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

` J Case 3:03-cv-0096% IG Document 1 18 Filed 10/@004 Page 1 of 3
ZUUH lltl 2i; at ii; 55 g
"l,_FZ_ ’Tl.iili}€liT“l” FTl"i’lilIi'
Umrso smrss nisnucr couar . l e 1 . .» r. le., m
msriucr or conusscrrcur
THOMAS MATYASOVZSKY, et al. on behalf of :
themselves and all others similarly situated, :
Piaiatirrs, ;c1v1r Action No. Q
y ; 3:03 cv 968 (wie)
V. : l l
nousino Aurnoiurv or ms env os 2 l
Bmoospoar et ai. ; ocrossa 25, 2.004 l
Defendants. : l
PLAINTIFFS’ Morton TO Mom Y scusnuunc oiumn
Plaintiffs respectfully move this Court, Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.Rule 26 and
Local R.Civ.P. Rule 7, for an modifying the Scheduling Order by extending the time for i
the filing of motions to join a party defendant and to amend the complaint accordingly,
until October 26, 2004 No other deadlines are affected by this proposed modification.
Good cause exists to modify the Scheduling Order, in light of the Housing
Authority ofthe City of Bridgeport’s change in leadership ofthe BHA, the third such
change in the past ten months, based on the following facts:
u
1. Prior to the commencement of this action, the defendant BHA, through its l
officers and employees, openly acknowledged that they operated the Fireside apartments
1
E
· l
I




1 1 Case 3:03-cv-OO96&&\§l|G Document 118 Filed 10/%65004 Page 2 of 3 _~__L1
1
1
as an elderly only complex even though it is funded to provide a housing preference to
both disabled and elderly tenants. A recitation ofthe many public statements made by
BHA officials acknowledging the de facto elderly only status of Fireside and the efforts
of advocates to have the BHA comply with federal housing law by making Fireside 1
available to disabled tenants on an equal basis is set forth in the memorandum submitted
in support of plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, dated September 24, 2004.
2. In or about August, 2004, proposed defendant Patsy Michelle became the third
person to serve as executive director of the BHA,, replacing defendant Judith Grof-Tisza. 1
A motion to have Ms. Michelle joined as a third party defendants is pending before this
Court. 1
3. Ms. Michelle has now herself been replaced by a hired consultant, Robert
Graham, who now must be joined as a party defendant as the person who directs and
enforces implementation of the policies, practices and procedures of the BHA. He
therefore must be joined so that he may be held accountable for any damages and
injunctive relief that may be granted plaintiffs. Like his predecessors, Mr. Graham has
thus far failed to rescind longstanding discriminatory policies and practices challenged in
this case.
2

1


" ` J Case 3:03-cv-OO96@I IG Document 1 18 Filed 10/2{§_/2004 Page 3 of 3
0
4
4. The plaintiffs have moved to modify the Scheduling Order on tive prior
occasions. Counsel for defendants have been informed of plaintiffs’ intent to make this i
motion but do not consent to the relief requested.
E
THE PLAINTIFFS,
BY 5 E
Alan Rosner, Esq. (ct 10414)
1115 Main Street, Suite 415 ‘
Bridgeport, CT 06604 I
(203*) 384-1245 I
Fax (203) 384-1246 i
Ala_nr_osner(@,aol.com
J
CERTIFICA ION
This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing motion has been served by regular l
first class mail postage prepaid on this 24“‘ day of September, 2004 to Michael ’
Ryan, Esq., Ryan Ryan Johnson & Deluca, P.O. Box 3057, Stamford, CT 06905.
Alan Rosner
I
3 i