Tamares Las Vegas Properties, LLC et al v. Travelers Indemnity Company

Filing 88

ORDER Granting 84 Stipulation to Extend Discovery Deadlines. Discovery due by 9/7/2018. Motions due by 10/8/2018. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 11/8/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 6/19/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1

4

Amanda Peterson (pro hac vice)
WEG & MYERS, P.C.
52 Duane Street, 2nd Floor
New York, NY 10007
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

5

and local counsel

2
3

6
7
8
9
10
11

Shan Davis (SBN 9323)
DAVIS|STIBOR
1180 N. Town Center Drive, Ste. 100
Las Vegas, NV 89144
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Tamares Las Vegas
Properties, LLC, Plaza Hotel & Casino, LLC
and T-UPR, LLC

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

14
15

TAMARES LAS VEGAS PROPERTIES,
LLC; PLAZA HOTEL & CASINO, LLC; and
T-UPR, LLC,

16

Plaintiffs,

Case No. 2:16-cv-02933-JAD-NJK

17

vs.

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES

18

THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY
COMPANY,

(Fifth Request)

19
20

Defendant.

21

Plaintiffs Tamares Las Vegas Properties, LLC, Plaza Hotel & Casino, LL, and T-UPR,

22

LLC (collectively “Plaintiffs”) and Defendant The Travelers Indemnity Company (“Travelers”),

23

by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate and request that the Court

24

extend the discovery deadlines identified herein by approximately seventy-seven (77) days. This

25

is the parties’ fifth request to extend the discovery deadlines in this matter. The Court previously

26

granted extensions of ninety (90) days on September 8, 2017, forty-five (45) days on November

27

13, 2017, thirty (30) days on January 18, 2017 and thirty (30) days on March 9, 2018. The

28

primary reason for this request is that the parties anticipate it will take at least seventy-seven (77)

1

days to complete the depositions of the parties’ respective expert witnesses whose testimony they

2

wish to obtain before filing dispositive motions.

3

Pursuant to Local Rule 26-4, the parties state as follows:

4

I.

DISCOVERY COMPLETED TO DATE

5

•

The parties conducted the Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) conference.

6

•

The parties have exchanged initial and supplementary disclosures of documents

7
8

and lists of witnesses, including the exchange of thousands of pages of documents.
•

9

requests, including requests for admissions, requests for production of documents

10
11

The parties have propounded and responded to multiple sets of written discovery

and interrogatories.
•

The parties have issued subpoenas duces tecum to approximately twenty-five (25)

12

non-parties for documents relating to the alleged claim and loss, resulting in

13

collection of tens of thousands of pages of documents. Some of those document

14

subpoenas remain outstanding and the parties are working with the recipients to

15

obtain records in response.

16

•

17

The parties have completed eighteen (18) depositions, including depositions of
their respective representatives and employees and those of several non-parties.

18

•

Travelers has conducted (2) two site inspections of the subject premises.

19

•

The parties’ have engaged in extensive meet and confer efforts and have resolved,

20

a number of issues relating disputes with respect to their respective discovery

21

responses and depositions.

22

•

23
24

pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) and corresponding expert reports.
•

25
26
27

Plaintiffs have provided the Defendant with their expert witness disclosures

Defendant has provided Plaintiffs with their expert witness disclosures pursuant to
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) and corresponding expert reports.

•

Plaintiffs have provided the Defendant with rebuttal expert reports and two (2)
additional rebuttal expert witness disclosures pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2).

28
-2-

1

II.

2

•

3
4

DISCOVERY TO BE COMPLETED
Depositions of expert witnesses.

The above list is made without prejudice to any party’s ability to conduct additional
discovery consistent with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

5

III.

6

REASONS WHY THE DEADLINES CANNOT BE COMPLETED WITHIN
THE CURRENT SCHEDULE

7

As noted in the original Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order, this is a complex insurance

8

coverage action arising out of alleged storm damage to the Plaza Hotel & Casino in downtown

9

Las Vegas. The additional time for expert discovery is requested primarily to allow for the

10

completion of the depositions of the thirteen (13) identified expert witnesses designated by the

11

parties.

