Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Auler v. Hertz Corporation, 2:18-CV-01522-JAD-BNW. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20190813802 Visitors: 7
Filed: Aug. 08, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 08, 2019
Summary: MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES (SECOND REQUEST) BRENDA WEKSLER , Magistrate Judge . Defendant, THE HERTZ CORPORATION, by and thought its attorneys, LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD SMITH LLP, respectfully requests this Court to issue an Order extending certain discovery deadlines in this case. MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT Pursuant to Local Rules (LR) 2604, LR6-1 and LR 26-1, Defendant, by and through its attorneys, James Murphy, Esq. of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP, hereby moves this Cou
More

MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES

(SECOND REQUEST)

Defendant, THE HERTZ CORPORATION, by and thought its attorneys, LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD SMITH LLP, respectfully requests this Court to issue an Order extending certain discovery deadlines in this case.

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT

Pursuant to Local Rules (LR) 2604, LR6-1 and LR 26-1, Defendant, by and through its attorneys, James Murphy, Esq. of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP, hereby moves this Court to extend the discovery deadlines for the disclosure of expert reports and to amend pleadings and add parties in the above-captioned case for a period of twenty-one (21) days.

Local Rule (LR) 2604 provides that applications to extend any date set by the discovery plan, scheduling order or other order must, in addition to satisfying the requirements of LR6-1, be supported by showing of good cause for the extension.

LR26-1 also requires that an application for the extension of a deadline must be received by the court no later than 21 days before extension of the subject deadline.

LR6-1 provides the "(a) request made after the expiration of the specified period shall not be granted unless the moving party, attorney or other person demonstrates the failure to act as a result of excusable neglect."

DISCOVERY REMAINING

1. Plaintiffs will complete the deposition of Hertz Corporation pursuant to FRCP 30(b)6 by August 30, 2019;

2. The parties will complete all written discovery and provide necessary supplements thereto;

3. The parties will take the depositions of any and all other witnesses garnered through discovery.

This Request for an extension of time is not sought for any improper purpose or other purpose of delay. Rather, it is sought by the parties solely for the purpose of allowing sufficient time to conduct discovery.

WHY REMAINING DISCOVERY HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED

Defendant Hertz Corporation, through its counsel Mr. Lazar, Esq. and Mr. Murphy, Esq. spoke with Plaintiffs' counsel Mr. Capp, Esq. twice on Monday July 29, 2019 and again via email on Tuesday, July 30, 2019. Generally, more time was requested to accommodate counsel and Hertz Cooperation. In these communications Plaintiffs advised Defendant Hertz Corporation that Plaintiffs are agreeable to an extension of time to complete discovery on the strict condition that the continued deposition of Hertz Corporation takes place and is completed by August 30th at the very latest. See Affidavit of James E. Murphy, Esq., attached hereto as Exhibit A. A separate communication took place between James E. Murphy, Esq. and Mr. Cisneros, Esq., counsel for Mr. Robert Stevens, and Mr. Cisneros expressed his agreement with a modest extension of the deadlines as well. Id.

Extension or Modification of The Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. LR 26-4 governs modifications or extension of this discovery plan and scheduling order. Any stipulation or motion must be made no later than twenty-one (21) days before the expiration of the subject deadline, and comply fully with LR 26-4.

The following is a list of the current discovery deadlines as ORDERED by the Court on May 21, 2019 (Doc#35) and the parties' proposed extended deadlines.

Scheduled Event Current Deadline Proposed Deadline Discovery Cut-off October 9, 2019 Unchanged Amendment to August 9, 2019 August 30, 2019 Pleadings or adding parties Interim Status Report July 10, 2019 Unchanged Expert Disclosure August 19, 2019 September 9, 2019 pursuant to Fed R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) Rebuttal Expert September 18, 2019 October 11, 2019 Disclosure pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) Dispositive Motions November 7, 2019 Unchanged Joint Pretrial Order December 6, 2019 Unchanged

This Request for an extension of certain deadlines is not sought for any improper purpose or other purpose of delay. Rather, it is sought by the parties solely for the purpose of allowing sufficient time to conduct discovery in this case and adequately prepare their respective cases for trial. Specifically, the deposition of Hertz Corporation pursuant to FRCP 30(b)6 is contemplated to take place by August 30, 2019 and added time is necessary to permit the various designees of Hertz Corporation to appear, and be prepared ahead of time by Counsel for Hertz Corporation given the travel schedules of all concerned.

This is the second request for extension of time in this matter. The parties respectfully submit that the reasons set forth above constitute compelling reasons and good cause for the short extension with respect the dates specified above.

WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request that this Court extend the deadline to disclose expert reports by a period of twenty-one days (21) days from the current deadline of August 19, 2019 up to and including September 9, 2019 and the deadline to amend pleadings or add parties by a period of twenty-one days (21) days from the current deadline of August 9, 2019 up to and including August 30, 2019 and the deadline for Rebuttal Expert Disclosure from September 18, 2019 to October 11, 2019 pursuant and the other discovery dates as outlined in accordance with the table above remain unchanged.

DATED this 30th day of July, 2019. LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP BY ________ JAMES E. MURPHY Nevada Bar No. 8586 6385 S. Rainbow Boulevard, Suite 600 Las Vegas, Nevada 89118 Attorneys for Defendant THE HERTZ CORPORATION

IT IS SO ORDERED.

EXHIBIT A

AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES E. MURPHY

Auler v. The Hertz Corporation / Case No. 2:18-CV-01522-JAD-BNW

AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES E. MURPHY, ESQ. IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY (SECOND REQUEST)

STATE OF NEVADA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF CLARK )

James E. Murphy, Esq., being first duly sworn, now deposes and says as follows:

1. Affiant is a partner in the law firm of LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD SMITH, LLP. Counsel for Defendant Hertz Corporation. I give this affidavit of my own personal knowledge and in support of Defendant's Motion to Extend Discovery Deadlines (Second Request).

2. Defendant Hertz Corporation, through its counsel Mr. Lazar, Esq. and Affiant, spoke with Plaintiffs' counsel Mr. Capp, Esq. twice on Monday July 29, 2019 and again via email on Tuesday, July 30, 2019. Plaintiffs advised Defendant Hertz Corporation Plaintiffs are agreeable to an extension of time to complete discovery assuming the deposition of Hertz Corporation takes place by August 30th at the very latest. Affiant advised this request would be issued.

3. Affiant has also spoken directly with Mr. Cisneros, Esq. representing Mr. Robert Stevens. Mr. Cisneros, Esq. expressed his agreement with the concepts outlined herein.

FURTHER YOUR AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.

Signed: ________ JAMES E. MURPHY, ESQ. Title: Partner Date: July 30, 2019 SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to before me this 30 day of July, 2019. ________ NOTARY PUBLIC in and for State of Nevada, County of Clark.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer