Free Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 33.0 kB
Pages: 3
Date: December 21, 2005
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 388 Words, 2,332 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/22978/126.pdf

Download Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Connecticut ( 33.0 kB)


Preview Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Connecticut
ase 3:03-cv-01048-PCD Document 126 Filed 12/21/2005 Page 1 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
CLIFTON S. FREEDMAN, )
)
Plaintiff, ) Civil Action No. 3:03CVl048 (PCD)
V- )
)
THE TOWN OF FAIRFIELD, )
DETECTIVE WILLIAM YOUNG AND )
{ DETEC'I`l\/E DAVID BENSEY )
I (Individually and in their official capacities ) DECEMBER 21, 2005
as police officers for the Town of Fairfield, )
)
Defendants. ) I
DEF ENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO PLAINTIF F ’S MEMORANDUM IN
OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR RECON SIDERATION
The Defendants in the above—captioncd matter hereby aver that the Plaintiffs
I
Memorandum in Opposition remains inaccurate as to the facts. The Plaintiff claims in
his Motion in Opposition that the Court lacks jurisdiction as the Defendants’ Motion
for Reconsideration was not filed within the parameters set out in Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure §59(e). In fact, the Def`endants’ Motion for Reconsideration was filed
t
with the Court on November 23, 2005, and was delivered in hand by counsel to the
Court. All of the proper procedures were adhered to, with a courtesy copy also
delivered in hand to the Honorable Peter C. Dorsey. Due to the Thanksgiving holiday,
the Motion for Reconsideration was not posted electronically until November 28,
I 2005. For the reasons mentioned above, as the filing ofthe Defendants’ Motion for
I
l Reconsideration was in fact within the l0—day time limit, the Court does in fact have
jurisdiction. Having jurisdiction, and for the reasons contained in the l)cfendantS’
Memorandum of Law in Support of the Motion For Reconsideration, the Defendants |

ase 3:03-cv-01048-PCD Document 126 Filed 12/21/2005 Page 2 of 3
respectfully request that the Court should grant the Dei`endants’ Motion as a matter ol`
law.
THE DEFENDANTS
‘ By: ' ‘ I
Walter A. Shalvoy, t25l32)
Maher & Murtha, LLC
528 Clinton Avenue
Bridgeport, CT 06605
(203) 367-2700
L

ase 3:03-cv-01048-PCD Document 126 Filed 12/21/2005 Page 3 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
. I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been mailed on this 21st day
of December, 2005 to the following:
Daniel J. Klau, Esq.
Pepe & Hazard LLP i
Goodwin Square I
225 Asylum Street
Hartford, CT 06103-43 02
Fax No: 860-522-2796
II Walter A. Shel Jr,
I
I
I I