12

complete the expert depositions by September 7, 2018 and for the parties to obtain deposition

13

transcripts and review that testimony before providing filing their respective dispositive motions.

14

Specifically, the parties have agreed to the following expert deposition schedule:

The requested extension is expected to provide the parties with sufficient time to

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

June 22, 2018 – Alan Mooney of Criterium Engineers in New York, NY;
July 10, 2018 – Karen Terry of Risknomics in San Diego, CA;
July 10, 2018 – Theresa Lopeman-Cortese of Risknomics in San Diego, CA;
August 8, 2018 – Michael LoGiudice of CBIZ Corporate Recovery Services in Las
Vegas, NV;
August 9, 2018 – Don Gifford of Gifford Consulting Group, LLC in Las Vegas, NV;
August 10, 2018 – John Breuer of Whiting-Turner in Las Vegas, NV;
August 14, 2018 – Dr. Elizabeth Austin of Weather Extreme in Las Vegas, NV
August 15, 2018 – Derek Downey of Legal Pool Experts in Las Vegas, NV;
August 16, 2018 –William Badini of Inversion Consulting, LLC in Las Vegas, NV;
August 22, 2018 – George Coto of J.S. Held in New York, NY;
August 23, 2018 – John Held of J.S. Held in New York, NY;
August 29, 2018 – Steven Rosenthal of RGL Forensics in San Francisco Bay Area,
CA; and
September 5, 2018 - Paul Christoferson of J.S. Held in New York, NY.

25
26
27
28
-3-

1

The parties have worked cooperatively over the last several months to complete fact

2

discovery and will continue to do so in order to minimize any delay in completing the expert

3

discovery that remains.

4

In sum, this extension is intended to allow the parties additional time to complete the

5

depositions of the parties’ respective expert witnesses before the close of expert discovery

6

because 30 days to complete thirteen (13) expert depositions, most of which require both parties

7

to travel out of state, will not be sufficient. The parties agree that this request is not made for the

8

purpose of delay, but to ensure a just adjudication of the case on the merits, and that none of them

9

will be prejudiced by the requested extension.1

10

IV.

11

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

12

PROPOSED SCHEDULE

as follows:

13
EVENT

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

Plaintiffs’ Designation
of Expert Witness(es)
Defendant’s
Designation of Expert
Witness(es)
Close of Fact
Discovery
Plaintiffs’ Disclosure
of Rebuttal Expert
Testimony
Close of Expert
Discovery
File Dispositive
Motions
Joint Pretrial Order

24
25
26

CURRENT
DEADLINE

PROPOSED DEADLINE
COMPLETED
COMPLETED
COMPLETED
COMPLETED

June 22, 2018

September 7, 2018

July 23, 2018

October 8, 2018

August 23, 2018

November 8, 2018
*In the event dispositive motions are filed, the
date for filing the Joint Pretrial Order shall be
suspended until 30 days after the decision of
the dispositive motions or further order of
Court.

27
28

1

This Joint Filing by the parties has no effect as it relates to Plaintiffs’ pending motion to amend their complaint
(ECF Dkt. No. 70) sub judice.

-4-

1

Case No. 2:16-cv-02933-JAD-NJK

2

Stipulation and Order to Extend
Discovery Deadlines (Fifth Request)

3
4
5

Dated June 18, 2018

Dated June 18, 2018

WEG & MYERS, P.C

FORAN GLENNON PALANDECH PONZI
& RUDLOFF PC

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

/s/ Amanda Peterson
Dennis T. D’Antonio (admitted pro hac vice)
Joshua L. Mallin (admitted pro hac vice)
Amanda Peterson(admitted pro hac vice)
52 Duane Avenue, 2nd Floor
New York, NY 10007

/s/ Casey G. Perkins
Amy M. Samberg
1 East Washington Street, Suite 500
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Casey G. Perkins
2200 Paseo Verde Parkway, Suite 280
Henderson, NV 89052
Counsel for The Travelers Indemnity
Insurance Company

/s/ Shan Davis
Shan Davis
DAVIS STIBOR
1180 N. Town Center Drive, Ste. 100
Las Vegas, NV 89114
Counsel for Plaintiffs
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.

June 19, day of
DATED this _____ 2018 June _____, 2018

_______________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28
-5-