Free Motion for Leave to File - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:03-cv-00193-MRK Document 90 Filed 07/14(2004 Fagéxgféli of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT s `ifi
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT ?5;;L,;x
MARIAN DEBORAH MILLER, il"-
Plaintiff,
VS- CIV NO.
3:03CV 0193 (MRK)
EDWARD D. JONES & C0., L.P.,
MICHAEL MAHONEY, MICHAEL
CUMMINS, BARBARA MOSCA, and _
STEVEN RARICK,
Defendants. E
July 13, 2004
l
UNOPPOSED MOTION OF DEFENDANTS EDWARD D. JONES & CO., L.P.,
MICHAEL CUMMINS, BARBARA MOSCA, AND STEVEN RARICK
FOR LEAVE TO FILE CONSOLIDATED REPLY BRIEF
l
COI)/IE NOW Defendants Edward D. Jones & Co., LP. ("Edward Jones"), N
Michael Cummins ("Cummins"), Barbara Mosca ("Mosca"), and Steven Rarick ("Rarick"), )
by undersigned counsel, and respectfully move for leave to file one consolidated Reply
totaling over 10 pages in length rather than four (4) separate briefs, stating:
!
1. The separate motions for summary judgment filed by Defendants Edward
Jones, Cummins, Nlosca, and Rarick, and accompanying fact statements and
memoranda in support, raised numerous and complex issues. \
2. In total, Defendants Edward Jones, Cummins, Mosca, and Rarick moved
l
for summaryjudgment on 14 separate Counts of the Complaint.
i
3. Plaintiff has responded to these motions with extensive filings, including a i
40-page opposition to Edward Jones' motion, a 21-page opposition to Cummins‘ motion,
a 20-page opposition to IVIosca's motion, and a 20-page opposition to Rarick's motion.
4. Pursuant to Local Rule 7(d), Defendants Edward Jones, Cummins,
Mosca, and Rarick would each be entitled to file a 10-page reply, submissions totaling
40 pages.
1
i
i

Case 3:03-cv-001$?;MRK Document 90 Filed 07/14/2004 Page 2 of 3
J C.;
5. There is enough overlap between the issues pertinent to each motion,
and Plaintiffs responses to each motion, that combining the four replies of these
Defendants into a single reply would allow for a clearer and more concise presentation
of the issues.
6. Defendants Edward Jones, Cummins, Mosca, and Rarick anticipate that I
such a consolidated Reply would require considerably less than the total of 40 pages I
allotted amongst them. I
7. Defendants consulted with Plaintiff's attorney, Vlad Spitzer, regarding this
matter. Plaintiff does not oppose and consents to this motion to file one consolidated
reply brief for all four Defendants.
WHEREFORE, separate Defendants Edward Jones, Cummins, Mosca and
Rarick respectfully request that the court grant them leave to file one consolidated reply
brief more than ten (10) but less than forty (40) pages in length.
Respectfully submitted,
DEFENDANTS Edward Jones & Co., L.P., I
Michael Cummins, Barbara Mosca, and
Steven Rarick
By: Wi &&
Michael N. LaVelle, Esq. 06170 I
Pullman & Comley, LLC
850 Main Street, P.O. Box 7006
Bridgeport, CT 06601-7006 I
(203) 330-2000 I
(203) 330-2288 (Facsimile) I
Fred A. Ricks, Jr., Esq. I
Harris Dowell Fisher & Harris, L.C.
15400 South Outer Forty, Suite 202
St. Louis, Missouri 63017
(636) 532-0300
(636) 532-0246 (Facsimile)
I
____________l

Case 3:03-cv-001%”5MRK Document 90 Filed 07/14/2004 Page 3 of 3
O
cERTii=icATioN
This is to certify that a copy 0f the foregoing was mailed, postage prepaid, to the g
following parties: \
Peter E. Gillespie, Esq. i
Attorney at Law '
46 Riverside Avenue \
Westport, CT 06880
(203) 227—7000 x
Vlad Spitzer, Esq. K
Spitzer & Brey, LLC ,
239 Main Street, 2nd Floor
Westport, CT 06880
(203) 226-3266 Ext. 14 i
l
l
I

l
i
l
i
i
C l
i
M 3 i