Free Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
LAW OFFICES One Arizona Center, 400 E. Van Buren Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2202 (602) 382-6000

Dan W. Goldfine (#018788) Richard G. Erickson (#019066) Adam Lang (#022545) SNELL & WILMER L.L.P. One Arizona Center 400 East Van Buren Street Phoenix, AZ 85004-2202 Telephone: (602) 382-6000 Facsimile: (602) 382-6070 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Counterdefendants and Third Party Defendants Steve Hilton and John Landon IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Meritage Homes Corporation, a Maryland Corporation, formerly d/b/a Meritage Corporation, Case No. CV-04-0384-PHX-ROS Hancock-MTH Builders, Inc., an Arizona corporation, Hancock-MTH Communities, Inc., an MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE Arizona corporation, and currently d/b/a Meritage LIMITS IN THE OPPOSITION TO Homes Construction, Inc., an Arizona corporation, RICK AND BRENDA HANCOCK'S and Meritage Homes of Arizona, Inc., an Arizona MOTION TO AMEND AND FILE corporation, COUNTERCLAIM, ADD CLAIMS AGAINST EXISTING THIRD Plaintiffs, PARTY DEFENDANTS AND ADD THIRD PARTIES v. Ricky Lee Hancock and Brenda Hancock, husband and wife; Gregory S. Hancock and Linda Hancock, husband and wife, Rick Hancock Homes L.L.C., an Arizona limited liability company; RLH Development, L.L.C., an Arizona limited liability company; and J2H2, L.L.C., an Arizona limited liability company, Defendants. Greg Hancock, an individual, Defendant, Counter-Claimant, and Third Party Plaintiff, v. Steven J. Hilton, an individual; John R. Landon, an individual; Larry W. Seay, an individual; and Snell & Wilmer, L.L.P., an Arizona professional corporation, Third Party Defendants. (Assigned to the Honorable Roslyn O. Silver)

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Snell & Wilmer L.L.P.

Case 2:04-cv-00384-ROS

Document 289

Filed 03/20/2006

Page 1 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
LAW OFFICES One Arizona Center, 400 E. Van Buren Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2202 (602) 382-6000

Purported counterdefendants Meritage Corporation, Hancock-MTH Builders, Inc., Hancock-MTH Communities, Inc., and Meritage Homes of Arizona, Inc., and purported third-party defendants Steve and Suzanne Hilton and John and Debi Landon (collectively, "Opposing Parties"), move this Court for permission to file their opposition to Rick and Brenda Hancock's ("the Hancocks") Motion to Amend and File Counterclaim, Add Claims Against Existing Third Party Defendants and Add Third Parties (the "Motion"), in a number of pages exceeding the presumptive limit of seventeen (17) pages pursuant to LRCiv. 7.2(e). Under Rule 7.2(e), "[u]nless otherwise permitted by the Court, . . . the response [to a motion] including its supporting memorandum . . . shall not exceed seventeen (17) pages, exclusive of attachments and any required statement of facts." Opposing Parties respectfully request leave to file an opposition to the Motion not exceeding 27 pages despite the rule's presumptive 17-page limit. This lawsuit has been ongoing for more than two years. Now suddenly, after substantial written discovery has been conducted and a multitude of witnesses been deposed, the Hancocks attempt to file a prolix 16-page counterclaim and third-party complaint (for the first time), containing 142 paragraphs of allegations, 9 separate causes of action, against 4 separate entities and 10 separate individuals (six of which are being added to the lawsuit for the first time). Over the past two years, thousands of pages of disclosure have been exchanged and at least 19 witnesses have been deposed. As a result, the opposition to the Motion will need to reflect the full record in order to demonstrate the Motion's futility. Additionally, the cost and burden on both the parties and the Court would be greatly reduced by granting Meritage's request to exceed the page limit. Allowing Opposing Parties to fully brief their position here could very well minimize the extensive motion practice that would likely follow if the Motion is granted. Opposing Parties would anticipate filing both motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment, receiving responses to them from the Hancocks, and then replying to them. The number of pages with which the
Case 2:04-cv-00384-ROS Document 289- 2 - Filed 03/20/2006 Page 2 of 4

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Snell & Wilmer L.L.P.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
LAW OFFICES One Arizona Center, 400 E. Van Buren Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2202 (602) 382-6000

Court and the parties would likely have to deal would greatly exceed the 27 pages, and likely subsequent reply by the Hancocks, that Opposing Parties now request. (This does not even take into account the 6 new parties that the Hancocks attempt to add. Not only would they have to file answers or motions to the new complaint, but they would likely need, and have the right, to conduct extensive discovery.) To be fully and fairly explained, and in order to potentially minimize the future burden on the parties and the Court, Opposing Parties' opposition to the Motion requires more than the presumptive 17 pages prescribed by Rule 7.2(e). Opposing Parties have done everything they can to present a succinct and clear picture of the factual record to the Court. Accordingly, Opposing Parties respectfully request that the Court allow them to file their opposition to the Motion in a number of pages not to exceed 27 in length. DATED this 20th day of March, 2006. SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Snell & Wilmer L.L.P.

By s/ Adam E. Lang Dan W. Goldfine Richard G. Erickson Adam Lang One Arizona Center Phoenix, AZ 85004-2202 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Counterdefendants and Third Party Defendants Steve Hilton and John Landon CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on March 20, 2006, I electronically transmitted the foregoing document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: Ivan K. Mathew Mathew & Mathew, P.C. 1850 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1910 Phoenix, Arizona 85004 Attorneys for Defendant Rick Hancock

Case 2:04-cv-00384-ROS

Document 289- 3 - Filed 03/20/2006

Page 3 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
LAW OFFICES One Arizona Center, 400 E. Van Buren Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2202 (602) 382-6000

Robert M. Frisbee Frisbee & Bostock, PLC 1747 East Morton Avenue Suite 108 Phoenix AZ 85020 Attorneys for Defendant Greg Hancock Mark I. Harrison Sarah Porter Osborn Maledon, P.A. 2929 North Central Avenue Suite 2100 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2794 Attorneys for Defendant Greg and Linda Hancock and Counsel of Record Robert Frisbee Kenneth J. Sherk Timothy J. Burke Fennemore Craig, P.C. 3003 N. Central Ave. Suite 2600 Phoenix, AZ 85012-2913 Attorneys for Defendant Snell & Wilmer, L.L.P. in State Court Action s/ Adam E. Lang
1807044

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Snell & Wilmer L.L.P.

Case 2:04-cv-00384-ROS

Document 289- 4 - Filed 03/20/2006

Page 4 of 4