BURGESS v. CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT

Case No. 2:17-cv-00805-GMN-VCF.

DANIEL M. BURGESS, an individual; ANTHONY RUSSO, an individual, Plaintiff, v. CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, a political subdivsion; EDWARD GOLDMAN, an individual; JAMES KETSAA, an individual; CHRISTOPHER KLEMP, an individual, Defendants.

United States District Court, D. Nevada.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cause: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Daniel M Burgess, Plaintiff, represented by Jason Maier , Maier Gutierrez Ayon.

Daniel M Burgess, Plaintiff, represented by Joseph A. Gutierrez , Maier Gutierrez Ayon & Danielle J. Barraza , Maier Gutierrez Ayon.

Anthony Russo, Plaintiff, represented by Adam Levine , Law Office of Daniel Marks, Daniel Marks , Law Office of Daniel Marks & Jason Maier , Maier Gutierrez Ayon.

Clark County School District, Defendant, represented by Kara B. Hendricks , Greenberg Traurig LLP & Mark E. Ferrario , Greenberg Traurig.

Edward Goldman, Defendant, represented by Kara B. Hendricks , Greenberg Traurig LLP & Mark E. Ferrario , Greenberg Traurig.

James Ketsaa, Defendant, represented by Kara B. Hendricks , Greenberg Traurig LLP & Mark E. Ferrario , Greenberg Traurig.

Christopher Klemp, Defendant, represented by Kara B. Hendricks , Greenberg Traurig LLP & Mark E. Ferrario , Greenberg Traurig.


STIPULATIONTOEXTEND PLAINTIFF ANTHONY RUSSO'S RESPONSETOTHEDEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS RUSSO'S CLAIM FOR VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS [Doc #10] AND PLAINTIFF DANIEL BURGESS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS BURGESS' CLAIMS [Doc #9]

(FirstRequest)

GLORIA M. NAVARRO, District Judge.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED between the parties, by and through their undersigned counsel, as counsel for Plaintiff Anthony Russo is undergoing emergency surgery and will be out of the office for a few days. In addition to multiple arbitrations SEIU Local 1107 v. Clark County and SEIU Local 1107 (Tanya Thomas) v. Clark County, hearings which include a Step 2, a Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award, the calendar call and a week-long trial in the Eighth Judicial District Court set to occur this month the Plaintiffs' Responses to Defendant's Motions to Dismiss [Docs # 9 & 10] shall be extended for a period of 32 days from June 9, 2017 to July 11, 2017 as the 30th day falls on a Saturday.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases