Las Vegas Sun, Inc. v. Adelson

1 J.RANDALL JONES, ESQ., SBN 1927 [email protected] MICHAEL J. GAYAN, ESQ., SBN 11135 [email protected] MONA KAVEH, ESQ., SBN 11825 [email protected] KEMP JONES, LLP 3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, 17th Floor Las Vegas, Nevada 89169 Telephone: +1 702 385 6000 DAVID R. SINGER, ESQ. (pro hac vice) [email protected] AMY M. GALLEGOS, ESQ. (pro hac vice) [email protected] JENNER & BLOCK LLP 515 South Flower Street, Suite 3300 Los Angeles, California 90071 Telephone: +1 213 239 5100 Facsimile: +1 213 239 5199 RICHARD L. STONE, ESQ. (pro hac vice) [email protected] Devon Avenue Los Angeles, California 90024 Telephone: +1 310 993 2068 Attorneys for Defendants/Counterclaimant UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA LAS VEGAS SUN, INC., a Nevada Case No. 2:19-cv-01667-GMN-VCF corporation, JOINT STIPULATION TO SET 20 Plaintiff, DEPOSITION PROTOCOLS 21 v. SHELDON ADELSON, an individual and as the alter ego of News+Media Capital Group LLC and as the alter ego of Las Vegas Review Journal, Inc.; PATRICK DUMONT, an individual; NEWS+MEDIA CAPITAL GROUP LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES, I-X, inclusive, 27 Defendants.

1 LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, INC., a Delaware corporation, Counterclaimant, v. LAS VEGAS SUN, INC., a Nevada corporation; BRIAN GREENSPUN, an individual and as the alter ego of Las Vegas Sun, Inc.; GREENSPUN MEDIA GROUP, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, as the alter ego of Las Vegas Sun, Inc., 8 Counterclaim- Defendants.

1 Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant LAS VEGAS SUN, INC., and Counterclaim- Defendants BRIAN GREENSPUN and GREENSPUN MEDIA GROUP, LLC (collectively the “Sun”), by and through their counsel Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP, Pisanelli Bice PLLC, and the Alioto Law Firm, and Defendant/Counterclaimant LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, INC., and Defendants NEWS+MEDIA CAPITAL GROUP LLC, SHELDON ADELSON, and PATRICK DUMONT (collectively the “Review-Journal”), by and through their counsel of record, Kemp Jones, LLP, Jenner & Block LLP, and Richard L. Stone, hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 9 1. To ensure that depositions are conducted efficiently and to minimize disputes, all objections during depositions in this matter must be stated concisely in a nonargumentative and nonsuggestive manner consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(c)(2).

12 2. Objections to the form of a question shall be stated concisely, in words such as “Objection, form,” or “objection to form.” Objections to form shall include questions that are “leading or suggestive; ambiguous or uncertain; compound; assume facts not in evidence; call for a narration; call for speculation or conjecture; or argumentative.” In re Stratosphere Corp. Sec. 16 Litig., 182 F.R.D. 614, 618 (D. Nev. 1998). Questions for which the parties believe there is a lack foundation or improper foundation also fall within this category. The parties further agree that even though relevance objections do not need to be preserved at deposition, objections to “form” may be used to object on relevance grounds too. The failure to object on relevance grounds shall not be deemed an implied or express waiver of any relevance objections.

21 3. Although not necessary to avoid waiving an objection to the relevance of a question, counsel may state an objection to a question on the grounds that it seeks information that is irrelevant due to a prior Court order regarding document discovery. Such objections shall be stated as “objection, form” (as noted above) or, if counsel chooses, “objection, court order. ” 25 4. Consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32(d)(3)(B)(i), objections may also be made to an error or irregularity at the deposition on the rare occasion where it is necessary to avoid waiver, including to the form of an answer, the oath or affirmation, a party’s conduct, or 1 5. Counsel may instruct a deponent not to answer only when necessary to preserve a privilege, to enforce a limitation ordered by the court, or to present a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(d)(3). The determination not to instruct a witness not to answer a question that violates a court order shall not be deemed an implied or express waiver of any objection or right.

