Free Motion to Supplement - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:04-cv-01263-REB-KLM

Document 148

Filed 10/27/2006

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 04-cv-01263-PSF-MEH ROBERT M. FRIEDLAND, Plaintiff, v. TIC ­ THE INDUSTRIAL COMPANY and GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS INC., f/k/a GEOSERVICES, INC. Defendants. ROBERT M. FRIEDLAND'S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD REGARDING DEFENDANT GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff, Robert M. Friedland, by his undersigned counsel and pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(f), requests the Court exercise its discretion to allow the submission of the attached evidence to supplement Plaintiff's arguments in opposition to Defendant GeoSyntec Consultants, Inc., f/k/a Geoservices, Inc's ("GeoSyntec") pending motion for summary judgment and, in support thereof, states as follows: LOCAL RULE 7.1CERTIFICATION Pursuant to D.C. Colo. L.R. 7.1, undersigned counsel has conferred with counsel for GeoSyntec regarding this Motion to Supplement the Record Regarding Defendant GeoSyntec Consultants Inc.'s Motion for summary Judgment ("Motion to Supplement"). GeoSyntec has indicated that it takes no position on with regard to this motion, that it may oppose the motion, and/or that it may offer its own supplement of the record.

Case 1:04-cv-01263-REB-KLM

Document 148

Filed 10/27/2006

Page 2 of 4

1.

GeoSyntec filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on November 18, 2005. At

that time, no depositions had been conducted in this case, and no GeoSyntec witnesses had been deposed. 2. Since GeoSyntec filed its motion, the parties have conducted fifteen (15)

depositions and designated over 300 deposition exhibits. Much of the testimony and many of the related exhibits are relevant to the issues raised in GeoSyntec's Motion for Summary Judgment. 3. In his response in opposition GeoSyntec's motion, Plaintiff indicated that

discovery was ongoing, suggested that consideration of the motion might be continued pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 (f), and attached an affidavit in support of the same. See Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Defendant GeoSyntec's Motion for Summary Judgment at 12, fn 1, and the Affidavit of Lauren C. Buehler, Exhibit 20 thereto. 4. Much of the additional evidence anticipated by Plaintiff is now available and

should be considered in resolving GeoSyntec's motion for summary judgment. 5. It is within the Court's discretion to allow supplementation of the record of a

motion for summary judgment after the motion has been fully briefed for the purpose of issuing an order that is "just." F.R.C.P. 56(f); see also Patty Precision v. Brown & Sharpe Manuf. Co., 742 F.2d 1260, 1264-1265 (10th Cir. 1984). 6. The timing of the filing of a motion for summary judgment, particularly when it is

filed at the outset of discovery, should not preclude a full and fair adjudication of the issues raised therein in light of all relevant evidence developed by the parties. It would serve the interests of justice and fair play for the Court to consider the offered supplementation to the record in this regard.

-2-

Case 1:04-cv-01263-REB-KLM

Document 148

Filed 10/27/2006

Page 3 of 4

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Robert M. Friedland respectfully requests this Court accept for filing his Supplement to His Response in Opposition to Defendant GeoSyntec Consultants, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment, Attachment 1 hereto. DATED this 27th day of October 2006.

s/ R. Kirk Mueller John D. Fognani, Esq. R. Kirk Mueller, Esq. Perry L. Glantz, Esq. Fognani & Faught, PLLC 1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 2222 Denver, CO 80203 Attorneys for Plaintiff

-3-

Case 1:04-cv-01263-REB-KLM

Document 148

Filed 10/27/2006

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 27th day of October 2006, a true and correct copy of the foregoing ROBERT M. FRIEDLAND'S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD REGARDING DEFENDANT GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT was electronically filed via ECF with the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado and served electronically or via first-class U.S. mail on the following: Terrence M. Ridley, Esq. [email protected] [email protected] Marian Lee Carlson, Esq. [email protected] [email protected] Colin C. Deihl, Esq. [email protected] [email protected] Michael S. Freeman, Esq. [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Paul J. Sanner, Esq. [email protected] Hanson, Bridgett, Marcus, Vlahos & Rudy, LLP 333 Market Street, Suite 2100 San Francisco, CA 94105-2122

s/ C.S. Vega