{ Converted to text. The PDF is the controlling
document. The Exhibits are in the PDF. JM}
REC'D & FILED
2016 Jan 14 AM
11:08
Susan Merriwether. CLERK
BY DEPUTY _________
Adam McMillen (10678)
amcmillen@bhfs.com
BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHREK, LLP
Telephone: 775-324-4100
Facsimile: 775-333-8171
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Jed Margolin
In The First Judicial District Court of the
State of
In and for
|
JED MARGOLIN, an individual,
Plaintiff,
vs.
OPTIMA TECHNOLOGY
CORPORATION, a
Defendants.
|
Case No.: 090C00579 1B Dept. No.: 1
MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING CONTEMPT AND EX PARTE MOTION FOR ORDER SHORTENING TIME
|
Plaintiff
Jed Margolin requests this Court issue an Order
requiring Reza Zandian (“Zandian”)
to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of court for having
violated the Court’s November 6, 2015 Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for
Debtor Examination and to Produce Documents. In that Order, Zandian was ordered to produce to Plaintiff’s counsel on or
before December 21, 2015, certain documents related to Zandian’s
financial affairs. No such documents have been produced.
-1-
On January 7, 2016, this Court issued an Amended Order Granting Motion to Withdraw as Counsel. In pertinent part, that Order requires Zandian to comply with the November 6, 2015 Order “as to appearing at a Judgment Debtor’s Examination at a specific location chosen by Plaintiff” in February 2016 and that Zandian’s failure to comply with the January 7, 2016 Order will result in the Court issuing an Order to Show Cause as to why Zandian should not be held in contempt. The January 7, 2016 Order did not address the document production of the November 6, 2015 Order, presumably because the December 21, 2015 deadline had already passed. Nevertheless, the documents have not been produced and without the documents the debtor’s examination will be less effective.
In addition, the
NRS 1.210(3) states that “[t]he
Court has the power to compel obedience to its orders.” NRS 22.010(3) provides
that the “refusal to abide by a lawful order issued by the Court is
contempt.” See also Matter of Water Rights
of Humboldt River, 118 Nev. 901, 907, 59 P.3d 1226, 1229–30 (2002)
(noting that the district court generally has particular knowledge of whether
contemptible conduct occurred and thus its decisions regarding contempt are
given deference). “Courts have inherent power to enforce their decrees
through civil contempt proceedings, and this power cannot be abridged by
statute.” In re
Determination of Relative Rights of Claimants & Appropriators of Waters of
Humboldt River Stream Sys. & Tributaries, 118
-2-
P.2d 430, 432 (1970).
“A civil contempt order may be used to compensate the contemnor’s adversary for
costs incurred because of the contempt.”
“[D]istrict judges are afforded broad discretion in imposing sanctions” and the Nevada Supreme Court “will not reverse the particular sanctions imposed absent a showing of abuse of discretion.” State, Dep't of Indus. Relations, Div. of Indus. Ins. Regulation v. Albanese, 112 Nev. 851, 856, 919 P.2d 1067, 1070 (1996) (citing Young v. Johnny Ribeiro Building, 106 Nev. 88, 92, 787 P.2d 777, 779 (1990)).
“Generally, an order for civil
contempt must be grounded upon one’s disobedience of an order that spells out
‘the details of compliance in clear, specific and unambiguous terms so that
such person will readily know exactly what duties or obligations are imposed on
him.’” Southwest Gas Corp. v. Flintkote
Co., 99
Here,
it is undisputed Zandian violated this Court’s
November 6, 2015 Order by failing to produce the documents by December 21,
2015. There is no justification for Zandian’s
failure. The full damages to Plaintiff from Zandian’s
conduct and contempt for this Court cannot be measured.
-3-
Therefore, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court issue an order to show cause as to why Zandian should not be held in contempt. Plaintiff further requests the Court hold Zandian in contempt and award an appropriate compensatory sanction, both to coerce Zandian’s compliance with the production Order as well as to compensate Plaintiff for his damages, including his attorney fees and costs associated with bringing the subject motion for debtor’s examination and this motion for order to show cause regarding contempt. If the Court deems such an award of attorney fees and costs is warranted, Plaintiff will file a subsequent affidavit and cost memorandum.
Pursuant to FJDCR 9(3), Plaintiff also requests this motion be decided on an order shortening time. This is requested as the debtor’s examination has been duly ordered to occur in February of this year. It is hoped that this motion and any resulting order will secure Zandian’s production of the requested documents. To this end, Plaintiff requests that any opposition to this motion be filed by Zandian on or before January 22, 2016, and that Plaintiff’s reply be filed by January 26, 2016, in order for the Court to render a decision prior to the debtor’s examination in February of 2016.
Accordingly, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court issue an order to show cause as to why Zandian should not be held in contempt for his failure to produce documents pursuant to this Court’s November 6, 2015 Order. Plaintiff also requests that an Order shortening time be issued requiring any opposition to this motion be filed on or before January 22, 2016 and that any reply be submitted on or before January 26, 2016.
-4-
AFFIRMATION PURSUANT TO NRS 239B.030
The undersigned does hereby affirm that the preceding document does not contain the social security number of any person.
Dated this 13th day of January, 2016.
BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER
SCHRECK, LLP
BY:
Matthew D. Francis (6978)
Adam P. McMillen (10678)
Telephone: 775-324-4100
Facsimile: 775-333-8171
Attorneys for
Plaintiff Jed Margolin
-5-
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), I certify that I am an employee of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, and that on this date, I deposited for mailing, in a sealed envelope, with first-class postage prepaid, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document, MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING CONTEMPT AND EX PARTE MOTION FOR ORDER SHORTENING TIME, addressed as follows:
Reza Zandian
c/o Alborz Zandian
Severin A. Carlson
Tara C. Zimmerman
Kaempfer Crowell
Dated: January 13, 2016
______________________
Nancy Lindsley
-6-
INDEX OF EXHIBITS
|
EXHIBIT NO. |
DESCRIPTION |
PAGE(S) |
|
1 |
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
3 |
-7-