Free Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:07-cv-00273-MCW

Document 61

Filed 07/30/2008

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS STEPHEN J. ROGERS, et al., ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Hon. Mary Ellen Coster Williams No. 07-273 L

Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. BIRD BAY EXECUTIVE GOLF COURSE, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.

Hon. Mary Ellen Coster Williams No. 07-426 L

PLAINTIFFS' THIRD UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME IN WHICH TO FILE THEIR RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT COME NOW Plaintiffs in the above-captioned cases, consolidated for purposes of summary judgment, and, pursuant to RCFC 6.1, request that this Court enlarge the time until August 6, 2008, in which Plaintiffs may file their Response to Defendant's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. In support of this Motion, Plaintiffs state as follows: 1. Under RCFC 6.1 and per two extensions previously granted by this Court,

Plaintiffs'Response to Defendant' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is due on s

STLDOCS 220145v1

Case 1:07-cv-00273-MCW

Document 61

Filed 07/30/2008

Page 2 of 3

August 1, 2008. (The total enlargement of time requested by the Plaintiffs has only been 25 days) 2. 3. Defendant' counsel consented to such enlargement of time. s The Defendant, in their Cross-Motion, raised several issues concerning the

land title records for one of the named Plaintiffs, Bird Bay. The Plaintiffs' counsel has requested the Plaintiffs'title examiner review these land records, however, the title examiner is still in the process of locating some of these land records from the Sarasota County and Manatee County archives and this process has taken the title examiner longer than they initially anticipated. 4. The Plaintiffs' counsel has been unable to review the complete title work

because of the title examiner' difficulty in locating these records. s 5. The Plaintiffs will not have adequate time to review the complete title

work prior to filing their Response currently due on August 1, 2008. 6. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' counsel seeks this enlargement of time of five (5)

days noting that this enlargement of time will not significantly delay resolution of this case and is necessary in order to allow Plaintiffs'counsel opportunity to provide this Court with a full and complete response to the government' Cross-Motion. s 7. The government' counsel has consented to this third enlargement of time s

in which Plaintiffs may file their Response to the government' Cross-Motion. s WHEREFORE, Defendant's counsel having consented, Plaintiffs ask this Court to grant them until Wednesday, August 6, 2008, to file their Response to Defendant's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment and for any other relief this Court deems just and proper.

STLDOCS 220145v1

2

Case 1:07-cv-00273-MCW

Document 61

Filed 07/30/2008

Page 3 of 3

LATHROP & GAGE L.C. Date: July 30, 2008 By /s/ Mark F. (Thor) Hearne, II MARK F. (THOR) HEARNE, II LINDSAY S.C. BRINTON MEGHAN S. LARGENT 10 South Broadway, Suite 1300 St. Louis, MO 63102-1708 (314) 613-2500 (314) 613-2550 (fax) [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS

STLDOCS 220145v1

3