Vegas Litigator

NRCP Rule 34 allows Parties to serve Requests Production of Documents and Things.  Of course, the scope of the requests is limited by NRCP 26(b) which authorizes parties to obtain discovery regarding any matter not privileged. See, State ex rel. Tidvall v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court ex rel. County of Clark, 91 Nev. 520, 539 P.2d 456 (1975).  In other words, the material sought should be relevant to the issues of the case.  

There is no numerical limit to the number of Requests for Production that can be asked as there is a limit on the number of Interrogatories that can be asked.  However, Parties should be reasonable in making Discovery Requests.  I cannot imagine that a Court or Discovery Commissioner would allow Requests for Production to be abused by a party if it appears that the Requests were being used to harass the other Party rather than to seek information to prepare the case for settlement or Trial.

Most often, Requests for Production seek documents within the other Party’s possession or control.  If a party uses a third party to care for or control its records, such as a billing company, then that Party should be responsible for gathering that information and producing it to the other Party for use in the case for settlement or Trial.  Documents should be produced in a manner that is meaningful to the Requesting Party.  Rule 34(b) requires that producing party “shall produce them as they are kept in the usual course of business or shall organize and label them to correspond with the categories in the request.”

Rule 34 can also be used to obtain things, such the tires from a car involved in an accident in a case where the Plainitff is claiming injuries as a result of an accident caused by bad tires.  In such a case, the Court has the power to require the owner of the tires (or their insurer) to produce the tires for inspection and testing by the adverse party’s expert witness.  The Court may place restrictions on the testing to be conducted on the tire(s) and will look to ensure there is a proper evidentiary trail to guarantee that the actual tires are the only ones being examined and commented upon during the course of litigation.

Using NRCP 34, a Party should may be allowed to enter another’s land if doing so is necessary for the case.  This would be the case where a defendant’s experts would need to enter a Plaintiff’s home in a construction defect case where the Plaintiff is claiming damages as a result of a poorly constructed home.  Clearly, the Defendant’s experts would need to enter the home to examination the allegedly damaged area so they could form their opinions regarding what, if any, defects were made in constructing the home.  Rendering wuch an opinion could not be done from a distance or with photographs.

As you can see, NRCP Rule 34 is another tool for gathering information allowing Parties to prepare for Trial by finding evidence relevant to the case.  Attorneys will often use Requests for Production prior to Interrogatories and Depositions to form appropriate questions.  Sometimes, they are used as follow ups to the other tools to gather documents and things that were identified in Interrgoatoies or Deposition.

to a new site  Vegas Litigator is not blogging at vegaslitigator.com/blog.  Please update your links.  We are also in the process of moving Vegas Personal Injury Law Blog to vegaspersonalinjurylawblog.com/blog. 

Hope to see you soon.

As you can see, I have written several posts regarding the Nevada Short Trial program. I have been involved in over 25 Short Trials. In most of these cases, I have represented Plaintiffs injured in personal injury accidents. I have received the largest award in the history of the Nevada Short Trial Program on behalf of one of my personal injury clients. In that case, the Jury awarded my client $758,000.00 in damages for injuries she received in a car accident. The Driver who caused the accident had previously settled the case for her policy limits and the Trial was against my client’s own insurance company, Allstate Insurance seeking underinsured motorist benefits. Of course, I cannot guarantee that I can be as successful for any other client, but I do work hard to represent all of my clients.

I have recently been invited to speak as a faculty member in a seminar on the Short Trial Program in Nevada. That seminar, Breaking Down the Short Trial Program, is being produced by Lorman Education Services and will be held on March 19, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. More information on this seminar can be found at Breaking Down the Short Trial Program.

There will be five speakers at the seminar. The other speakers will be speaking about:

• Overview, History and Evolution of the Short Trial Program;
• Judicial Ethics;
• Motion Practice;
• Admission of Expert Witness Testimony in Short Trials;
• Short Trial Procedure From the Commissioner; and
• How Best to Represent Your Client in a Short Trial Mediation.

I will be speaking about the Short Trial Program from a Litigator’s Perspective and the Pros and Cons of the Short Trial Program (also from a litigator and client’s perspective). I plan on taking the attendees through the process from the time the case has entered the Short Trial Program through the time of filing a Judgment with the Court. This will include:

• Pretrial Procedures;
• The Jurors and Juror Selection;
• The Trial, and
• Post-Trial Procedures.

I’m hoping to have some fun while I provide information to the attendees in an interesting way.

I have started a new group on Google Groups called Success for Plaintiffs. The goal of this group is to help personal injury accident victims by freely exchanging information between their Attorneys.

I am looking for Plaintiff’s personal injury attorneys who will share information about their successes. This information could include:

• information about tactics taken by insurance companies that might demonstrate bad faith;
• information about defense experts and their opinions;
• information about defense attorney discovery tactics;
• information about Motions filed by Defendants and how to successfully oppose those Motions;
• information about Motions filed on behalf of personal injury accident victims and how they changed the outcome of the Trial.

Go to Success for Plaintiffs and sign up. Once you have been approved, you will be able to post messagesto tell others of your successes. You will also be able to post a page for your firm that others may use for referral purposes.

I hope that Plaintiff’s attorneys will join me in this venture.