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.

Dish Network Corp. v. Lohrengel

United States District Court, D. Nevada

May 24, 2018

DISH NETWORK CORPORATION, As Plan Administrator And On Behalf Of DISH NETWORK CORPORATION 401K PLAN, Plaintiff,
v.
ROY LOHRENGEL, and DEBORAH POMPA Defendants. DEBRA JEAN POMPA, Cross-claim Plaintiff,
v.
ROY LOHRENGEL, Cross-claim Defendant.

          Andrew F. Dixon Nevada Bar No. 8422 Bowler Dixon & Twitchell LLP Attorneys for Defendant/ Cross-claim Plaintiff Debra Jean Pompa

          JOINT STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER TO STAY DISCOVERY (FIRST REQUEST)

         Pursuant to LR IA 6-1 and LR II 7-1, Plaintiff, Dish Network Corporation, As Plan Administrator And On Behalf Of Dish Network Corporation 401(K) Plan (“Dish Network”), Defendant/Cross-claim Plaintiff/Cross-claim Defendant, Debra Jean Pompa (“Pompa”), and Defendant/Cross-claim Plaintiff/Cross-claim Defendant, Roy Lohrengel (“Lohrengel”), by and through their respective attorneys of record, hereby stipulate and agree pursuant to Local Rule 7-1 as follows:

         1. This matter is an interpleader action brought by Dish Network relating to competing claims to a decedent's retirement benefits. Pompa and Lohrengel have filed Cross-Claims asserting claim to the retirement benefits.

         2. On May 10, 2018, Pompa filed her Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 30), on Lohrengel's Cross-Claim against her. Pompa alleges in her Motion for Summary Judgment that Lohrengel's Cross-Claim is barred by the statute of limitations. Pompa's Motion for Summary Judgment is potentially dispositive both of Lohrengel's Cross-Claim and to the claim in interpleader brought by Dish Network, because, if granted, it would resolve the competing claims at issue in Pompa's and Lohrengel's respective Cross-Claims.

         3. On May 10, 2018, the undersigned counsel for Pompa sent correspondence to the undersigned counsel for Lohrengel advising her of the pending Motion for Summary Judgment and requesting her stipulation that discovery be stayed pending the outcome and requesting, if she would not agree, that she provide dates and times in which the parties could meet and confer pursuant to LR II 26-7 prior to filing a motion for stay or for a protective order.

         4. On May 14, 2018, the undersigned counsel for Pompa responded to the correspondence from the undersigned counsel for Pompa, advising that she would not agree to stay discovery and providing her availability for the meet and confer.

         5. On May 17, 2018, the undersigned counsel for Pompa and Lohrengel held a telephonic “meet and confer” LR II 26-7. During the telephonic meet and confer, the respective undersigned counsel, in good faith, discussed at length their relative positions with respect to: (a) the issues raised in the Motion for Summary Judgment; (b) whether discovery was necessary to address the issue so raised; (c) the upcoming discovery set to occur, including the deposition of Pompa, and the impending expert disclosure deadlines; (d) the need to yet obtain medical records prior to expert disclosures and the pending delays in obtaining said records due to procedural issues with the probate court; and (e) the anticipated time that will be required for the court to consider and rule on the Motion for Summary Judgment.

         6. After personally meeting and conferring on these issues in good faith, and thoroughly considering the issues, the undersigned counsel for Pompa and Lohrengel reached an agreement that it is in the best interests of all parties to wait until the Motion for Summary Judgment has been decided by the Court prior to continuing with any remaining discovery, including, but not limited to, written discovery, depositions, and the retention and disclosure of experts and expert reports, the cost of which could be substantial and which may be unnecessary in the event the Motion for Summary Judgment is granted.

         7. The parties have been diligent thus far in working toward completing discovery and the following discovery has been completed to Dated:

• Dish Network served its initial disclosures on October 26, 2017.
• Pompa served her initial disclosures on November 15, 2017.
• Lohrengel served his initial disclosures on December 13, 2017.
• Lohrengel served his First Supplemental Disclosure of Witnesses and Documents ...

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.