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.

Taylor v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department

United States District Court, D. Nevada

October 8, 2019

LARIME TAYLOR, an individual, Plaintiff,
v.
LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT, in its official capacity; CLARK COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Nevada; SHERIFF JOSEPH LOMBARDO, in his official capacity as Sheriff of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department; OFFICER YOUNG, as an individual and in his capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Officer; OFFICER KRAVITZ, as an individual and in his capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Officer; OFFICER DARRELL LEE DAVIES, as an individual and in his official capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Officer; OFFICER WESTON FERGUSON, as an individual and in his official capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Officer; OFFICER THOMAS ALBRIGHT, as an individual and in his official capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department; OFFICER JANETTE GUTIERREZ, as an individual and in her official capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Officer; OFFICER CLINT OWENSBY, as an individual and in his official capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department; OFFICER ROBERT THORNE, as an individual and in his official capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Officer; OFFICER JACOB BITTNER, as an individual and in his official capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Officer; OFFICER GERARDO REYES, as an individual and in his official capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Officer; OFFICER MORGAN MCCLARY, as an individual and in his official capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Officer; OFFICER JAKE FREEMAN, as an individual and in his official capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Officer; and OFFICER CHRISTOPHER LONGI, as an individual and in his official capacity as a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Officer, Defendants.

          MARGARET A. MCLETCHIE, Nevada Bar No. 10931 ALINA M. SHELL, Nevada Bar No. 11711 MCLETCHIE LAW Counsel for Plaintiff Larime Taylor

          STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO COUNTY DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY (ECF No. 38) (SECOND REQUEST)

          HONORABLE NANCY J. KOPPE U.S. DISTRICT COURT MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Pursuant to LR IA 6-1, Plaintiff LARIME TAYLOR and Defendants CLARK COUNTY and CLARK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS (“County Defendants”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate and request that this Court extend the deadline to file the Plaintiff's Response to County Defendants' Motion to Stay Discovery (ECF No. 38) filed on September 17, 2019 by an additional two (2) days, extending the deadline from October 7, 2019 to October 9, 2019. (See ECF No. 50, Order.) This is the second stipulation for extension of time for Plaintiff to file his Response.

         This Request for an extension of time is not sought for any improper purpose or other purpose of delay. This request for extension is based upon the following:

         Counsel for Plaintiff initiated this request because counsel for the parties were unable to reach an agreement regarding a potential resolution to discovery matters. In addition, counsel for Plaintiff had oral argument in the Nevada Supreme Court on October 7, 2019 in two consolidated cases, Clark County Office of the Coroner/Medical Examiner v. Las Vegas Review-Journal, Nev. S.Ct. Nos. 74604 and 75095.

         WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request that this Court extend the deadline to file Plaintiffs Response to County Defendants' Motion to Stay Discovery (ECF No. 38) filed on September 17, 2019 to up to and including October 9, 2019.

         ORDER

         IT IS ...


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.