Free Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Arizona - Arizona


File Size: 106.8 kB
Pages: 4
Date: December 31, 1969
File Format: PDF
State: Arizona
Category: District Court of Arizona
Author: unknown
Word Count: 714 Words, 4,490 Characters
Page Size: 622 x 760 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/azd/43021/185.pdf

Download Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Arizona ( 106.8 kB)


Preview Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Arizona
1
2 3

RICHARD J. MCDANIEL, P.C. ATTORNEY AT LAW 11811 N. TATUM BLVD., SUITE 1051 PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85028 Telephone (602) 953-8721 FAX (602) 953-8731 Richard J. McDaniel #013329 Attorney for Defendants Woodcock IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Case No. CIV 04-7B-FJM SHIMKO & PISCITELLI, Plaintiff, v'. MOTION TO CONTINUE DATE FOR COMPLETION OF DISCOVERY AND FILING DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS; MOTION TO CONTINUE DEPOSITIONS; AND REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION

4
5 6 7 8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21

PAUL and BOBBI WOODCOCK, et. al. Defendants.

The Woodcocks move for this Court to extend the date for completion of discovery until April 30, 2008 and for filing dispositive motions until May 30, 2008. The Woodcock also move to continue the depositions currently set for March 19, 2008. The Woodcocks ask for expedited consideration of this motion. The Woodcocks understand the Court's reluctance to extend dates in this longstanding case, but these short extensions are

22

necessary to prevent prejudice to Defendants Woodcock. Several
23

months ago, Shimko indicated to the parties and/or their counsel that he would be happy to come to "warmer" Phoenix in January or February to be deposed. For reasons that Shimko's counsel has

24
25

Case 2:04-cv-00078-FJM

Document 185

1

Filed 03/17/2008

Page 1 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

not explained to Defendant Woodcocks' counsel, Shimko did not make himself available for deposition in January or February. Because the Woodcocks were unable to depose Shimko in a timely matter, they served interrogatories and requests for production on Shimko in mid-February when it became apparent that Shimko would not make himself available for deposition. Shimko's discovery responses are due at the end of March. Shimko's counsel has apparently indicated to Defendant Ross' attorney that Shimko was also unavailable for most of March for deposition. Defendant Woodcock's counsel has learned, second hand through an e-mail forward from Defendant Ross' counsel, that Shimko's counsel has indicated that Shimko will be in the Cayman Islands and any documents for the deposition needed to be sent to him last week. It is too late for Woodcocks' counsel to do so and would have been burdensome. Despite the easy availability of phone and e-mail, Shimko's counsel has not communicated any of this information directly to Woodcock's counsel and he is learning of it second hand through e-mails from Defendant Ross' counsel. Shimko's attorney has, for reasons unknown to counsel, repeatedly left him out of emails or other communications concerning Shimko's deposition availability; decision not to come to Phoenix; and Shimko's whereabouts. Defendants should not be put at a disadvantage because Shimko has been too busy to be deposed during the last three

Case 2:04-cv-00078-FJM

Document 185

2

Filed 03/17/2008

Page 2 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

months; backed out of his agreement to appear in Arizona in person; and will now be on vacation in the Cayman Islands. Extending the deadlines for a few weeks will allow Defendants to receive and review the discovery responses; schedule Shimko's deposition while he is in the United States; deliver deposition exhibits to him in the U.S; and file dispositive motions if applicable. For these reasons, Defendants Woodcock motion to extend the date for completion of discovery until April 30, 2008 and for filing dispositive motions until May 30, 2008. Defendants also seek this Court's order compelling Shimko to make himself available for deposition during April 2008. Dated this 17th day of March 2008. RICHARD J. MCDANIEL ATTORNEY AT LAW By /s/ Rich McDaniel Richard J. McDaniel 11811 N. Tatum, #1051 Phoenix, AZ 85028 Attorney for Defendants Woodcock

Original electronically filed and copy sent electronically this 17th day of March 2008 to: David Welling Timothy Shimko & Associates 2010 Huntington Building 925 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, Ohio 44115 Roger Cohen JABURG & WILK 3200 N. Central, 20 th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85012-2440 Attorney for Ross
3

Case 2:04-cv-00078-FJM

Document 185

Filed 03/17/2008

Page 3 of 4

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Copy mailed to: David and Rhona Goldfarb 11437 N. 53 rd Place Scottsdale, AZ 85254 Pro Per /s/ Rich McDaniel

4

Case 2:04-cv-00078-FJM

Document 185

Filed 03/17/2008

Page 4 of 4