winecup gamble ranch lawsuit

ECF No. "); Shamnoski v. PG Energy, 579 Pa. 652, 671 (Pa. 2004) (reasoning that for a negligence per se holding, "the statute at issue would have to be so specific as to leave little question that a person or entity found in violation of it deviated from a reasonable standard of care." Research the case of Winecup Gamble, Inc. v. Gordon Ranch LP, from the D. Nevada, 03-17-2022. Some are as large as 67,000 acres, adds Bates' associate David Packer. A at 43:24-25), he also admits that the emails could have been deleted later by receiving a new computer or by failing to change his backup setting (Id. Winecup's first motion in limine to exclude Union Pacific's expert Daryoush Razavian's testimony related to mile post 670.03 (ECF No. 403. Winecup did not undertake a program for investigation of the hydraulic adequacy of 23 Mile dam with respect to flood and seeping under a full hydraulic head, admittedly a safety concern, as noted in the 2003 inspection report under long term actions (3 years). Winecup Gamble, Inc. v. Gordon Ranch, LP - Casetext Winecup Gamble, Inc. v. Ranch | 3:17-cv-00163-ART-CSD | D. Nev The Court finds that the agents did intentionally spoliate ESI vital to the issues of this case, which resulted in prejudice that can only be cured through dispositive rulings in Defendant's favor. In October 2016, the parties entered into a detailed seventeen-page agreement, where Plaintiff was to sell a ranch property in Northern Nevada to Defendant. Winecup Gamble Ranch Atmospherics - YouTube ECF No. The Court finds Lindon is a qualified expert in meteorology and hydrology, as it relates to his opinions in this specific case. It's about 100 miles from Elko, Nev . Lastly, Union Pacific motions the Court to amend the pretrial order (ECF No. ECF No. Great Ranches of the Great Basin - American Cowboy At the time of this writing, the undersigned has presided over one criminal in-person jury trial since the COVID-19 lockdown orders went into effect in early March 2020, which included hearing from both witnesses in-person and via ZOOM video conferencing. 3:12-cv-00344-RCJ-WGC, 2015 WL 260873, at *4 (D. Nev. Jan. 21, 2015) (emphasis in original). 89 16, 32, 50; ECF No. (ECF No. In Winecup's sixth and final motion in limine, it motions the Court to exclude evidence and argument related to the financial condition of Winecup, Paul Fireman, or the sale of Winecup Gamble Ranch in 2019, as it is irrelevant and would be unfairly prejudicial. winecup gamble ranches llc. Additionally, the Court finds that the potential risk for jurors to view exhibits out of order, to lose focus during testimony, or be unable to take notes, weighs against providing such binders. Additionally, Union Pacific requests the Court appoint a neutral expert to be either a technical advisor to the Court or expert witness. See NAC 535.055 ("Inflow design flood" means "a hypothetical flood of a given magnitude that is used to determine the design of a dam and its related hydraulic features. 8, 2020). ECF No. (ECF No. This District's courtrooms are fully equipped with an electronic exhibit display system that allows each juror to view exhibits on their own personal screen. SEND MQ: Yes. Colony Ins. 133; 133-1. 111) and its second motion in limine to exclude hydrological opinions of Matthew Lindon and to appoint a neutral expert (ECF No. 171 at 4-5. AnyLaw is the FREE and Friendly legal research service that gives you unlimited access to massive amounts of valuable legal data. How beavers make the desert bloom - High Country News Id. 131. 20106(a)(2). R. EVID. The clause would be an enforceable liquidated damages provision if the amount was a good faith effort to estimate the actual damages, but an unenforceable penalty if the amount is disproportionate to the actual damages sustained. As part of its holding, the Ninth Circuit noted that that the Court may consider parol evidence to resolve ambiguities in contractual language under Nevada law. As the parties have already agreed to prepare their exhibits electronically, juror binders are unnecessarily redundant. Confidential submissions may include any information relevant to mediation of the case and settlement potential, including, but not limited to, settlement history, ongoing or potential settlement discussions, non-litigated party related issues, other pending actions, and timing considerations that may impact mediation efforts.[11771335]. As discussed above, Razavian's opinion the subject was first disclosed during his February 2017 deposition. The case status is Pending - Other Pending. 