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.

Alexander v. Falk

United States District Court, D. Nevada

July 31, 2018

RANDI ALEXANDER, an Individual, and JACKSON YOUNG, an Individual, Plaintiffs,
v.
KATHRYN FALK, an Individual; ROMANTIC TIMES, INC., d/b/a ROMANTIC TIMES MAGAZINE, a New York Corporation; JANE DOE a/k/a "GRACIE WILSON", an Individual; DOE DEFENDANTS 1 through 100; and ROE ENTITIES, 1 through 100, Defendants.

          PERRY & WESTBROOK A Professional Corporation ALAN W. WESTBROOK, ESQ., CHERYL H. WILSON, ESQ. Attorneys for Defendants

          FRIZELL LAW FIRM R. DUANE FRIZELL, ESQ., COLE LAW GROUP, P.C. TODD G. COLE, ESQ. Admitted Pro Hac Vice Attorneys for Plaintiffs

          JOINT MOTION TO AMEND JULY 19. 2018 ORDER (ECF NO. 89) TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO MEET AND CONFER AND FILE A PROPOSED SCHEDULING ORDER REGARDING EXPERT WITNESS DISCLOSURE FROM JULY 27. 2018 TO AUGUST 1. 2018

         COME NOW the parties, by and through their respective counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6o(b)(f) hereby move the Court to extend the deadline established by the Court for the parties to meet and confer and file a proposed scheduling order regarding expert witness disclosures in its July 19, 2018 Order (ECF No. 89) for three business days from July 27, 2018 to August 1, 2018 due to the unexpected and emergency medical condition of counsel for defendants from July 20, 2018 to July 30, 2018.

         This motion is supported by the memorandum of points and authorities below and the declaration Cheryl Wilson, Esq., attached hereto.

         I. STATEMENT OF FACTS

         On July 19, 2018, the Court issued its Order subsequent to a hearing of the same date as a result of the Motion filed by the Defendants on June 21, 2018. (ECF No. 89). The Order provided, in pertinent part, that the parties meet and confer and file a proposed scheduling order regarding expert witness disclosures no later than July 27, 2018.

         On July 20, 2018, counsel for the Defendants was stricken suddenly ill, hospitalized and caused to be absent from the office until July 30, 2018. As a result, the parties were unable to comply with the Court's Order as the defense counsel who was ill was the counsel most knowledgeable about those specific issues and unable to communicate. (See attached Declaration of Cheryl Wilson, Esq.).

         On July 30, 2018, upon return to office, counsel for the Defendants immediately communicated with counsel for the Plaintiffs and asked and was granted permission to file a joint motion for a three day extension of the July 27, 2018 deadline to Wednesday, August 1, 2018.

         II. LEGAL ARGUMENT

         Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60 (f) provides, in pertinent part:

Rule 60. Relief from a Judgment or Order (b) Grounds for Relief from a Final Judgment, Order, or Proceeding. On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons:
(6) any other reason that justifies relief.
(c) Timing and Effect of the Motion.
(1) Timing. A motion under Rule 60(b) must be made within a reasonable time and for reasons (1), (2), and (3) no more than a year after the entry of the judgment or ...

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.