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

Case 1:04-cv-00865-REB-CBS

Document 115

Filed 09/01/2005

Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 04-cv-0865-REB-CBS ESTATE OF APRIL HILL, SCOTT HILL, personal representative; SCOTT HILL, as Conservator of the Estate of Katelyn Hill; and SCOTT HILL, individually, Plaintiff, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY; MERASTAR INSURANCE COMPANY; and PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Defendant.

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO CONDUCT SPECIFIC LAY WITNESS DEPOSITIONS

Plaintiff Scott Hill, by and through his attorneys, moves this Honorable Court for an extension of time within which to complete lay witness depositions, pursuant to D.C.Colo.LCivR 6.1, as follows: D.C.COLO.LCivR. 7.1(A) Certification: Plaintiff's counsel has conferred with Defendants' counsel regarding this motion. Counsel for Allstate and Prudential have indicated this motion is not opposed by them. Counsel for Merastar is awaiting instruction from Merastar, and will file a response indicating opposition or lack of it, upon receipt of instructions from Merastar.

1

Case 1:04-cv-00865-REB-CBS

Document 115

Filed 09/01/2005

Page 2 of 5

1. The deadline for discovery cut off is currently set for September 5, 2005, per the Amended Scheduling Order filed March 17, 2005. 2. The deadline for Plaintiff's lay witness depositions is currently set for September 5, 2005, per this Court's Order of July 29, 2005. 3. It will not be possible for Plaintiff to conduct the depositions within the time allowed, even if Plaintiff exercises due diligence and gives priority to the preparation for the depositions. 4. In Plaintiff's July 26, 2005 Motion for Extension of Time, paragraph 7, Plaintiff indicated that, because of the lay witnesses' schedules, depositions of lay witnesses were tentatively scheduled for the week of September 5, 2005. 5. In Plaintiff's July 26, 2005 Motion for Extension of Time, paragraph 8, Plaintiff accordingly requested an extension of time "to the week of September 5th" ­ but the request should have been worded "to include the week of September 5th," that is, to run until Friday, September 9th. 6. In this Court's Order of July 29, 2005, the deadline for lay witness depositions was scheduled for Monday, September 5, 2005, rather than the anticipated Friday, September 9, 2005. 7. Plaintiff and Defendants have continued in good faith to conclude preparations for the depositions scheduled for the week of September 5th, including providing waivers of service where necessary. 8. Since the time of the July 26, 2005 Motion for Extension of Time, one Defendant has confirmed a 30(b)(6) deposition on September 9th, which was believed to have been within the allowable period.

2

Case 1:04-cv-00865-REB-CBS

Document 115

Filed 09/01/2005

Page 3 of 5

9. Since the time of the July 26, 2005 Motion for Extension of Time, one Defendant has informed Plaintiff's counsel that the only available date for a 30(b)(6) deposition is September 16, 2005. 10. Since the time of the July 26, 2005 Motion for Extension of Time, one Defendant has not informed Plaintiff's counsel of an available date for a 30(b)(6) deposition, but has informed Plaintiff's counsel that Defendant's counsel reasonably expects to be able to select a date on or prior to September 30, 2005. 11. After conferring with defense counsel, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the due date for lay witness depositions for Plaintiff be extended to September 30, 2005, for the purpose of covering the currently-scheduled depositions, and the one as-yet-unscheduled 30(b)(6) deposition. No additional lay witness depositions will be noticed. 12. The parties previously filed, on March 1, 2005, a Joint Motion for Extension of Pretrial Deadlines. This motion was granted on March 4, 2005, and established the current deadlines as set in the Amended Schedule Order filed March 17, 2005. 13. Plaintiff filed, on July 26, 2005, a Motion for Extension of Time To Serve Insurance Expert Witness Disclosures And To Conduct Lay Witness Depositions. This motion was granted on July 29, 2005, and established the current lay witness deposition deadline of September 5, 2005. 14. No prejudice will result from the granting of this extension. All other deadlines will remain as currently set in the Amended Scheduling Order filed March 17, 2005, and this Court's Order of July 29, 2005.

3

Case 1:04-cv-00865-REB-CBS

Document 115

Filed 09/01/2005

Page 4 of 5

WHEREFORE, good cause appearing, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the aforementioned extension be granted. Respectfully submitted this 1st day of September, 2005.

By: _s/Co Horgan________ Robert B. Carey Co Horgan Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, LLP 2425 East Camelback Road Suite 650 Phoenix, AZ 85016 (602) 840-5900 FAX: (602) 840-3012 Cindy R. Ten Pas The Carey Law Firm 2301 East Pikes Peak Avenue Colorado Springs, CO 80909 (719) 635-0377 Kenneth A. Senn Law Offices of Kenneth A. Senn 3620 Oakhill Drive Titusville, FL 32780 Attorneys for Plaintiff

4

Case 1:04-cv-00865-REB-CBS

Document 115

Filed 09/01/2005

Page 5 of 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (CM/ECF) I hereby certify that on September 1, 2005, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to the following e-mail addresses: Alma M. Lugto ([email protected]) John Mark Vaught ([email protected]) Michael D. Alper ([email protected]) Meghan Frei Berglind ([email protected]) Terence M. Ridley ([email protected]) Attorneys for Defendant Allstate Insurance Company Alan E. Popkin ([email protected]) David W. Sobelman ([email protected]) Elizabeth L. Morton ([email protected]) Gregory Scot Tamkin ([email protected]) Michael K. Alston ([email protected]) Attorneys for Defendant Merastar Insurance Company Clifton J. Latiolais, Jr. ([email protected]) Casey A. Quillen ([email protected]) Attorney for Defendant Prudential Insurance Company of America Cindy Rae Ten Pas ([email protected]) Kenneth Alan Senn ([email protected]) Robert Bruce Carey ([email protected]) Attorneys for Plaintiffs and I hereby certify that I have emailed the document to the following non email CM/ECF participants in the matter: Marian Elizabeth Lokey ([email protected]) Attorney for Defendant Merastar Insurance Company Scott Hill Conservator of the Estate of Katelyn Hill s/Co Horgan Co Horgan Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP 2425 E. Camelback Rd. Suite 650 Phoenix, AZ 85016 Telephone: (602) 840-5900

5