Free Response to Motion - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 199

Filed 10/20/2006

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 04-cv-1067-REB-CBS WILLIAM R. CADORNA, Plaintiff, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO, a municipal corporation, Defendant.

RESPONSE OF CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED MOTION PURSUANT TO FED R. CIV. P. 15(b) AND 16(e) TO AMEND PRETRIAL ORDER

Defendant, City and County of Denver, Colorado ("Denver"), through counsel, submits the following response to Plaintiff's Amended Motion Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(b) and 16(e) to Amend Pretrial Order to Conform to the Evidence and/or Prevent Manifest Judgment (the "Amended Motion"). 1. On September 15, 2006, Plaintiff, William R. Cadorna ("Cadorna") filed

Plaintiff's Motion Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(b) and 16(e) to Amend Pretrial Order to Conform to the Evidence and/or Prevent Manifest Judgment (the "Original Motion"). 2. On October 10, 2006, Denver filed its Response to Plaintiff's Motion

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(b) and 16(e) to Amend Pretrial Order ("Original Response"). In its Original Response, Denver advanced several reasons why the

Original Motion should be denied, including that Cadorna had failed to comply with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1A.

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 199

Filed 10/20/2006

Page 2 of 3

3.

On October 12, 2006, Cadorna filed the Amended Motion "to correct his

"inadvertent omission of the required D.C.Colo.LCivR. 7.1(A) [certification]" from the Original Motion. (Amended Mot. at 1.) 4. Except for this correction, the Amended Motion is identical to the Original

Motion in every respect. 5. Therefore, rather than submit to the Court an Amended Response to

Cadorna's Amended Motion that simply repeats verbatim all of Denver's Original Response to Cadorna's Original Motion (except for the argument addressing the failure to comply with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1A), Denver instead incorporates by reference in this Amended Response all of Denver's Original Response except for Section I, which addressed Cadorna's failure to comply with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1A, and which is not applicable to this Amended Motion. Respectfully submitted this 20th day of October 2006. BROWNSTEIN HYATT & FARBER, P.C. s/ Richard P. Barkley Richard P. Barkley 410 17th Street, 22nd Floor Denver, Colorado 80202 (303) 223-1100 [email protected] Christopher M.A. Lujan Assistant City Attorney Denver City Attorney's Office Litigation Section 201 W. Colfax Ave., Dept. 1108 Denver, CO 80202 (720) 913.3100 [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT

2

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 199

Filed 10/20/2006

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that on the 20th day of October, 2006, a true and correct copy of the foregoing RESPONSE OF CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED MOTION PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 15(b) AND 16(e) TO AMEND PRETRIAL ORDER was served via the CM/ECF system to the following: Mark E. Brennan, Esq. Mark E. Brennan, P.C. P.O. Box 2556 Centennial, Colorado 80161 Email: [email protected]

____s/______________________ Melissa Brenneman

3