Free Memorandum in Support of Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:03-cv-00945-CFD

Document 93

Filed 05/21/2004

Page 1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

CLARENCE R. COLLINS, JR., et al. Plaintiffs, V. OLIN CORPORATION, et al. Defendants.

: : : : : : : :

3:03-CV-945 (CFD)

MAY 20, 2004

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING AND CONSIDERATION OF DEFENDANTS MOTION TO COMPEL DATED MAY 20, 2004 The defendants, Town of Hamden ("Town") and Olin Corporation ("Olin"), hereby move this Court, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 7(a), for an order expediting the briefing schedule in connection with the defendants' Motion to Compel, dated May 20, 2004. The defendants also moves this Court for expedited consideration of the referenced Motion to Compel. The basis for the defendants' request for expedited briefing and consideration in connection with their Motion to Compel is that there is only a limited time within which the defendants may conduct discovery on class certification issues, and there is a significant amount of discovery in that area to conduct. The Motion to Compel is necessary to permit the

defendants access to the putative class representatives who, through counsel, will not agree to be deposed. The Court has ordered that discovery concerning class certification be completed by July 30, 2004 and any opposition to plaintiffs' motion for class certification be filed thirty days

One Goodwin Square 225 Asylum Street Hartford, CT 06103

HALLORAN & SAGE LLP

Phone (860) 522-6103 Fax (860) 548-0006 Juris No. 26105

Case 3:03-cv-00945-CFD

Document 93

Filed 05/21/2004

Page 2 of 5

thereafter. Given the significant amount of discovery to be conducted on class certification issues, and the limited time within which to complete that significant discovery, any further delay brought about by plaintiffs' refusal to submit to the discovery process will severely prejudice the defendants in their ability to conduct the discovery required to oppose the plaintiffs' class certification motion. Additionally, the defendants have proposed and agreed to certain dates for depositions during May and June. Regrettably, the deposition dates scheduled for late May (May 26 and 27) are being postponed until the issues raised in the Motion to Compel are resolved. As more fully noted in the Motion to Compel and supporting Memorandum, there are thirty-six (36) named class representatives. Class counsel are refusing to submit the named putative class

representatives for deposition, insisting initially that no more than five (now raised to ten) of the named class representatives be deposed. Additionally, class counsel insist that the seven hour limit of Rule 32(d) apply to the class representatives' depositions. As a result, class counsel require, in effect, that each plaintiff class representative be deposed only once with the subject matter to include both discovery on class certification and the merits of the case ­ or that defendants choose now which of the class representatives to depose on class certification issues and which to depose later on issuing going to the merits of the underlying claims. Among other arguments set forth in the Memorandum of Law accompanying our Motion to Compel, this position runs counter to the schedule separating class issues from merits, which was first approved by this court on October 14, 2003. The defendants would very much welcome the opportunity to proceed with the depositions but not at the risk of prejudicing their
-2­
One Goodwin Square 225 Asylum Street Hartford, CT 06103

HALLORAN & SAGE LLP

Phone (860) 522-6103 Fax (860) 548-0006 Juris No. 26105

Case 3:03-cv-00945-CFD

Document 93

Filed 05/21/2004

Page 3 of 5

ability to conduct discovery on the merits of plaintiffs' claims at a later date. The defendants confirmed three additional deposition dates (June 8, 9 and 24), and have offered numerous additional dates in June. The defendants would very much like to proceed on these dates unencumbered by plaintiffs' capricious restrictions. Furthermore, the plaintiffs will not be unfairly prejudiced in the event this motion is granted because the issues are limited and procedural in nature, and have been addressed by the parties for the past several weeks. For that period of time, the plaintiffs have known about the specific issues and positions the defendants set forth in their Motion to Compel. The plaintiffs should be able to address these issues promptly, just as the defendants have been able to address them on short notice following the end of good faith negotiations on the discovery issues that are the subject of the Motion to Compel. Based on the foregoing, this Court may expedite the briefing schedule and consideration of the defendants' Motion to Compel. See, e.g., Security Ins. Co. of Hartford v. Trustmark Ins. Co., 218 F.R.D. 29, 36 (D.Conn. 2003) (allowing expedited briefing schedule); New Colt Holding Corp. v. RJG Holdings of Florida, Inc., 2003 WL 22327167 *1, *5 (D.Conn. 2003) (same) (attached). The defendants believe that a period of seven (7) days from the date hereof is reasonable to require any opposition to its Motion to Compel to be filed, and a period of seven (7) days thereafter for the defendants to file any memorandum in reply. WHEREFORE, the defendants respectfully moves this Court for an expedited briefing schedule and expedited consideration of its Motion to Compel in order to permit class certification discovery to proceed in accordance with a prior Order of this Court.
-3­
One Goodwin Square 225 Asylum Street Hartford, CT 06103

HALLORAN & SAGE LLP

Phone (860) 522-6103 Fax (860) 548-0006 Juris No. 26105

Case 3:03-cv-00945-CFD

Document 93

Filed 05/21/2004

Page 4 of 5

THE DEFENDANT, TOWN OF HAMDEN By_________________________________ Ann M. Catino Federal Bar #ct02747 Joseph G. Fortner, Jr. Federal Bar #ct 04602 HALLORAN & SAGE LLP One Goodwin Square 225 Asylum Street Hartford, CT 06103 (860) 522-6103 OLIN CORPORATION By: Michael H. Wetmore Joel B. Samson HUSCH & EPPENBERGER, LLC 190 Carondelet Plaza, Suite 600 St. Louis, MO 63105 (314) 480-1500

-4­
One Goodwin Square 225 Asylum Street Hartford, CT 06103

HALLORAN & SAGE LLP

Phone (860) 522-6103 Fax (860) 548-0006 Juris No. 26105

Case 3:03-cv-00945-CFD

Document 93

Filed 05/21/2004

Page 5 of 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 20th day of May, 2004, a copy of the foregoing was served by first class U.S. mail, postage prepaid, upon all counsel and pro se parties of record, as follows: Monte E. Frank, Esq. David B. Zabel, Esq. Alison K. Clark, Esq. Cohen and Wolf, P.C. 158 Deer Hill Avenue Danbury, CT 06810 Mark Roberts, Esq. McRoberts, Roberts & Rainer L.L.P. 101 Merrimac Street Boston, MA 02114 Neil T. Leifer, Esq. Michael A. Lesser, Esq. Brad J. Mitchell, Esq. David C. Strouss, Esq. Thornton & Naumes, LLP 100 Summer Street, 30th Floor Boston, MA 02110 ________________________________ Joseph G. Fortner, Jr.

-5­
One Goodwin Square 225 Asylum Street Hartford, CT 06103

HALLORAN & SAGE LLP

Phone (860) 522-6103 Fax (860) 548-0006 Juris No. 26105