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


File Size: 14.3 kB
Pages: 4
Date: December 31, 1969
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 712 Words, 4,532 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/22500/75.pdf

Download Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Connecticut ( 14.3 kB)


Preview Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:03-cv-00383-WIG

Document 75

Filed 02/23/2004

Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT WASLEY PRODUCTS, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. BARRY LEONARD BULAKITES, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:03 CV 0383 (DJS) (LEAD)

FEBRUARY 20, 2004

DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AND OBJECTION TO MOTION FOR DEFAULT FOR FAILURE TO PLEAD Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b), and Local Rule of Civil Procedure 7(b)(2), Defendants Barry L. Bulakites, James A. Winslow, and Joshua Adams Corporation ("Defendants") hereby move for an extension of time to answer Plaintiffs Gregory T. Prentiss, John Rizzi, Richard Seich, and Dorothy Brown's ("Plaintiffs") Complaint. Defendants also object to Plaintiffs' Motion for Default for Failure to Plead. 1. On or about October 16, 2003, Plaintiffs commenced an action captioned

Prentiss, et al. v. Wasley Products, Inc., et al. (3:03 CV 01790) ("the participants action"), in which Defendants were named defendants.

19410.000/353048.1

Case 3:03-cv-00383-WIG

Document 75

Filed 02/23/2004

Page 2 of 4

2.

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12, Defendants were required

to answer Plaintiffs' Complaint on or before December 21, 2003. 3. On December 19, 2003, Plaintiffs moved to consolidate the participant's

action with the instant action, which Motion this Court granted on January 27, 2004. 4. On January 23, 2004, counsel for Defendants, Maurice T. FitzMaurice,

and Peter K. Rydel (hereinafter "Counsel") moved for leave to withdraw their appearance as counsel (hereinafter "Motion"). 1 5. 6. The Court has not yet ruled on Counsel's Motion. Defendants have not responded to Plaintiffs' Complaint because of the

pendency of Counsel's Motion. 7. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b), and Local Rule of Civil

Procedure 7(b)(2), Defendants respectfully request that the period within which they must answer the Complaint be extended to at least 30 days after the Court's ruling on Counsel's Motion. 8. The pendency of Counsel's Motion constitutes excusable neglect under

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b).

1

Counsel incorrectly stated their firm, Reid and Riege, P.C., as the movant, rather than themselves individually. The Court, however, has inherent power to construe the Motion in its correct form, as it already has done in its Order of February 19, 2004.

2
19410.000/353048.1

Case 3:03-cv-00383-WIG

Document 75

Filed 02/23/2004

Page 3 of 4

9.

The pendency of Counsel's Motion constitutes good cause under Local

Rule of Civil Procedure 7(b)(2). 10. Pursuant to Local Rule of Civil Procedure 7(b)(2), Defendants have

inquired of opposing counsel Attorney Moukawsher and he consents to the extension of time requested herein. 11. On account of Attorney Moukawsher's consent, Plaintiffs' Motion for

Default for Failure to Plead should be denied.

WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request that Defendants' Motion for Extension of Time be granted and that Plaintiffs' Motion for Default for Failure to Plead be denied. DEFENDANTS BARRY LEONARD BULAKITES, JAMES ALBERT WINSLOW & JOSHUA ADAMS CORPORATION

By________________________ Peter K. Rydel Fed. #ct24793 REID AND RIEGE, P.C. One Financial Plaza, 21st Flr. Hartford, CT 06103 Tel. 860-278-1150

3
19410.000/353048.1

Case 3:03-cv-00383-WIG

Document 75

Filed 02/23/2004

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 20T H day of February, 2004, a copy of the foregoing Objection to Motion for Default for Failure to Plead and Motion for Enlargement of Time was sent via certified mail, return receipt requested, to the following: Barry Bulakites 558 Castle Pines Pkwy. Unit B4 # 401 Castle Pines, CO 80108 James Winslow 61 Muller Drive Westbrook, CT 06498

I further certify that on this 20TH day of February, 2004, a copy of the foregoing Objection to Motion for Default for Failure to Plead and Motion for Enlargement of Time was sent via first-class mail to the following: Mary E.R. Bartholic Cohn Birnbaum & Shea, P.C. 100 Pearl Street Hartford, CT 06103 Bryan D. Short, Esq. Deborah S. Freeman, Esq. Bingham McCutchen One State Street Hartford, CT 06103 Theodore J. Tucci, Esq. Robinson & Cole 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103-3597

Eric L. Sussman, Esq. Day, Berry & Howard, LLP CityPlace I 185 Asylum Street Hartford, CT 06103 Thomas G. Moukasher Moukasher & Walsh, LLC Capitol Place 21 Oak Street Hartford, CT 06106

___________________________ Peter K. Rydel

4
19410.000/353048.1