Free Response to Motion - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:04-cv-00687-PSF-BNB

Document 57

Filed 10/07/2005

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 04-cv-00687-PSF-BNB MARY JO LAIRD, Plaintiff, v. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF GUNNISON, THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR THE GUNNISON COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY, and PEGGY MARTIN, in her official capacity and individually, Defendants. ______________________________________________________________________________ DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________________ Defendants, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF GUNNISON, THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR THE GUNNISON COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY, and PEGGY MARTIN, by their attorney, ERIC M. ZIPORIN, ESQ., hereby submit their Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion for Summary Judgment: 1. Within Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion for [sic]

Judgment (hereinafter "Plaintiff's Motion"), Plaintiff suggests that due to her motion for leave to file an amended Complaint, it would be a waste of judicial and legal resources to file a response to a summary judgment motion which may not be based on the operative complaint in this case. [See, Plaintiff's Motion at ¶ 1].

Case 1:04-cv-00687-PSF-BNB

Document 57

Filed 10/07/2005

Page 2 of 3

2.

While Defendants do not necessarily disagree with Plaintiff, since Defendants

have opposed Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend her Complaint and file a Proposed Third Amended Complaint, Defendants object to Plaintiff's request for an extension of time to respond to the pending Motion for Summary Judgment. 3. In fact, for the same reasons set forth within Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiff's

Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint and File Proposed Third Amended Complaint, Defendants object to Plaintiff's motion for extension of time, and incorporate herein those same arguments made within Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint and File Proposed Third Amended Complaint. WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request that the Court deny Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion for Summary Judgment.

Respectfully submitted,

s/ Eric M. Ziporin Eric M. Ziporin, Esq. SENTER GOLDFARB & RICE, L.L.C. 1700 Broadway, Suite 1700 Denver, Colorado 80290 Telephone: 303-320-0509 Facsimile: 303-320-0210 Attorney for Defendants

2

Case 1:04-cv-00687-PSF-BNB

Document 57

Filed 10/07/2005

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 7th day of October, 2005, I electronically filed a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following email addresses: Nathan Davidovich, Esq. [email protected] Ronald H. Nemirow, Esq. [email protected]

s/ Barbara A. Ortell Barbara A. Ortell E-mail: [email protected] Secretary for Eric M. Ziporin

3
00198931.DOC