175-2. (Id.) 112.) (ECF No. Union Pacific motions the Court to exclude Winecup's expert, Matthew Lindon, from providing opinions on meteorological and hydrological issues. Fed. 120-1 at 5. R. CIV. Union Pacific's arguments in opposing Godwin's testimony are best left to cross-examination and presentation of opinion evidence by Union Pacific's own experts rather than exclusion. Winecup opposes. Winecup Gamble, Inc. v. Ranch - casetext.com IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Union Pacific's thirteenth motion in limine to bar evidence or argument related to an "Act of God" defense (ECF No. ECF Nos. Stephanie Hoit Lee & David N. Finley, Federal Motions in Limine 1:1 (2018). SEND MQ: Yes. Altogether, both ranches encompass one million acres257,000 are deeded, and the remainder is private leases. The Offering Included All Owned Deeded Land, All Water Rights, Transfer of a Private-Use Year 'Round BLM Permit for 52,000 AUMs Plus All Machinery & Equipment. Union Pacific's ninth motion in limine to bar mention to the jury of the notion that Nevada's dam statutes and regulations do not apply to the Winecup dams due to their age (ECF No. (citing Smiley v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 517 U.S. 735, 744 n.3 (1996)). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Union Pacific's eighteenth motion in limine to bar Winecup from offering evidence or argument about preserving the Dake dam for pike (ECF No. 135. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Union Pacific's second motion in limine to exclude hydrological opinions of Matthew Lindon and to appoint a neutral expert (ECF No. (Id.) The Court agrees with Union Pacific that the email cited is hearsay that does not fall within Rule 803(20): whether a state or federal agency requested that the Dake dam be preserved for pike is not "general historical events important to" the Elko or Nevada community. Mediation Questionnaire. Counsel are requested to contact the Circuit Mediator should circumstances develop that warrant settlement discussions. The Winecup Gamble is owned by Paul Fireman,. 2011). 3:20-CV-00293 | 2020-05-18. Lindon's criticism of Union Pacific's hydrology expert, Daryoush Razavian, are admissible. Union Pacific's twelfth motion in limine to bar evidence or argument about (A) the Oroville Dam spillway failure, or (B) weather or (C) flood conditions in watersheds west of the relevant one (ECF No. Therefore, Union Pacific's fifth and sixth motions in limine are denied. 135) is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part. are for the jury.") ), After remand, the parties reinitiated discovery. 112) are denied. FED. During the initial proceeding, the jury will decide whether Winecup acted with oppression, fraud, or malice. 2004); see Mizzoni v. Allison, 2018 WL 3203623 at*5 (D. Nev. 2018) (citing to Zubulake). ECF No. of San Bernardino, 750 F. App'x 534, 537 (9th Cir. The parties stipulated to extend rebuttal expert disclosures until November 19, 2018, at which time, Winecup disclosed two rebuttal witnesses. 108.) Confidential submissions may include any information relevant to mediation of the case and settlement potential, including, but not limited to, settlement history, ongoing or potential settlement discussions, non-litigated party related issues, other pending actions, and timing considerations that may impact mediation efforts.[11771335]. Union Pacific argues that it had previously hired consulting experts early in the case who were eventually replaced by those now acting as testifying experts, which Winecup tried to learn about during discovery. 112) is DENIED. Upon remand, we instruct the Chief Judge of the District of Nevada to assign this case to a different judge, Full title:WINECUP GAMBLE, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GORDON RANCH LP, Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. v. Thitchener, 192 P.3d 243, 252-53 (Nev 2008) (citing Evans v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 5 P.3d 1043, 1052 (2000)). S.E.C. Accordingly, the Court denies Union Pacific's requested exclusion. Accordingly, the Court enters such a sanction and closes the case. 149. The Honorable Fernando M. Olguin, United States District Judge for the Central District of California, sitting by designation. 191. at 3. Appellee Gordon Ranch LP answering brief due 06/07/2021. Conversely, Clay Worden was never an employee of Winecup, and testified in Gordon Ranch in his individual capacity, not as a corporate witness or agent of Winecup. Accordingly, the late disclosure was harmless, and Lindon will be permitted to testify on the subject. ECF No. Union Pacific further argues that evidence of Winecup's financial condition is "to allow the jury to fully evaluate the decades of neglect, to see it was not due to financial straits but was fully calculated and intentional with an eye to profits." Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v. Mahan & Rowsey, Inc., 786 F.2d 1004, 1007 (10th Cir. 2000). In its second motion in limine, Union Pacific argues that Lindon's opinions regarding the cause of the mile post 670.03 washout should be excluded because he "ignored considerable evidence" that Razavian relied upon for his own opinion. Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC, 229 F.R.D. (ECF No. Winecup motions the Court to exclude Union Pacific from arguing or presenting evidence that NAC 535.240 applies to the 23 Mile or Dake dams. winecup gamble inc. winecup gamble ranch people. 702. (See, e.g., ECF No. 107) is GRANTED. 135) is denied in part and granted in part. 14. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. 2-4. Winecup argues that this regulation does not "substantially subsume the subject matter of" culvert size, and therefore, it cannot preempt the state common law standard. ECF No. Gamble Ranch - Straddling the Wyoming & Utah Border . 151. In that case, participating attorneys would appear in-person, and the Court would leave it to each party's counsel to determine which of its witnesses would appear by video or in-person. 132) is granted. While a degree or certificate in a certain area is helpful to support expert qualification, a witness can be qualified by "knowledge, skill, experience, [or] training," as well as education. The amendment uses broad categorical language that purportedly made the earnest money non-refundable in almost all circumstances. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and OLGUIN, District Judge. Union Pacific's third motion requests that the jurors be provided with three binders of pre-admitted exhibits (containing "200 or so" exhibits) at the outset of trial. AnyLaw is the FREE and Friendly legal research service that gives you unlimited access to massive amounts of valuable legal data. 157. 112 at 10-12. The American Landowner: James Rogers - The Land Report The Court agrees with this case and holds that the 2015 amendment did not lessen Plaintiff's burden. Union Pacific argues that due to the complexity of the Oroville Dam failure, evidence and argument on the topic would result in a "mini trial," and as the weather and flooding occurred outside the relevant watershed, the evidence is irrelevant. The Court heard selected oral argument on four of these motions on June 25, 2020 (ECF No. CSX Transp., Inc. v. Easterwood, 507 U.S. 658, 664 (1993). Id. iv. The language of the amendment does not specifically state that this result was desired or intended, and, in the absence of such a clear statement of the parties' intent, we find that the parties' agreement is ambiguous in this particular respect. The proponent of preemption must establish that the regulations more than "touch upon" or "relate to" the subject matter"pre-emption will lie only if the federal regulations substantially subsume the subject matter of the relevant state law." 18-16463-CIV-SELTZER, 2018 WL 4693526, at *1 (S.D. 160-2. However, as applied and in context, the terms of the parties' amended agreement are ambiguous on the point of whether the contract was intended to shift the risk-of-loss scheme. 128), and Union Pacific's related nineteenth motion in limine to preclude experts disclosed on May 13, 2020 (ECF No. Union Pacific's combined fifth and sixth motion in limine to bar two opinions of Derek Godwin (ECF No. The case status is Pending - Other Pending. 2019). unless the failure was substantially justified or is harmless." ECF No. To submit pertinent confidential information directly to the Circuit Mediators, please use the following # link . Union Pacific argues that good cause appears to permit videoconferencing under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43(a) due to the COVID-19 pandemic. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// ///. 112. While 23 Mile dam is classified as a low hazard dam, meaning it carries a "very low probability of causing a loss of human life;" and a "reasonable probability of causing little, if any, economic loss or disruption in a lifeline," that does not negate a dam owner's statutory mandate to perform "work necessary to maintenance and operation which will safeguard life and property." ECF Nos. Union Pacific argues that Lindon is not a qualified expert in meteorology because he does not hold a degree or certificate in the field. Further, whether Winecup presents sufficient evidence during trial to support giving the jury an Act of God instruction must be determined at trial. H at 1 (Privilege Log noting that Mr. Worden sent an email with the Bates Number "REV00000041" summarized as "Email