6 6. The deposing counsel may request the basis for an objection to determine whether to restate a question. All counsel shall refrain from arguing the merits of objections on the record, to avoid impeding, delaying, or frustrating the fair examination of the deponent.

10 DATED this 14th day of March 2022. DATED this 14th day of March 2022.

11 LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER CHRISTIE LLP KEMP JONES LLP By: /s/ Kristen Martini By: /s/ Michael Gayan E.Leif Reid, Bar No. 5750 J. Randall Jones, Esq., Bar No. 1927 Kristen L. Martini, Bar No. 11272 Michael J. Gayan, Esq., Bar No. 11135 Marla J. Hudgens, Bar No. 11098 Mona Kaveh, Esq., Bar No. 11825 15 Nicole Scott, Bar No. 13757 3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, 17th Floor One East Liberty Street, Suite 300 Las Vegas, Nevada 89169 16 Reno, Nevada 89501-2128 JENNER & BLOCK LLP PISANELLI BICE PLLC David R. Singer, Esq., Pro Hac Vice 18 James J. Pisanelli, Bar No. 4027 Amy M. Gallegos, Esq., Pro Hac Vice Todd L. Bice, Bar No. 4534 515 South Flower Street, Suite 3300 19 Jordan T. Smith, Bar No. 12097 Los Angeles, California 90071 South 7th Street, Suite 300 20 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Richard L. Stone, Esq., Pro Hac Vice Devon Avenue ALIOTO LAW FIRM Los Angeles, California 90024 22 Joseph M. Alioto, Pro Hac Vice One Sansome Street, 35th Floor Attorneys for Defendants/ 23 San Francisco, California 94104 Counterclaimant 24 Attorneys for Plaintiff/ Counterclaim- Defendants 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA LAS VEGAS SUN, INC., a Nevada Case No. 2:19-CV-01667-GMN-VCF || corporation, Plaintiff, 4 V. SHELDON ADELSON, an individual and as PROPOSED 5|| the alter ego of News+Media Capital Group | | ORDER LLC and as the alter ego of Las Vegas Review 6|| Journal, Inc.; PATRICK DUMONT, an individual, NEWS+MEDIA CAPITAL 7|| GROUP LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, || INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES, I-X, inclusive, 9 Defendants. || LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, INC., a Delaware corporation, 1 Counterclaimant, 12 Vv.

13 LAS VEGAS SUN, INC. a Nevada corporation; BRIAN GREENSPUN, an individual and as the 14|| alter ego of Las Vegas Sun, Inc.; GREENSPUN MEDIA GROUP, LLC, a Nevada limited 15|| liability company, as the alter ego of Las Vegas Sun, Inc. 16 .

Counterclaim Defendants.

18 The Court, having considered the parties’ Joint Stipulation to Set Deposition Protocols, and || good cause appearing therefore, 20 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 21 1. The parties’ stipulated protocols for depositions in this matter shall apply to all || depositions in this matter.

IT IS SO ORDERED: 25 \ 4,09 Dated this >t day of March 9922. f 26 SPECIAL MASTER PHILIP M. PRO 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 I hereby certify that on the 11th day of March, 2022, I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing JOINT STIPULATION TO SET DEPOSITION PROTOCOLS via the United States District Court’s CM/ECF electronic filing system to all parties on the e-service list.

5 E.Leif Reid, Bar No. 5750 Marla Hudgens, Bar No. 11098 Kristen L. Martini, Bar No. 11272 7 Nicole Scott, Bar No. 13757 LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER CHRISTIE LLP 8 One East Liberty Street, Suite 300 Reno, Nevada 89501 10 Joseph M. Alioto, Pro Hac Vice ALIOTO LAW FIRM 11 One Sansome Street, 35th Floor San Francisco, California 94104 James J. Pisanelli, Bar No. 4027 Todd L. Bice, Bar No. 4534 14 Jordan T. Smith, Bar No. 12097 PISANELLI BICE PLLC 15 400 South 7th Street, Suite 300 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendants 19 /s/ Pamela Montgomery An employee of Kemp Jones, LLP