United States District Court, D. Nevada
BRYAN EDWARD O'NEAL, an individual; and KATHLEEN ROBINSON, an individual, Plaintiff,
LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT, a political subdivision of the State of Nevada; LINDA THEOBALD, an individual; PROKOPIOS ZIROS, an individual; GUSTAVO RIOS, an individual; CLARK COUNTY, a County existing under the laws of the State of Nevada; NAPHCARE, INC., an Alabama corporation; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive; and ROE CORPORATIONS 1 through 25, inclusive; and POE MEDICAL PERSONNEL 1 through 25, inclusive; Defendants.
S. ANDERSON RYAN W. DANIELS KAEMPFER CROWELL Attorneys for
Defendants Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, Linda
Theobald, Prokopios Ziros, and Gustavo Rios
BRANDON W. MCCOY MCCOY LAW GROUP, LTD. Attorney for
S.BRENT VOGEL JEFFREY H. BALLIN LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD &
SMITH Attorneys for NaphCare, Inc.
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY
HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED between the parties that the
discovery cut-off date of January 27, 2020, be continued for
a period of forty-five (45) days up to and including
March 13, 2020, for the purpose of allowing
Plaintiffs to respond to outstanding written discovery, take
the depositions of parties, and disclose expert witnesses.
COMPLETED TO DATE
LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT, LINDA THEOBALD,
PROKOPIOS ZIROS, and GUSTAVO RIOS (“LVMPD
Defendants”); NAPHCARE, INC. (“NaphCare”);
and Plaintiffs, BRYAN O'NEAL AND KATHLEEN ROBISON
(“Plaintiffs”) have provided their initial Rule
26(f) Disclosures. LVMPD Defendants have also provided their
first supplemental disclosures to the parties.
Defendants CLARK COUNTY and NaphCare have served written
discovery on Plaintiffs. Plaintiff, Kathleen Robinson still
has not responded to NaphCare's Interrogatories and
Requests for Production of Documents. The LVMPD Defendants
served their initial written discovery requests
(Interrogatories, Requests for Production of Documents and
Requests for Admissions) on each of the Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs provided responses to the Interrogatories and
Requests for Admissions only. LVMPD Defendants and NaphCare
served various third-party Subpoenas. LVMPD Defendants
re-served the Requests for Production of Documents following
the appearance of Plaintiffs' new Counsel and those
responses have not yet been received. The depositions of
Plaintiffs and a third-party witness were scheduled to be
taken in September 2019, however, the depositions had to be
vacated due to calendar conflicts. The depositions of
Plaintiffs had been re-scheduled to October 2019 and November
2019. However, on the eve of Plaintiff Kathleen
Robinson's deposition, Counsel was informed that she
would not be able to appear for her deposition. The
deposition was re-scheduled to November 7, 2019; however, it
had to be re-set again to November 18, 2019 because
Defendants had not yet received her discovery responses.
Although the depositions were rescheduled, the parties need
to re-schedule them to December 2019 as they still have not
received the discovery responses.
YET TO BE COMPLETED
will respond to the outstanding discovery responses no later
than November 29, 2019. The depositions of Plaintiff Kathleen
Robinson will be taken on December 9, 2019 and the deposition
of Plaintiff Bryan O'Neal will be taken on December 20,
2019. Additional written discovery and depositions may be
taken. The parties will disclose expert and any necessary
rebuttal expert reports.
WHY REMAINING DISCOVERY HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED
parties have been diligent in completing discovery in this
matter. However, as this Court may recall, Plaintiffs'
prior attorney became very ill and Plaintiffs had to retain
alternate Counsel. As a result, the first six (6) requested
extension of discovery were due to this issue alone.
Discovery was at a standstill for that entire period of time.
Plaintiffs did retain new Counsel and that Counsel has been
working to provide the outstanding discovery responses to
LVMPD Defendants and NaphCare and the parties have been
working to coordinate the depositions of Plaintiffs and a
third-party. The parties need a brief extension to accomplish
these tasks and coordinate the calendars of all Counsel and
Defendants and NaphCare cannot efficiently conduct the
depositions of Plaintiffs until the responses to written
discovery are received. In addition, the Defendants'
experts have stated that it will be necessary to review all
discovery responses and deposition transcripts to prepare
their reports. As such, the parties are asking for one more
brief extension so that this discovery can be completed prior
to the expert disclosure deadline.
it is hereby stipulated and respectfully requested that this