of 5 1 2 J 4 5 6 7 8 Robert R. Kinas, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 6019 Blakeley E. Griffith, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 12386 Charles E. Gianelloni Nevada Bar No. 12747 SNELL & WILMER I.I.p. 3883 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1100 Las Vegas, NV 89169 Telephone: (7 02) 7 84-5200 Facsimile: (7 02) 7 84-5252 Email : rkinas@swlaw.com bgriffrth@swlaw.com cgianelloni@swlaw.com Attorneys for Defendant Merrick Bank 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 11 li () H H Ë ,¿ c) Ê U) ?12 ås 13 I' i+ã lo 14 "92? DISTRICT OF NEVADA RON BOLAND and LINDA BOLAND No. 2:l 6-cv -02706-APG-GWF Plaintiffs, STIPULATION AND ORDER TO STAY DISCOVERY PENDING RESOLUTION OF MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION v. MERRICK BANK, 15 ;¡)$P l= ãj16 3 9'17 Case Defendant. :E Defendant Merrick Bank ("Defendant" or "Merrick Bank") and Plaintiff Ron Boland 18 ("Plaintiff' and together with Defendant, the "Parties"), by and through their respective t9 for good cause showing, hereby stipulates and requests an order from the Court to stay discovery 20 pending resolution of Defendant Menick Bank's Motion to Compel Arbitration of Linda Boland's 2l Claims, and to Stay Ron Boland's Claims Pending that Arbitration (ECF No. 15). 22 counsel, This Stipulation is based upon the following Memorandum of Points and Authorities, all 23 papers filed with the Court, any documents incorporated by reference or subject to 24 judicial notice, and any oral argument this Court may entertain. MEMORANDUM OF'PO 25 26 AND AUTHORITIES The Parties have conferred and agreed that discovery should be stayed pending the 27 28 4829-3161-99t0 Case 2:16-cv-02706-APG-GWF Document 29 Filed 04/12/17 Page 2 of 5 1 resolution of the Motion to Compel Arbitration.l This is the first request for a stay of discovery 2 in this matter. J Discovery Should be Stayed Based on the Pending Motion to Compel Arbitration. The trial court has wide discretion to control the conduct of pretrial discovery by any party 4 5 6 ¡o l* *à+ o.i ,¿ E (W.D. V/ash. Mar. 9, 2007) (issuing protective order baning merits discovery pending resolution t2 of motion to compel arbitration); Cunningham v. Van Ru Credit Corp., 2006 V/L 2056576, at *2 13 (E.D. Mich. July 21,2006) (staying merits discovery pending resolution of motion to compel I4 arbitration); Ross v. Bank of Am.,2006 WL 36909, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 6,2006) (granting stay of 15 discovery pending resolution of motion to compel arbitration); Meruill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & t6 Smith, Inc. v. Coors,357 F. Supp. 2d1277,1281 (D. Colo.2004) (issuing stay of "all discovery T7 and pretrial scheduling" pending resolution of motion to compel arbitration); Intertec Contracting 18 v. Turner Steiner Int'\, 5.A.,2001 V/L 812224, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. July 18, 2001) (noting that "[a]s is T9 the general practice of district courts, a stay of discovery was imposed in this case while the 20 motion to compel arbitration was pending before the Court."). JU q,z= fFÉ o) a.) F3 É l= ãr U) C 07-4486 SBA (N.D. Cal. Nov. 29, 2007); Coneff v. AT&T Corp., 2007 WL 738612, at *2 11 ri No. 57 2015 (D. Nev. November 2I,2014)(same); see also Stiener v. Apple Computer,.fuc., No. l0 .: motion to compel arbitration); Oknda v. Nevada Prop. l,LLC,2:I4-CY-01601-LDG-NJK, ECF 9 a4. WL 1971326 (D. Nev. June I,2012) (granting a motion to stay discovery pending ruling on a 8 lr () motion to compel arbitration is pending before the court. 7 o a to the action, and courts routinely stay pre-trial obligations, including merits discovery, when See a Andrus v. D.R. Horton, Inc., 2012 2I Here, the Parties agree that discovery should be stayed while the Motion to Compel 22 Arbitration is pending, as that issue should be decided before proceeding with discovery. In 23 CIGNA HealthCare 24 permitting discovery on the merits before "the issue of arbitrability is resolved puts the cart before 25 the horse," because 26 27 28 of "[i]f St. Louis, Inc. y. Kaiser, the Seventh Circuit aptly explained that a dispute is arbitrable, responsibility for the conduct of discovery lies 1 Defendant filed a Motion to Stay Discovery Pending Ruling on Motion to Compel Arbitration ("Motion") (ECF No. 27.) The Court has set a hearing on this Motion for May 4,2017. Upon the filing of this Stipulation, Defendant will withdraw the Motion to Stay Discovery and request that the Court vacate the hearing on May 4,2017. 