Title: Torremoro v. Eighth Judicial District Court
Citation: 138 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 54
Docket Number: 
State: Nevada
Issuer: Nevada Supreme Court
Date: July 7, 2022

Torremoro v. Eighth Judicial District Court Annotate this Case Justia Opinion Summary The Supreme Court denied a petition for a writ of mandamus in this tort action, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in modifying the scheduling order, reopening discovery, and granting a motion to substitute. At issue in this case was the standard for substituting an expert witness after the close of discovery. Lamont Compton brought this complaint against Petitioners seeking damages for injuries received from a motor vehicle accident. Compton designated Dr. Jeffrey Gross as his expert, after which Dr. Gross pleaded guilty to conspiracy in a federal case. The district court subsequently granted Compton's motion to substitute Dr. Raimundo Leon for Dr. Gross. The district court granted the motion. The Supreme Court concluded that hte district court properly granted the motion, holding that Nev. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4)'s good cause test, in combination with relevant local rules, provides the standard governing when a district court may modify a scheduling order. Read more Want to stay in the know about new opinions from the Supreme Court of Nevada? Sign up for free summaries delivered directly to your inbox. Learn More › You already receive new opinion summaries from Supreme Court of Nevada. Did you know we offer summary newsletters for even more practice areas and jurisdictions? Explore them here . Opinion Annotation Download PDF Primary Holding The Supreme Court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in modifying the scheduling order, reopening discovery, and granting a motion to substitute. Disclaimer: Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship. Torremoro v. Eighth Judicial District Court Primary Holding The Supreme Court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in modifying the schedul... Read the full annotations for this case. Webinars You Might Like: Please visit individual webinar pages for more information about CLE accreditation.