Voip Pal Com Inc (VPLM)

[drumming4life]

Keepem - You're certainly entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts! Kipping's counsel was admonished by the court on 10/26/2017 for not getting their client to the scheduled deposition to move the case along. In addition, they missed the 2nd scheduled deposition date of 2/7/2018 as shown in the court case listing on the Clark County Court website.

If this is "doing extremely well", I'd hate to see what going poorly looks like!

If anybody wants to follow this case, go to my post 42003. It has a link and instructions on how to get to the case docket.




--------------------

Here's the text of the minutes entered into the court record on 10/26/17 for your reading pleasure:


10/26/2017 Minute Order (7:45 AM) (Judicial Officer Cory, Kenneth)

Minutes
10/26/2017 7:45 AM
- NOTICE AND ORDER: Supplemental Trial Order MINUTE ORDER Case No. A717491 The Jury Trial for this case has been continued to a Stack date of 09/04/18 at 1:30 p.m. The continuance was by stipulation between counsel pursuant to Rule 2.35 EJDCR. The stipulation should contain the dates for the close of discovery pursuant to Rule 2.35. The date for the deadline for filing dispositive motions shall remain no more than 30 days following the discovery cutoff, pursuant to NRCP 16.1 (c) (8). Counsel should not presume that by informally stipulating to continue some discovery past the discovery cutoff date that the above deadline for dispositive motions is somehow affected. The deadline to file motions in limine, in accordance with Rule 2.47 EJDCR remains no less than 45 days prior to the stacked trial date, and heard not less than 14 days prior to the same stacked trial date. The Pretrial Conference/Calendar Call will be held on 08/16/18 at 9:00 a.m., District Court Dept. 1. The lead trial attorney trying the case shall attend and should come prepared with his/her calendar for the entire 5-week stack, as well as the 5-week calendar for all witnesses to be called in the trial. Your case may be tried anywhere within the 5-week stack, regardless of age of the case. The Court notes that it becomes increasingly difficult to accommodate the schedules of out-of-state witnesses, particularly expert witnesses. It is up to counsel to anticipate scheduling difficulties with witnesses and to notify the Court and opposing counsel well in advance of the Pretrial Conference/Calendar Call date. It will not do to simply appear at Calendar Call expecting to notify the Court at that late date of the need to reschedule the trial. If you do so, you may expect to be treated with the same consideration which you have shown for both the Court and opposing counsel. A ready alternative to live, in-court testimony is available through the use of either deposition testimony or live video testimony, through the use of now-available technology installed by the Eighth Judicial District Court. The Court has presided over a number of trials where expert testimony was admitted utilizing a live video feed technique and has noted little or no diminution in the effectiveness of live video testimony compared to live in-court testimony. Rule 2.47 EJDCR The Court is singularly unimpressed with attorneys who wait too close to motion deadlines to hold meaningful conferences pursuant to EJDCR 2.47(b), prompting the filing of many form motions in limine, or worse yet, a form omnibus motion in limine, with little or no particularized reference to the facts of the present case. Often the motions merely ask that settled law be enforced at trial. A motion in limine is moving counsel s opportunity to raise prior to trial those few evidentiary issues which are novel or as to which the law is thus far silent. Rather than ask that settled law be enforced in a motion in limine, counsel are invited to file a trial brief outlining an issue in which, in counsel s estimation, the Court may not be as well versed as counsel would wish. An omnibus motion in limine is a sure tip-off that the very stock motions which EJDCR 2.47 seeks to avoid are being filed and accordingly should not be filed. The failure to evidence that meaningful Rule 2.47 conferences are being held will likely result in all motions in limine being stricken by the Court sua sponte. The Court will make the determination not only from the certificate evincing compliance with the Rule but also from the substance of the motions themselves. Also, given that the deadline for filing dispositive motions will have already passed, a motion in limine should not be a motion for summary judgment in disguise. This Order shall supplement the original trial order, which counsel are invited to re-read. 8/16/18 9:00 AM PRETRIAL CONFERENCE 9/4/18 1:30 PM JURY TRIAL CLERK'S NOTE: The above minute order has been distributed to: Kurt Bonds, Esq. ([e-mail]) and Harold Gewerter, Esq. ([e-mail]). /mlt