Jeffrey Morse v. Ten X Holdings, LLC et al

Filing 29

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 27 the parties' stipulation to stay discovery is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if the defendants' motions to dismiss or to transfer are denied, the parties must meet and confer and file a stipulated discov ery plan within 21 days of the order denying those motions. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 11 Defendant Richard Beston's motion to stay discovery is DENIED as moot. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 3/30/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

Case 2:17-cv-00073-JAD-CWH Document 27 Filed 03/23/17 Page 1 of 4

1

HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS PLLC

6

Robert Hernquist, Nevada Bar No. 10616
[e-mail]
Jay Young, Nevada Bar No. 5562
[e-mail]
Wells Fargo Tower, Suite 1000
3800 Howard Hughes Parkway
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169-5980
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

7

Attorneys for Defendant Richard Beston

2
3
4
5

8

10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11
3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1000
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
[phone] FAX: [phone]

HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS, PLLC

9

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

JEFFREY MORSE, as executor of the Estate
of Donald L. Pratt – FB Estate of Donald L.
Pratt,
Plaintiff,
vs.
TEN X HOLDINGS, LLC, an Illinois limited
liability company; RICHARD F. BESTON,
an individual; BRIAN PEBLEY, an
individual; JOHN BRANCH, an individual;
DOES I through X; and ROE
CORPORATIONS I through X,

Case No. 17-cv-00073-JAD-(CWH)
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO STAY
DISCOVERY PENDING A
DETERMINATION ON DEFENDANTS’
MOTIONS TO DISMISS OR TRANSFER

Defendants.

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Pursuant to Local Rules LR II 26-1 and LR II 26-4, Plaintiff Jeffrey Morse (“Plaintiff”),
Defendant Ten X Holdings, LLC (“TXH”), Defendant Richard Beston (“Beston”) and Defendant
John Branch (“Branch” and together with TXH and Beston, “Defendants”) submit this stipulation
to stay discovery pending decisions on the Defendants’ pending motions to transfer or dismiss:
THE PENDING MOTIONS TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO TRANSFER TO ILLINOIS
1.

Plaintiff filed the Complaint on November 28, 2016 in the Eighth Judicial District
Page 1 of 4

Case 2:17-cv-00073-JAD-CWH Document 27 Filed 03/23/17 Page 2 of 4

1

Court, Clark County, Nevada, Case No. A-16-747268-C. (ECF 1-1).

2

2.

3

(ECF 1).

4

3.

Beston was the first-appearing defendant, and removed this case on January 8, 2017.

On February 1, 2017, Beston filed a Motion to Dismiss or Alternatively Transfer

Venue (“Beston’s Motion to Dismiss”). (ECF 6 & 7). In Beston’s Motion to Dismiss he argues,

6

inter alia, that this case should be transferred to Illinois pursuant to forum selection clauses that are

7

contained in the underlying documents between the parties. (Id.). Plaintiff filed an Opposition to

8

Beston’s Motion to Dismiss on February 15, 2017 (ECF 10) and Beston filed his Reply on February

9

23, 2017 (ECF 13).

10

4.

On February 27, 2017, Branch filed a Motion to Dismiss or Alternatively Transfer

11
3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1000
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
[phone] FAX: [phone]

HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS, PLLC

5

Venue (“Branch’s Motion to Dismiss”) which also argues, inter alia, that this case should be

12

transferred to Illinois pursuant to forum selection clauses that are contained in the underlying

13

documents between the parties. (ECF 19). Plaintiff filed an Opposition to Branch’s Motion to

14

Dismiss on March 13, 2017 (ECF 24).

15

5.

On March 1, 2017, TXH filed a Motion to Transfer Venue or, Alternatively, to

16

Dismiss (“Ten X’s Motion to Dismiss”) which also argues, inter alia, that this case should be

17

transferred to Illinois pursuant to forum selection clauses that are contained in the underlying

18

documents between the parties. (ECF 17 & 18). Plaintiff filed an Opposition to TXH’s Motion to

19

Dismiss on March 15, 2017 (ECF 25).

