Free Motion for Leave to Exceed Page Limit - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:93-cg-00648-SGB

Document 238

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS __________________________________________ ) LAND GRANTORS IN HENDERSON, ) UNION, AND WEBSTER COUNTIES, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) No. 93-648 v. ) ) Judge Susan G. Braden UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________) PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED THE PAGE LIMIT Pursuant to RCFC 5.3(b)(1), Plaintiffs submit this Unopposed Motion for leave to exceed the page limit in its Opposition to the United States' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings or, in the Alternative, Motion for Judgment on the Record, filed on October 1, 2007, in the abovecaptioned case. Plaintiffs respectfully ask to exceed the forty (40) pages allowed under Rule 5.3(b)(1) by eighteen (18) pages, for a total of fifty-eight (58) pages. Counsel for Plaintiffs has consulted with counsel for Defendant and is authorized to state that Defendant does not oppose this motion. Plaintiffs seek these extra pages because of the number of issues presented by Defendant in its 67-page Motion. Defendant has essentially filed three motions in one: a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and a motion to dismiss based on the trial record. As a result, Plaintiffs require an additional eighteen pages to respond fully to Defendant's arguments. Additionally, Plaintiffs seek these extra pages because of the complexity of the legal and factual issues present in this case. The factual issues in this case stretch back sixty years and require consideration of

Case 1:93-cg-00648-SGB

Document 238

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 2 of 2

numerous documents. Plaintiffs need the additional pages to adequately address the disputed factual and legal issues. For the reasons stated above, Plaintiffs respectfully request leave to exceed the page limit by eighteen (18) pages in its Opposition to the United States' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings or, in the Alternative, Motion for Judgment on the Record. Respectfully submitted, _s/ Nancie G. Marzulla______ Nancie G. Marzulla Roger J. Marzulla MARZULLA LAW 1350 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 410 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 822-6760 (202) 822-6774 (facsimile) Dated: December 13, 2007 Counsel for Plaintiffs

Of counsel: M. Stephen Pitt Merrill S. Schell Jean W. Bird WYATT, TARRANT & COMBS, LLP 500 West Jefferson Street Suite 2800 Louisville, Kentucky 40202