2 4829-3161-99't0 Case 2:16-cv-02706-APG-GWF Document 29 Filed 04/12/17 Page 3 of 5 1 with the arbitrators." CIGNA HealthCare of 2 2002); see also Mundi v. Union Sec. Life Ins. Co., 2007 WL 2385069, at x6 (E.D. Cal. Aug.17, J 2007) (stating that "the parties should not be required to endure the expense of discovery that 4 ultimately would not be allowed in arbitration."). St. Louis, Inc. v. Kaiser,294F.3d 849, 855 (7th Cir. If the case proceeds to arbitration, then the arbitrator would be responsible for 5 in this case. Further, here, the issue of overseeing with discovery is 6 7 impacts the scope of discovery. Finally, Menick Bank has not yet filed an answer. 'While the 11 Motion to Compel Arbitration is pending, Plaintiff s ability to conduct discovery is prejudiced T2 because he cannot customize discovery 13 I favor of staying discovery as it is not clear whether or not the estate will appear which directly 10 C) estate has not made an appearance in the case. This is another consideration which weighs in 9 lr complicated because of the unfortunate passing of Mrs. Boland. 8 o o discovery discovery would need to be extended, or that discovery already conducted would need to be E t_ = qE ¡o t4 lö ,¿ i=? 15 CJ É U) tì o) I :{3 ãr f proceeding further At this time, Mrs. Boland's to Defendant's answer. It is therefore likely that reopened or supplemented after Defendant files an answer or Mrs. Boland's estate appears in the case. The Parties agree that will if discovery proceeds while the Motion to Compel Arbitration is t6 pending, it t7 matter under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Discovery for all Parties 18 expensive, and less efficient. I9 be diffrcult to accomplish a 'Just, speedy and inexpensive determination" of the will be longer, more CONCLUSION If 20 discovery is not stayed pending resolution of the Motion to Compel Arbitration, the will be forced to incur legal fees and costs for document production, discovery 21 Parties 22 and deposition, 23 Arbitration. 24 all of which could be mooted if the Court grants the Motion responses to Compel Such a result would be costly, ineffrcient, and potentially needless. The Parties therefore If 25 respectfully request that discovery be stayed pending resolution of the Motion. 26 ultimately denies the Motion to Compel Arbitration, the Parties shall have fourteen days from that 27 Order to file a revised discovery plan and scheduling order. Additionally, Defendant Merrick 28 4829-3161-9910 the Court Case 2:16-cv-02706-APG-GWF Document 29 Filed 04/12/17 Page 4 of 5 I Bank will have fourteen days from that Order to respond to Plaintifls written discovery requests 2 that were previously served. IT IS SO STIPULATED. J 4 Dated: April 12,2017. Dated: April12,2017. SNELL & WILMER L.L.P. HAINES & KRIEGER 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ¡r : C)l óö cl :^ t¡l ;; F I niic Èt I Ëj3i J iO -,iz2 4) t >þ,r, lfiþ3 -olai ã | !( UDI ; By: /s/ Blakelev E. Griffrth Robert R. Kinas, Esq. Blakeley E. Griffith, Esq. Charles E. Gianelloni, Esq. 3883 Howard Hughes Pkwy., Suite 1100 Las Vegas, NV 89169 Telephone : (7 02) 7 84 -5200 Facsimile: (7 02) 7 84-5252 Attorneys for Defendant Merrick Bank By: /s/ David H David H. Krieger. Esq. Rachel B. Saturn, Esq. 8985 S. Eastern Ave., Suite 350 Henderson, NV 89123 Telephone: (702) 880-5554 Facsimile: (702) 385-55 I 8 Attorneys þr Plaintiffs Ron Boland and Linda Boland l2 13 l4 15 ORDER 16 s t7 Based on the above Stipulation of the Parties, and good cause appearing therefor: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that discovery is stayed pending the Court's resolution of the 18 Motion to Compel Arbitration. I9 DATED this 20 _13th day of 20r7 April 2I UNI'I ED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 z) 24 25 26 27 28 -44829-3161-9910

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?