re response to Margaret Ludewig" dated March 6, 2017.). The Court finds that this experience makes him qualified to offer opinions on rerouting, costs and repair, design, and construction of railroads, bridges, and culverts. Haystax: Posted 10/3/2016 21:32 (#5562551) Subject: Winecup-Gamble Ranch for sale: DV, NV: Thought you guys might like to see what one of the best ranches in the world looks . In addition to other research goals, Rogers hopes that the scientists will work with ranchers from the ground up to develop outcome-based grazing metrics that are relevant to how ranchers manage their operations. at 44:8-14). UniCourt uses cookies to improve your online experience, for more information please see our Privacy Policy. 107 Ex. ), The original terms of the agreement contained a comprehensive risk-of-loss provision. In the 2012 inspection report, it is noted that the spillway should be cleared of all debris and vegetation, however, in 2016, the inspection report provides that the spillway has lost its design capacity due to vegetation growing and earthen materials sluffing from the hillside. Counsel are requested to contact the Circuit Mediator should circumstances develop that warrant settlement discussions while the appeal is pending. ECF No. . The Court dismisses Plaintiff's complaint and enters judgment in favor of Defendant on its counterclaim. Gordon Ranch attempted to purchase real property located in northern Nevada from Winecup Gamble in 2016. ECF No. And such communications took place shortly after the flood on February 21, 2017. R. EVID. During the deposition of Winecup's designated Rule 30(b)(6) witness, James Rogers, he testified that he "did not know" the answers to several of Union Pacific's questions. However, it is not for the Court to conclude which expert is correct; that is for the jury to decide. . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Union Pacific's eighth motion in limine to bar evidence or argument that a non-party is comparatively negligent (ECF No. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Union Pacific's sixteenth motion in limine to bar two words in an email with profane reference (ECF No. This is a question of accuracy, not admissibility, and it is best left to the jury to consider the weight of this evidence. Ind. And Union Pacific and Razavian have had this supplemental disclosure since July 12, 2019. 175. Winecup opposes this motion for two reasons: (1) because N.A.C. The parties are encouraged to agree upon pre-admittance of any uncontested exhibits. 131) is denied without prejudice. 142) is GRANTED, as exhibits 10 and 11 contain information Union Pacific has marked "Confidential" under the Court's April 17, 2018 protective order and the request to seal is unopposed by Winecup. WINECUP GAMBLE, INC. V. GORDON RANCH LP, No. 20-16411 (9th Cir. 2021) 108.) Atkinson v. MGM Grand Hotel, Inc., 98 P.3d 678, 680 (Nev. 2004). FED. ECF No. ECF No. Third, Plaintiff took reasonable steps to prevent the deletions. Winecup owned and managed the Dake Reservoir dam (ID #NV00109, legal description 189DN40 E70 07D) and 23 Mile dam (ID #NV00110, legal description 189CN42 E67 15BA), both located on Thousand Springs Creek, in Elko County, Nevada. (ECF No. (ECF No. ECF No. The Court agrees with Winecup. Quebec Edible Arrangements franchisees sue company over claims of lack (Id.) [11769734] [20-16411] (Jordan, David) [Entered: 07/28/2020 03:34 PM], Docket(#1) DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. Godwin's opinions on pre-flood design structures are admissible. 141. 89 32. 3. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Winecup Gamble, Inc. For 25 years, Lindon worked at the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights, Dam Safety Section, in part, creating "hydrological models to simulate hypothetical storms and floods and re-create actual events, such as rain on snowpack events, that resulted in flooding and dam failures." The Court agrees with Winecup: any ruling that Winecup is precluded from arguing that a specific statute applies in this case must be made on a statute-by-statute/ regulation-by-regulation basis. Date of service: 07/28/2020. But the expert may be required to disclose those facts or data on cross-examination." [12048869] (BLS) [Entered: 03/22/2021 11:05 AM], (#2) Filed (ECF) Appellant Winecup Gamble, Inc. (ECF No. 133) is DENIED without prejudice. FED. 141-2 7-8. Union Pacific's fourteenth motion in limine to bar evidence or argument about consulting experts (ECF No.

Broward County Elections 2022, Town Hall Meeting Invitation To Employees, Is An Upside Down Peace Sign Bad, Portillo's Livonia Opening Date, Gianni Versace Mansion Restaurant Menu, Articles W