holding that when a plaintiff's 4 allegations fail to “state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading 5 qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery”
How later courts described this case
- holding that when a plaintiff's 4 allegations fail to “state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading 5 qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery”
- holding that qualified immunity “is meant 7 to give government officials a right, not merely to avoid standing trial, but also to avoid the 8 burdens of such pretrial matters as discovery.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Attorney General
2 CHRIS DAVIS (Bar No. 6616)
Senior Deputy Attorney General
3 SAMUEL L. PEZONE, JR. (Bar No. 15978)
Deputy Attorney General
4 State of Nevada
Office of the Attorney General
5 555 East Washington Ave., Suite 3900
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
6 (702) 486-9252 (phone)
(702) 486-3773 (fax)
7 Email: cwdavis@ag.nv.gov
8 Attorneys for Defendants
9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10 DISTRICT OF NEVADA
11 STEVEN L. SCOTT, Case No. 2:22-cv-01801-APG-EJY
12 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND ORDER
TO STAY DISCOVERY
13 v.
14 STEVE F. SISOLAK, et al.,
15 Defendants.
16
17 Plaintiff, Steven Scott, by and through his attorney, Travis N. Barrick, of GALLIAN
18 WELKER & ASSOCIATES, L.C., and Defendants, Terence Agustin, Sonya Carrillo,
19 Barbara Cegavske, Charles Daniels, Aaron Ford, Benedicto Gutierrez, Michael Minev,
20 Rochelle Ross, and Steve Sisolak, by and through counsel, Aaron D. Ford, Nevada Attorney
21 General, Chris Davis, Senior Deputy Attorney General, and Samuel L. Pezone, Jr., Deputy
22 Attorney General, hereby stipulate and agree to stay discovery until this Court resolves
23 the issue of qualified immunity in Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings. If
24 the motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied, the parties further stipulate and agree
25 to reset all of the deadlines in this Court’s scheduling order from the date the order on the
26 motion to dismiss is entered.
27 The parties hereby further stipulate and agree that a stay is appropriate in light of
28 Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings, in which Defendants’ assert qualified
2 court should resolve that threshold question [of qualified immunity] before permitting
3 discovery”); Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985) (holding that when a plaintiff's
4 allegations fail to “state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading
5 qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery”);
6 Behrens v. Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299, 306-07 (1996) (holding that qualified immunity “is meant
7 to give government officials a right, not merely to avoid standing trial, but also to avoid the
8 burdens of such pretrial matters as discovery.”) The above stipulations are made in good
9 faith and not for the purposes of delay.
10 Accordingly, the parties stipulate and agree as follows:
11 1. That discovery shall be stayed until this Court resolves the issue of qualified
12 immunity in Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings.
13 2. If the motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied, then all of the deadlines
14 in this Court’s scheduling order shall be reset.
15
16 DATED this 1st day of September 2023. DATED this 1st day of September 2023.
17 AARON D. FORD
Attorney General
18
19 By: /s/ Travis N. Barrick By: /s/ Samuel L. Pezone, Jr.
Travis N. Barrick (Bar No. 9257) Samuel L. Pezone, Jr (Bar No. 15978)
20 GALLIAN WELKER & ASSOCIATES, L.C. Deputy Attorney General
730 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 104 Attorneys for Defendants
21 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
T: (702) 892-3500
22 E: tbarrick@vegascase.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
23
IT IS SO ORDERED.
24
25
____________________________________________
26 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
27
28 DATED: September 2, 2023