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.

Friedman v. United States

United States District Court, D. Nevada

September 3, 2019

SCOTT FRIEDMAN, an individual Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Defendants.

          MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT (ECF NO. 175) STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (ECF NO. 190)

          CAM FERENBACH, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Before the Court is plaintiff Scott Friedman's motion for leave to file an amended complaint (ECF No. 175). The United States, Tali Arik, and the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (including officers LePore, Hahn, and Heiner) filed their responses. (ECF Nos. 177, 178, and 180). Plaintiff filed replies. (ECF Nos. 182, 184, and 185).

         Also before the Court is the parties' stipulation for an extension of time. (ECF No. 190).

         Scott Friedman's motion to amend and the parties' stipulation are granted.

         BACKGROUND

         On May 11, 2018, Plaintiff Scott Friedman filed a complaint against multiple parties and entities related to a federal criminal prosecution that the government brought against him. (ECF No. 1). Friedman asserted fourteen causes of action, alleging that the defendants engaged in various unlawful activities before and during the prosecution of a criminal case against Friedman. (Id.) On November 19, 2018, the parties all signed and submitted to the Court for review a stipulated discovery plan and scheduling order. (ECF No. 115). The parties all agreed that the last day to file a motion to amend the pleadings or to add parties would be July 29, 2019. (Id. at 115). On November 27, 2018, this court granted the stipulated discovery plan and scheduling order. (ECF No. 117 at 8).

         On January 7, 2019, this Court dismissed the following claims without prejudice:

• malicious prosecution, abuse of process, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, civil conspiracy, and negligence against the USA;
• all civil tort claims against the FBI agents;
• intentional infliction of emotional distress, champerty and maintenance, aiding and abetting, and alter ego against Arik and Arik Ventures; and
• malicious prosecution, champerty and maintenance, and intentional infliction of emotional distress against Bolton.

(ECF No. 121). On May 7, 2019, the Court also dismissed the aiding and abetting claim against the USA without prejudice. (ECF No. 167). On July 29, 2019, Friedman filed his motion for leave to file his amended complaint. (ECF NO. 175). Friedman argues that his motion is timely and that the proposed amended complaint revives claims that this Court dismissed without prejudice. (Id. at 2). Plaintiff also alleges two new claims, negligent infliction of emotional distress against all defendants and a municipal liability claim against LVMPD. (Id.) Friedman alleges that the claims are partly based on new information that came to light during discovery, including his review of the previously undisclosed grand jury transcripts related to the indictment against him in the criminal prosecution. (Id.) The Defendants allege that Friedman brings the new claims in bad faith because he obtained the grand jury transcripts a few months ago and that the delay prejudices them. (ECF Nos. 177 at 9; 178 at 6; and 180 at 6). Defendants also allege that his claims are futile. (ECF Nos. 177 at 12; 178 at 6; and 180 at 9).

         On August 27, 2019, the parties filed a stipulation to extend expert disclosure deadlines in the ...


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.