Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :04-cv-01394-GIVIS Document 160 Filed 02/21 /2006 Page 1 of 2
NE **4-, STATE OF DELAWARE ,:1*-* Ge,
é _ , q` [QD
" i a DEPARTIVIENT OF JUSTICE Q %
{ > 1 * ;
1;, L; W
‘** "" " _»g CARL C. DANBERG 3% 457
°°•· •m·*‘°1 Attorney General OF DF-**5
NEW CASTLE COUNTY KENT COUNTY SUSSEX COUNTY
Carvel State Building 102 West Water Street 114 E. Market Street
820 N. French Street Dover, DE 19904 Georgetown, DE 19947
Wilmington, DE 19801 Criminal Division (302) 739-4211 (302) 856-5352
Criminal Division (302) 577-8500 Fax: (302) 739-6727 Fax: (302) 856-5369
Fax: (302) 577-2496 Civil Division (302) 739-7641 TTY: (302) 856-2500
Civil Division (302) 577-8400 Fax: (302) 739-7652
Fax: (302) 577-6630 TTY: (302) 739-1545
TTY: (302) 577-5783
PLEASE REPLY TO:
New Castle County Writer's Direct Dial: (302) 577-8510
FAX: (302) 577-5866
February 21, 2006
Hon. Gregory M. Sleet
United States District Court
Lock Box 19
844 North King Street
Wilmington, DE 19801
Re: Conley v. Delaware State Police, et al.
Civ. A. No. 04-1394-GMS
Dear ]udge Sleet:
On behalf of the defendants Secretary Mitchell, Colonel MacLeish, and the Delaware State
Police, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1.4, I request oral argument on the defendants Motion for
Partial Summary ]udgment as to Counts Hand III ofthe First Amended Complaint [Docket
#146]. Briefing has been completed on this Motion and related matters, and it is pending
decision.
There are a number of other matters before the Court. The plaintiff filed a motion to
bifurcate/ sever Counts ll and HI for purposes of trial [Docket #74], a motion to disqualify
Mr. Ligouri as counsel for Colonel Chaffinch [Docket #120], a summary judgment motion

Case 1 :04-cv—01394-GIVIS Document 160 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 2 of 2
[Docket #138], a discovery motion seeking sanctions [Docket #141], and a motion to strike
portions of the defendants’ summary judgment brief [Docket #158]. The defendants
moved to strike plaintiff's brief and appendix in support of her summary judgment motion
[Docket #151].
Respectfully, I would ask that the status of Mr. Ligouri as counsel for Colonel Chaffinch be
determined first, at the Court’s earliest convenience, in order that we might ascertain
whether Mr. Ligouri will be able to participate in oral argument (if the Court sees fit to
request oral argument, of course), or whether consideration of the remaining motions must
be suspended pending the entry of successor counsel.
I would further respectfully suggest that the competing motions to strike need to be
resolved, as a threshold matter, in order to confirm the record before the Court on the
summary judgment motions.
The defendants would object to any consideration of the plaintiff's ”Motion for Sanctions
and Other Relief Due to Defendants’ Intentional Destruction of Relevant Evidence” [Docket
#141], as it is not a case-dispositive motion, and, as set forth in the defendants' response to
it [Docket #152], the plaintiff failed to follow the Court’s protocol for discovery disputes.
I am at the Court’s disposal with regard to scheduling.
Respectfully submitted,
/Ja.?/.L
Ralp K. Durstein III
Deputy Attorney General
xc: Thomas S. Neuberger, Esq.
]ames E. Ligouri, Esq.