Free Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:01-cv-02158-WWE

Document 69-2

Filed 11/01/2004

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
DONALD WAINRIGHT, JANET WAINRIGHT, AND DEBORAH A. RUSSO-WILLIAMS,

Doc.# 301-CV-2158 (WWE)

Plaintiffs, against-

OSM COMMUNICATIONS, INC., ISRAEL H. POLANSKY, ROBERT E. POLANSKY, AND ANNE POLANSKY,
Defendants. October 30, 2004

MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S FOURTH MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO OBJECT TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(2) and 56(e), the Plaintiffs in this matter hereby respectfully submit their fourth motion for enlargement of time with which to object to the Defendants1 Motion for Summary Judgment (received by this firm on April 2, 2004). The Plaintiffs request a Fourth Enlargement of Time to Object, not to exceed 45 days, in order to allow the Plaintiffs to take the depositions and receive documents requested at the time of the depositions of Robert Polansky and Anne Polansky, and to allow the completion of the deposition of Israel Polansky OR in the alternative, seek an order of the Court to set the depositions and location of the depositions. LEGAL STANDARD "Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 6(b)(2), once a deadline has expired the court may only grant extensions of time where the party's failure to act was due to "excusable neglect." Lujan v. Nat'1 Wildlife Fed'n, 497 U.S. 871, 896 (1990). "Excusable neglect" under Rule 6(b)(2) is equivalent to "good cause." Putnam v. Morris, 833 F.2d 903, 905 (10th Cir. 1987). Some showing of "good faith" on the party seeking the enlargement and some reasonable

5

Case 3:01-cv-02158-WWE

Document 69-2

Filed 11/01/2004

Page 2 of 3

basis for noncompliance within the time specified, is generally required to act was due to "excusable neglect." Lujan v. Nat'LWildlifeFexi'n. 497 U.S. 871. 896 (1990). "Without attempting a rigid or all-encompassing definition of 'good cause,' it would appear to require at least as much as would be required to show excusable neglect, as to which simple inadvertence or mistake of counsel or ignorance of the rules usually does not suffice, and some showing of good faith on the part of the party seeking the enlargement and some reasonable basis for noncompliance within the time specified' is normally required. 10 Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil § 1165 at 622 (emphasis added). The district court is clearly not compelled to accept a lesser 'excusable neglect' showing." Putnam v. Morris, 833 F.2d 903. 905 (10lh Cir. 1987). THE PLAINTIFFS HAVE ACTED IN GOOD FAITH In support of the instant motion, the Plaintiffs have acted in good faith in attempting to schedule the depositions needed to oppose affidavits filed by the Defendants in support of their motion for summary judgment. (See Exhibit A - "Affirmation of Attorney Robert E. Arnold III", annexed hereto) This Court should therefore "...permit affidavits to be supplemented or opposed by depositions..." as allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e) and grant the Plaintiffs' Motion for Enlargement of Time to Object. Dated: New Haven, Connecticut By:
____________________________________

October 30, 2004

Robert E. Arnold III (CT Federal Bar # CT18093) 295 Bassett Street New Britain, CT 06051 Telephone: (203) 777-3000 Fax: (860) 224-0400

6

Case 3:01-cv-02158-WWE

Document 69-2

Filed 11/01/2004

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATION This is to Certify that a copy of the foregoing was mailed, postage prepaid, of October 30, 2004, to: By hand delivery to Counsel for the defendants Israel H. Polansky and Anne Polansky J. Michael Sulzbach 385 Orange Street New Haven, CT 06511 Tel. 203-781-0880 Fax.03-781-0861 By mail Defendant Robert E. Polansky 3 East 69th Street New York, New York 10021 By mail Defendant OSM Communications, Inc. 432 Park Avenue South Suite 705 New York, New York 10016
ORIGINALTO:

United States District Court, District Of Connecticut 915 LAFAYETTE BOULEVARD BRIDGEPORT, CONNECTICUT 06604 phone: (203) 579-5861 attn: clerk's office

By:
____________________________________

Robert E. Arnold III (CT Federal Bar # CT18093) 295 Bassett Street New Britain, CT 06051 Telephone: (203) 777-3000 Fax: (860) 224-0400

7