Case 3:02-cv-02272-AVC
Document 142
Filed 05/05/2004
Page 1 of 6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT CROWN THEATRES, LP, Plaintiff, VS. MILTON L. DALY, ET AL., Defendants. : : : : : : : : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:02-CV-2272 (AVC)
MAY 4, 2004
LOCAL RULE 56(a)2 STATEMENT In opposing the plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (dated April 21, 2004) Against Defendant Anne Daly as to Counts XIV and XVI of the Second Amended Complaint, defendant Anne Daly relies on the documentation attached to her Motion for Summary Judgment (dated February 24, 2004) as to Counts XIV, XVI, XVII, XIX and XX of the Second Amended Complaint and her accompanying Local Rule 56(a)1 Statement. Pursuant to Local Rule 56(a)2, defendant Anne Daly responds as follows to the Local Rule 56(a)1 Statement (dated April 21, 2004) that has been filed by the plaintiff: 1. Denied, in that the finances of the Dalys were not intertwined regarding
the allegations of wrongdoing against Milton Daly. Anne Daly had no knowledge of the same prior to the instant lawsuit. (Affidavit of Milton Daly, ¶ 4-7; Affidavit of Anne Daly, ¶ 4-7,9.)
Case 3:02-cv-02272-AVC
Document 142
Filed 05/05/2004
Page 2 of 6
2.
Denied, in that Anne Daly had no knowledge of this activity prior to the
instant lawsuit. (Affidavit of Anne Daly, ¶ 9.) 3. Denied, in that Anne Daly had no knowledge of this activity prior to the
instant lawsuit. (Affidavit of Anne Daly, ¶ 9.) 4. Denied, in that Anne Daly is not a director of Taylor-Leigh, Inc. (Affidavit
of Milton Daly, ¶ 4; Affidavit of Anne Daly, ¶ 4.) 5. Denied, in that Anne Daly never exercised any control over Taylor-Leigh,
Inc., or over any of its corporate, business or financial affairs. (Affidavit of Milton Daly, ¶ 4; Affidavit of Anne Daly, ¶ 4.) 6. Denied, in that Anne Daly never exercised any control over Taylor-Leigh,
Inc., or over any of its corporate, business or financial affairs. (Affidavit of Milton Daly, ¶ 4; Affidavit of Anne Daly, ¶ 4, 9.) 7. Denied, in that Anne Daly never exercised any control over Taylor-Leigh,
Inc., or over any of its corporate, business or financial affairs. (Affidavit of Milton Daly, ¶ 4; Affidavit of Anne Daly, ¶ 4, 9.) 8. 9. Admitted. Anne Daly will neither admit or deny this allegation as the same was only
just alleged by the plaintiff in violation of the Court's scheduling order and is presently the subject of a Motion to Strike that is being filed by defendant Anne Daly simultaneously herewith.
2
Case 3:02-cv-02272-AVC
Document 142
Filed 05/05/2004
Page 3 of 6
10.
Anne Daly will neither admit or deny this allegation as the same was only
just alleged by the plaintiff in violation of the Court's scheduling order and is presently the subject of a Motion to Strike that is being filed by defendant Anne Daly simultaneously herewith. 11. 12. 13. Admitted. Admitted. Anne Daly will neither admit or deny this allegation as the same was only
just alleged by the plaintiff in violation of the Court's scheduling order and is presently the subject of a Motion to Strike that is being filed by defendant Anne Daly simultaneously herewith. 14. Anne Daly will neither admit or deny this allegation as the same was only
just alleged by the plaintiff in violation of the Court's scheduling order and is presently the subject of a Motion to Strike that is being filed by defendant Anne Daly simultaneously herewith. 15. 16. Admitted. Anne Daly will neither admit or deny this allegation as the same was only
just alleged by the plaintiff in violation of the Court's scheduling order and is presently the subject of a Motion to Strike that is being filed by defendant Anne Daly simultaneously herewith.
3
Case 3:02-cv-02272-AVC
Document 142
Filed 05/05/2004
Page 4 of 6
17. 7.) 18.
Admitted. (But see Affidavit of Milton Daly, ¶ 7; Affidavit of Anne Daly, ¶
Anne Daly will neither admit or deny this allegation as the same was only
just alleged by the plaintiff in violation of the Court's scheduling order and is presently the subject of a Motion to Strike that is being filed by defendant Anne Daly simultaneously herewith. 19. Denied. Anne Daly had no knowledge or involvement in this activity.
(Affidavit of Milton Daly, ¶ 6; Affidavit of Anne Daly, ¶ 6; see also Deposition of Anne Daly, p. 68 (attached to plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment).) 20. 21. Admitted. Admitted.
Disputed Issues of Material Fact Defendant Anne Daly believes that the facts relied on by the plaintiff, whether disputed or not, simply do not have the legal significance that the plaintiff seeks to attach to them in terms of creating liability on the part of Anne Daly. In particular, this applies to the plaintiff's assertion that Anne Daly "benefited" from her husband's alleged conduct and whether she participated in that alleged conduct. The defendant's position is more fully set forth in her memorandum of law (dated February 24, 2004) and in her
4
Case 3:02-cv-02272-AVC
Document 142
Filed 05/05/2004
Page 5 of 6
reply brief (dated May 4, 2004) that have been filed in regard to the pending motion for summary judgment and cross-motion for summary judgment.
DEFENDANT, ANNE DALY
By_______________________ Kerry M. Wisser of WEINSTEIN & WISSER, P.C. 29 South Main Street, Suite 207 West Hartford, CT 06107 Telephone No. (860) 561-2628 Facsimile No. (860) 521-6150 Federal Bar No. ct01205
5
Case 3:02-cv-02272-AVC
Document 142
Filed 05/05/2004
Page 6 of 6
CERTIFICATION This is to certify that on the 4th day of May, 2004, a copy of the foregoing was served upon the following counsel of record by way of First Class Mail, postage prepaid: Harold James Pickerstein, Esquire Jodi Zils Gagne, Attorney Pepe & Hazard 30 Jelliff Lane Southport, CT 06890-4000 Craig C. Martin, Esquire Lawrence S. Schaner, Esquire Jenner & Block One IBM Plaza Chicago, IL 60611-7603 Mark Seiden, Esquire Marisa Lanza, Attorney Milber Makris Polusadis & Seiden, LLP 108 Corporate Park Drive, Suite 200 White Plains, NY 10604 Robert M. Frost, Jr., Esquire Zeldes, Needle & Cooper 1000 Lafayette Boulevard Bridgeport, CT 06601
___________________________ Kerry M. Wisser
6