Free Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:03-cv-00386-AWT

Document 51

Filed 12/22/2004

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

EUNICE SMITH, Plaintiff v. STATE OF CONNECTICUT, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, Defendant

: : : : : : : :

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:03CV00386(AWT)

DECEMBER 20, 2004

DEFENDANTS' REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN OPPOSITION TO RULE 37 SANCTIONS

With regard to the factual chronology surrounding the numerous requests for both discovery responses and a more definite statement, the defendants rely upon their Motion to Compel and Motion for Sanctions. It is important however to respond to plaintiff's counsel's suggestion that defendants' request for sanctions "is somewhat disingenuous". Prior to sending to the court a document entitled "Joint Motion to Extend Discovery Pursuant to L.R. Civ. P. 9(b)," plaintiff's counsel called the undersigned to determine if there was an objection to Plaintiff requesting an extension of time. I indicated that there was no objection. Surprisingly, the plaintiff filed a "Joint Motion" although the body of the motion referred to "Plaintiff" and the Motion was signed only by one party. In the interest of congeniality, the undersigned did not object to the filing of that motion in the manner in which it was filed.

Case 3:03-cv-00386-AWT

Document 51

Filed 12/22/2004

Page 2 of 3

More importantly, the "Joint Motion" makes absolutely no reference to a More Definite Statement. It is irresponsible to represent to the Court that plaintiff's counsel believed that her motion included time to submit an amended complaint. The defendants did not and would not agree to end discovery and presumably depose the plaintiff without the amended complaint that was ordered by the court nearly nine months prior. In furtherance of its Motion to Compel and Motion for Sanctions dated December 6, 2004, defendants request that sanctions be imposed. DEFENDANT, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION RICHARD BLUMENTHAL ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: _________________________________ Jane B. Emons Assistant Attorney General Federal Bar No. 16515 55 Elm Street - P.O. Box 120 Hartford, CT 06141-0120 Tel: (860) 808-5340 Fax: (860) 808-5383 Email: [email protected]

2

Case 3:03-cv-00386-AWT

Document 51

Filed 12/22/2004

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Defendants' Reply to Plaintiff's Motion in Opposition to Rule 37 Sanctions, was mailed this 20th day of December, 2004, first class postage prepaid to: Cynthia Jennings, Esq. The Barrister Law Group 211 State Street, 2nd Floor Bridgeport, CT 06604

___________________________ Jane B. Emons Assistant Attorney General

3