Free Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:03-cv-00949-JCH

Document 32

Filed 08/09/2004

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT EDWARD ROOT Plaintiff v. TIMOTHY LISTON Defendant : : : : : : 3:03CV949(JCH)

AUGUST 6, 2004

MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME The defendant, Connecticut State's Attorney Timothy Liston, respectfully moves for a two week extension of time from August 19, 2004, until September 2, 2004, to file his Reply to the Plaintiff's Opposition to the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. This extension of time is necessary for the following reasons: 1. 2. The defendant filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on June 11, 2004. Counsel for the plaintiff requested, and obtained, an extension of time until July

28, 2004 to respond, as he had a month-long vacation planned. 3. On or before July 28, 2004, counsel for the plaintiff contacted the undersigned

counsel for the defendant to obtain consent to file his opposition a few days later, on Monday August 2, 2004, due to pressing work obligations, and consent was provided. 4. On Thursday, August 5, 2004, the undersigned counsel for the defendant received

by mail, the Plaintiff's Memorandum in Opposition to the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. In accordance with the time calculations set forth in both the Federal and the Local Rules of Civil Procedure, the defendant's Reply brief would be due on Thursday, August 19, 2004. F.R.C.P. 6(a); L.R.C.P. 9(g).

Case 3:03-cv-00949-JCH

Document 32

Filed 08/09/2004

Page 2 of 3

5.

Unfortunately, the undersigned counsel for the defendant will be out of state on a

long planned family vacation beginning August 7th and will not return to the office until August 23rd, and thus will be unable to meet the deadline date. 6. Recognizing that the reply brief could not be timely filed in the allotted period

due to his vacation schedule, the undersigned counsel for the defendant contacted the plaintiff's counsel, Mr. Norm Pattis, and obtained his consent for a two week extension of time, until September 2, 2004, to file a reply brief. 7. This is the second request for an extension of time sought by the defendant, but

the first request for an extension of time to file the reply. 8. If this request is granted, it would not be prejudicial the plaintiff, but if denied, it

would be prejudicial to the defendant.

WHEREFORE, Defendant Timothy Liston respectfully requests that his Motion for an Extension of Time, until September 2, 2004, to file a Reply to the Plaintiff's Opposition to the Defendant's Motion For Summary Judgment be granted.

3

Case 3:03-cv-00949-JCH

Document 32

Filed 08/09/2004

Page 3 of 3

DEFENDANT TIMOTHY LISTON RICHARD BLUMENTHAL ATTORNEY GENERAL

BY:

/s/_____________ Robert B. Fiske, III Assistant Attorney General Fed. Bar No. ct17831 Office of the Attorney General 110 Sherman Street Hartford, CT 06105 Tel: (860) 808-5450 E-MAIL: [email protected]

CERTIFICATION This certifies that a copy of the foregoing was mailed this, the 6th day of August, 2004, to: Mr. Norm Pattis, Esq. Williams & Pattis 51 Elm Street, Suite 409 New Haven, CT 06510 __/s/__________________ Robert B. Fiske, III Assistant Attorney General

4