Bruins v. Osborn, 2:15-cv-00324-APG-VCF. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20180427906
Visitors: 17
Filed: Apr. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 19, 2018
Summary: ORDER STAYING CASE (ECF No. 88) ANDREW P. GORDON , District Judge . Defendants Fernando Herrera, Amy Poehl, and Dennis Slattery move to stay this case while they appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals the issue of their qualified immunity. ECF No. 88. The plaintiffs have not filed an opposition to the motion. "The failure of an opposing party to file points and authorities in response to any motion. . . constitutes a consent to the granting of the motion." Local Rule 7-2(d). In addit
Summary: ORDER STAYING CASE (ECF No. 88) ANDREW P. GORDON , District Judge . Defendants Fernando Herrera, Amy Poehl, and Dennis Slattery move to stay this case while they appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals the issue of their qualified immunity. ECF No. 88. The plaintiffs have not filed an opposition to the motion. "The failure of an opposing party to file points and authorities in response to any motion. . . constitutes a consent to the granting of the motion." Local Rule 7-2(d). In additi..
More
ORDER STAYING CASE
(ECF No. 88)
ANDREW P. GORDON, District Judge.
Defendants Fernando Herrera, Amy Poehl, and Dennis Slattery move to stay this case while they appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals the issue of their qualified immunity. ECF No. 88. The plaintiffs have not filed an opposition to the motion. "The failure of an opposing party to file points and authorities in response to any motion. . . constitutes a consent to the granting of the motion." Local Rule 7-2(d). In addition, "the filing of a notice of interlocutory appeal divests the district court of jurisdiction over the particular issues involved in that appeal." City of Los Angeles, Harbor Div. v. Santa Monica Baykeeper, 254 F.3d 882, 886 (9th Cir. 2001). Therefore, this case cannot proceed to trial until the Ninth Circuit rules on the defendants' appeal.
IT IS ORDERED that the defendants' motion for stay (ECF No. 88) is GRANTED. This case is stayed in its entirety until the Ninth Circuit rules upon the defendants' appeal. The parties shall file a status report within 21 days after completion of the mediation or six months from entry of this order, whichever comes first. The parties' Joint Pre-trial Order (ECF No. 90) is rejected as moot. The parties shall file a new Joint Pre-trial Order after the case returns here from appeal.
Source: Leagle
