Carley v. Gentry et al

Filing 185

ORDER granting 184 Stipulation to Continue Trial Date. Motions in Limine due by 11/6/2023. Calendar Call set for 11/27/2023 at 01:00 PM in LV Chambers - Telephonic before Chief Judge Miranda M. Du. Exhibit List due by 11/28/2023. Proposed Jury Instructions due by 11/28/2023. Jury Trial set for 12/5/2023 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom to be determined before Chief Judge Miranda M. Du. Signed by Chief Judge Miranda M. Du on 7/19/2023. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CT)

Download PDF
Case 2:17-cv-02670-MMD-VCF Document 185 Filed 07/19/23 Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 AARON D. FORD Attorney General Douglas R. Rands (Bar No. 3572) Senior Deputy Attorney General State of Nevada Office of the Attorney General 555 East Washington Avenue Suite 3900 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 (702) 486-3326 (phone) (702) 486-3773 (fax) Email: cguy@ag.nv.gov Attorneys for Defendants James Dzurenda, Charles Daniels, Sheryl Foster, Jo Gentry, Tanya Hill, Gabriela Najera, Dwight Neven, Cynthia Ruiz, Kim Thomas, and Patrick Vejar LISA A. RASMUSSEN, Esq. Law Offices of Kristina Wildeveld & Associates 550 East Charleston Blvd. Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 (702) 222-0007 (phone) (702) 222-0001 (fax) Email: Lisa@veldlaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiff 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 17 ELIZABETH CARLEY, 18 Plaintiff, 19 v. 20 JO GENTRY, et al., 21 Case No. 2:17-cv-02670-MMD-VCF STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE (First Request) Defendants. 22 Plaintiff Elizabeth Carley, by and through counsel, Lisa. A. Rasmussen, and 23 Defendants, Sheryl Foster, Patrick Vejar, Jo Gentry, James Dzurenda, Charles Daniels, 24 Gabriela Najera, Tanya Hill, Dwight Neven, Cynthia Ruiz, and Kim Thomas, by and 25 through counsel, Aaron D. Ford, Nevada Attorney General, and Douglas R. Rands, Senior 26 Deputy Attorney General, of the State of Nevada, Office of the Attorney General, hereby 27 submit this Stipulation to Continue the trial date in this matter to the Court’s December 28 5, 2023 trial stack based upon the following: Page 1 of 3 Case 2:17-cv-02670-MMD-VCF Document 185 Filed 07/19/23 Page 2 of 3 1 1. Counsel for Ms. Carley had a federal criminal trial scheduled to start on July 2 10, 2023. United States v. Litwin, 2:11-cr-347 KJD. At the request of the government, that 3 trial has been moved to September 11, 2023. The trial is a retrial of a case that took four 4 months to try in 2017 and the first trial included 39 witnesses. While the retrial will be 5 pared down, it is still anticipated that it will last several weeks and it is likely to include 6 at least 30 witnesses for the retrial. Preparation for this trial is a substantial undertaking 7 for Ms. Rasmussen. 8 2. This case is scheduled for the August 22, 2023 stack, a three week stack. 9 Further, this trial is anticipated to last five days. The uncertainty of knowing when this 10 trial will actually commence makes it difficult for Ms. Rasmussen because the stack bumps 11 into the Litwin trial. Preparation for the Litwin trial is difficult and requires substantial 12 coordination of witnesses and experts and will undoubtedly involve last minute issues that 13 Ms. Rasmussen cannot address if she is in trial in this case bumping up to the trial in the 14 Litwin case. 15 3. For these reasons, Plaintiff requests that this trial be continued to another 16 stack. Ms. Carley is out of custody and currently living in Texas. She is not opposed to 17 continuing this trial to another stack. 18 4. Additionally, Counsel for the Defendants has three additional trials on the 19 August stacks, two of which are likely to proceed to trial. Due to the preparation for these 20 trials, it would be difficult to go into this trial as currently calendared. 21 ... 22 ... 23 ... 24 ... 25 ... 26 ... 27 ... 28 ... Page 2 of 3 Case 2:17-cv-02670-MMD-VCF Document 185 Filed 07/19/23 Page 3 of 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?