Crawford v. Nevada Department of Transportation et al
Filing
33
ORDER Granting 31 Stipulation for Extension of Time re 30 Motion for Summary Judgment (First Request). Responses due by 5/11/2018. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 4/26/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
TREVOR J. HATFIELD, ESQ
1 Nevada Bar No. 7373
2 HATFIELD & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
703 S. Eighth Street
3 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone: (702) 388-4469
4 Facsimile: (702) 386-9825
5 Email: thatfield@hatfieldlawassociates.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
8
CASE NO: 2:17-cv-00655-GMN-PAL
9 KENDRICK CRAWFORD,
703 8th Street * Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone (702) 388-4469
HATFIELD & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
10
Plaintiff,
11
vs.
12
13
14
15
NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION, A Department of the
State of Nevada; WILSON MARSHALL, an
individual employed by the State of Nevada;
AND SONNIE BRAIH, an individual
employed by the State of Nevada,
STIPULATION AND ORDER
REQUESTING TIME FOR
PLAINTIFF TO RESPOND TO
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
(First Request)
16
Defendants.
17
18
COMES NOW, Plaintiff KENDRICK CRAWFORD (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), by and
19 through his counsel, Trevor J. Hatfield, of Hatfield & Associates, Ltd., and Defendants
20 NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, WILSON MARSHALL, and SONNIE
21 BRAIH (hereinafter “Defendants”), by and through their counsel, Adam Paul Laxalt, Attorney
22
General, Cameron P. Vandenberg, Chief Deputy Attorney General, and Dominika Batten,
23
Deputy Attorney General, and do hereby stipulate and agree to an extension of time for Plaintiff
24
25 to respond to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF #30) that was filed on April 6,
26 2018.
Accordingly, Plaintiff shall have up to and including May 11, 2018 to respond to
27 Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF #30).
28
April 27, 2018.
The Opposition is currently due on
1
This request is submitted pursuant to LR IA 6-1, 6-2 and LR II 7-1 and is the parties’ first
2 request for an extension concerning an extension of the time for Plaintiff to respond to
3 Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. The reason for the request is due to Plaintiff’s
4 attorney having been on a two-week vacation and travel for a settlement conference, this motion
5
having been filed while he was on vacation, and just only recently having an opportunity to meet
6
with Plaintiff to prepare a response to Defendants’ motion.
7
8 Dated: April 26, 2018
Dated: April 26, 2018
9 HATFIELD & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
ADAM PAUL LAXALT
Attorney General
703 8th Street * Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone (702) 388-4469
HATFIELD & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
10
/s/ Trevor J. Hatfield
11 ___________________________________
Trevor J. Hatfield, Esq.
12 Nevada Bar No. 7373
13 703 S. Eighth St.
Las Vegas, NV 89101
14 (702) 388-4469 Tel.
(702) 386-9825 Fax
15 thatfield@hatfieldlawassociates.com
16 Attorney for Plaintiff
17
ORDER
18
19
20
/s/ Cameron P. Vandenberg
__________________________________
Cameron P. Vandenberg
Nevada Bar No. 4356
Chief Deputy Attorney General
State of Nevada
Office of the Attorney General
5420 Kietzke Lane, Suite 202
Reno, NV 89511
cvandenberg@ag.nv.gov
Attorneys for Defendants
IT IS SO ORDERED.
26
DATED this _____day of April, 2018.
____________________________________
Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
1
2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 26th day of April, 2018, I filed and served the parties’
3 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REQUESTING TIME FOR PLAINTIFF TO
4 RESPOND TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (First Request)
5
with the Clerk of the Court using the ECF system which served the parties hereto electronically.
6
DATED: 26th day of April, 2018
7
By:
Freda P. Brazier
An employee of Hatfield & Associates, Ltd.
8
9
703 8th Street * Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone (702) 388-4469
HATFIELD & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-
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?