Free Stipulation - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 Robert Grasso, Jr. K Bar No. 015087 i
GRASSO LAW FIRM, P.C.
2 Jackson Plaza
4600 South Mill Avenue, Suite 125
3 I Tempe, Arizona 85282
' Telephone (480) 730-5553
4 Facsimile (480) 730-2810
5 Attorneys for Defendants
6
7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8 IN AND FoR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
9 MARIA CAUSTON, individually and on behalf )
10 of GIANA CAUSTON and MARINA SHEPPARD, ) Case No. CV-04-0500-PHX-ROS
Q )
§ 11 Plaintiffs, )
5 ) DEFENDANTS° STIPULATED MOTION
O 3 5 12 vs. ) To EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION FoR E
nj g S ij ) PURPOSES OF THEIR REPLY IN
g jg g g 13 CITY OF CHANDLER, a municipal corporation; ) SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FoR
LC g 2 E JOHN M. CARBOUN and JANE DoE CARBOUN, ) SUMMARY JUDGMENT
g gg 14 his wife; RANDLE L. MEEKER and JANE DoE )
6* § MEEKER, his wife; and JOHN DOES I-V, ) (Expedited Considerution Requested)
2 S ts 1 J
g E *‘ 5 Defendants. )
=’# Tg 16 )
§ 17 Defendants City of Chandler, John M. Carboun, and Randle L. Meeker (Defendants),
Ig by and through undersigned counsel, respectfully request that the Court allow them to exceed
19 the page limitation set by Local Rule 7.2(e).
20 Plaintiffs’ Complaint asserts both federal and state law claims against Defendants and
21 because there is some overlap in the legal analysis that applies to each of Plaintiffs’ claims
22 against Defendants, Defendants filed a single Motion for Summary Judgment that addresses
23 all of the claims asserted by Plaintiffs’ Complaint. Plaintiffs have now filed their Response
24 to Defendants’ Motion — and because of the number of issues/claims that need to be
25 addressed in the Reply, Defendants believe they will need to exceed the page limit for replies
26 by approximately five (5) pages. Defendants will make every effort to keep their Reply no 7
27 more than sixteen (16) pages. Defendants have contacted Plaintiffs’ counsel — who have
28 stated that they do not have any objection to this request.
II Case 2:04—cv—00500—FIOS Document 56 Filed O9/19/2005 Page 1 of 2 i

NN N
1 . For the Court’s convenience, a proposed fon:1 of Order is adached. N
2 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 19th day of September, 2005. N
3 H Gmsso LAW Frmvr, P.C. l
4 f’"";)
5 By n M;
RobertGrasso, Jr.
6 Jackson P1az?""—~\
4600 South Mill Avenue, Suite 125
7 Tempe, Arizona 85282
Attorneys for Defendants
8 COPY mailed this 19th day of
,9 September, 2005:
10 J. Robert Tolman, Esq. N
O ToLMAN, BRADSHAW & J oHNsoN, L.L.C.
Q 11 1019 South Stapley Drive
5 Mesa, Arizona 85204
Q 3 12 Attorneys for Plaintiffs A
CL E cu
- 5 S = {
EJ § Q f 13 B /
3 > _@
LS g 14
0 .¤ Sw
3 E EE 15
E 2 1- ,
O $ Tg 16
§ 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26 A '
27
28 2
NN Case 2:04—cv—00500—ROS Document 56 Filed O9/19/2005 Page 2 of 2 N

Case 2:04-cv-00500-ROS

Document 56

Filed 09/19/2005

Page 1 of 2

Case 2:04-cv-00500-ROS

Document 56

Filed 09/19/2005

Page 2 of 2