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


File Size: 12.8 kB
Pages: 3
Date: December 31, 1969
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 410 Words, 2,598 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/19423/485.pdf

Download Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Connecticut ( 12.8 kB)


Preview Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:02-cv-01302-JCH

Document 485

Filed 09/14/2005

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT SHAWN POULIOT Plaintiff v. PAUL ARPIN VAN LINES, INC. et al. Defendants : : : : : : : : :

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:02 CV 1302 (JCH) JUDGE JANET C. HALL

September 13, 2005

DEFENDANTS PAUL ARPIN VAN LINES, INC.'S AND ARPIN LOGISTICS, INC.'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION IN LIMINE RE: PLAINTIFF'S EMPLOYMENT STATUS Defendants Paul Arpin Van Lines, Inc. and Arpin Logistics, Inc. (hereinafter collectively "Arpin") hereby submit the following Reply to Plaintiff's Memorandum in Opposition to Arpin's Motion in Limine to Preclude Evidence of, Reference to, or Suggestion that Plaintiff is an Employee of Defendants. In his Memorandum in Opposition to Motion in Limine re: Plaintiff's Employment Status ("Plaintiff's Opposition"), Plaintiff asserts that "the Code of Federal Regulations does impose safety requirements on motor carriers regardless as to whether they are dealing with a (sic) `employee' or an `independent contractor'." See Plaintiff's Opposition, at p. 1. Plaintiff fails to identify or reference the particular federal regulations to which he is referring, so Arpin is unable to set forth any position regarding whether those regulations are or are not applicable in this case. By this Reply, Arpin respectfully requests that this Court instruct Plaintiff to

Case 3:02-cv-01302-JCH

Document 485

Filed 09/14/2005

Page 2 of 3

specify which regulations he is referring to in his Opposition so that Arpin may formulate and provide a response to Plaintiff's Opposition. Dated September 13, 2005. Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Karen Frink Wolf arold J. Friedman, Esq. CT 23785 Karen Frink Wolf, Esq. CT 26494 FRIEDMAN GAYTHWAITE WOLF & LEAVITT Six City Center, P.O. Box 4726 Portland, ME 04112-4726 (207) 761-0900 (207) 761-0186 (Fax) [email protected] [email protected]

2

Case 3:02-cv-01302-JCH

Document 485

Filed 09/14/2005

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing was mailed via overnight mail this 13th day of September, 2005 to the following:

Michael A. Stratton, Esq. Stratton Faxon 59 Elm Street New Haven, CT 06510 Thomas J. Grady, Esq. Lenihan Grady & Steele 6 Canal Street PO Box 541 Westerly, RI 02891-0541 Daniel J. Krisch, Esq. Horton, Shields & Knox, P.C. 90 Gillett Street Hartford, CT 06105

Roland F. Moots, Jr., Esq. Moots, Pellegrini, Spillane & Mannion 46 Main Street, PO BOX 1319 New Milford, CT 06776-1319

/s/ Karen Frink Wolf Karen Frink Wolf, Esq. # 26494

3