20
21

THE PENDING MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY
6.

On February 16, 2017, Beston filed a Motion to Stay Discovery Pending Resolution

22

of Beston’s Motion to Dismiss (“Beston’s Motion to Stay Discovery”). (ECF 11). Plaintiff has not

23

opposed Beston’s Motion to Stay Discovery.

24

7.

Absent this Stipulation, TXH and Branch would have filed joinders to Beston’s

25

Motion to Stay Discovery and/or filed their own separate motions to stay discovery pending a

26

decision on their respective motions to dismiss or transfer this action.

27
28

8.

On March 16, 2017, the parties conducted a Rule 26(f) conference and agreed that
Page 2 of 4

Case 2:17-cv-00073-JAD-CWH Document 27 Filed 03/23/17 Page 3 of 4

1

discovery in this action should be stayed until the Court has made rulings on Beston’s Motion to

2

Dismiss, Branch’s Motion to Dismiss and Ten X’s Motion to Dismiss (collectively “Defendants’

3

Motions to Dismiss or Transfer”).

4

STIPULATION AND ORDER
Based on the foregoing, the parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

6

Discovery in this action shall be stayed pending decisions on Defendants’ Motions to

7

Dismiss or Transfer on the grounds that (1) a stay of discovery will conserve both judicial resources

8

and the resources of the parties and (2) in the event this case is transferred to Illinois, discovery

9

should be conducted as set forth by an Illinois court.

10

The current deadline to submit the Stipulated Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order shall

11
3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1000
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
[phone] FAX: [phone]

HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS, PLLC

5

be vacated. In the event this case is transferred to Illinois, discovery will resume as provided by

12

the Illinois court and its local rules. Alternatively, in the event this case is not dismissed or

13

transferred, the parties shall conduct another Rule 26(f) conference and then submit a proposed

14

Joint Discovery Plan within thirty days of the Court’s decision on Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss

15

or Transfer.

16

///

17

///

18

///

19

///

20

///

21

///

22

///

23

///

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

Page 3 of 4

Case 2:17-cv-00073-JAD-CWH Document 27 Filed 03/23/17 Page 4 of 4

1
2

Beston’s pending Motion to Stay Discovery is hereby taken off calendar, as it is now moot
because the requested relief is provided by this Stipulation and Order.

3
4
5

DATED this 23rd day of March, 2017.

DATED this 23rd day of March, 2017.

MARQUIS AURBACH COFFING

HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS PLLC

6
7
8

10

Attorneys for Plaintiff Jeffrey Morse, as
executor of the Esatet of Donald L. Pratt – FB
Estate of Donald L. Pratt

Attorneys for Defendant Richard Beston

11
3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1000
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
[phone] FAX: [phone]

HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS, PLLC

9

By: /s/ Robert Hernquist
Robert Hernquist, Nevada Bar No. 10616
Jay Young, Nevada Bar No. 5562

By: /s/ Jonathan Lee ____________
Terry Coffing, Nevada Bar No. 4949
Jonathan Lee, Nevada Bar No. 13524

12
13
14
15
16

DATED this 23rd day of March, 2017.

DATED this 23rd day of March, 2017.

MULLINER LAW GROUP CHTD
By: /s/ Timothy Mulliner ____________
Timothy Mulliner, Nevada Bar No. 10692

By:

Attorneys for Defendant Ten X Holdings, LLC

Defendant In Properia Persona

/s/ John Branch
John Branch

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

IT IS ORDERED that the parties' stipulation (ECF No. 27) to stay discovery is
GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if the defendants' motions to dismiss or to
transfer are denied, the parties must meet and confer and file a stipulated
discovery plan within 21 days of the order denying those motions.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Richard Beston's motion to stay
discovery (ECF No. 11) is DENIED as moot.
____________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

March 30, 2017
DATED:_____________________________

25
26
27
28

Page 4 of 4