Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Diamond Resorts International, Inc. v. Reed Hein & Associates, LLC

United States District Court, D. Nevada

January 5, 2018

DIAMOND RESORTS INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Delaware corporation; DIAMOND RESORTS CORPORATION, a Maryland corporation; DIAMOND RESORTS U.S. COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and DIAMOND RESORTS MANAGEMENT, INC., an Arizona corporation, Plaintiffs,
v.
REED HEIN & ASSOCIATES, LLC, a Washington limited liability company DBA TIMESHARE EXIT TEAM; BRANDON REED, an individual and citizen of the State of Washington; TREVOR HEIN, an individual and citizen of Canada; and SCOTT LOUGHRAM, an individual and citizen of the State of Washington, Defendants.

          ROBERT S. LARSEN, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 7785 DAVID T. GLUTH, II, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 10596 GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP Attorneys for Defendants

          STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE ANSWER TO COMPLAINT [ECF NO. 1]

         Pursuant to Local Rules 6-1 and 7-1, Plaintiffs DIAMOND RESORTS INTERNATIONAL, INC.; DIAMOND RESORTS CORPORATION; DIAMOND RESORTS U.S. COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT, LLC; and DIAMOND RESORTS MANAGEMENT, INC., (“Plaintiffs”), and Defendants REED HEIN & ASSOCIATES, LLC d/b/a TIMESHARE EXIT TEAM; BRANDON REED; TREVOR HEIN and SCOTT LOUGHRAM (“Defendants”), by and through their respective attorneys of record, stipulate as follows:

         STIPULATION

         1. Plaintiffs filed their Complaint on December 6, 2017 [ECF No. 1].

         2. Defendant Reed Hein and Associates, LLC (“Reed Hein”) was served with process on or about December 20, 2017 making its response to the complaint due on January 10, 2018.

         3. Defendant Brandon Reed (“Reed”) was served with process on or about December 19, 2017 making his response to the complaint due on January 9, 2018.

         4. Service may have been attempted, but was not perfected, on Defendant Scott Loughram (“Loughram”) on December 23, 2017. To the extent service on Mr. Loughram was not perfected, Loughram has agreed to allow Robert S. Larsen of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukani LLP to accept service of the summons and complaint on his behalf.

         5. Defendant Trevor Hein (“Hein”) has not yet been served with process. Hein has agreed to allow Robert S. Larsen of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukani LLP to accept service of the summons and complaint on his behalf.

         6. Robert S. Larsen and the law firm of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukani LLP (“GRSM”) agree to accept service on behalf of the unserved defendants, Loughram and Hein.

         7. Because the summons and complaint were served on Defendants Reed Hein and Reed right before the Christmas holiday weekend, Defendants Reed Hein and Reed were unable to immediately retain counsel.

         8. On December 29, 2017, Defendants Reed Hein and Reed retained counsel. Subsequently, counsel for Reed Hein and Reed agreed to represent Defendants Hein and Loughram. However, because of the New Year's holiday weekend, Defendants have not been able to substantively discuss the allegations in the complaint with counsel and been unable to deliver any files and background documents related to the case. All of the Defendants reside outside of Nevada which adds to the initial burden to assist counsel in investigating the allegations in the complaint.

         9. The complaint in this case involves complex business tort, unfair business practices, and false advertising. The complaint includes more than 136 allegations and 6 separate causes of action.

         10. Given the very short time from when counsel for Defendants was able to be retained and the deadline to file responses to the complaint, it is unlikely that the files can be delivered to and reviewed by counsel before the current deadline.

         11. Additionally, an extension will promote judicial economy as it will allow the Defendants to determine whether a single response or separate ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.