Free Answering Brief in Opposition - District Court of Delaware - Delaware


File Size: 46.1 kB
Pages: 2
Date: December 31, 1969
File Format: PDF
State: Delaware
Category: District Court of Delaware
Author: unknown
Word Count: 353 Words, 2,212 Characters
Page Size: 622 x 792 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ded/8673/108-1.pdf

Download Answering Brief in Opposition - District Court of Delaware ( 46.1 kB)


Preview Answering Brief in Opposition - District Court of Delaware
Case 1 :04-cv-01321-SLR Document 108 Filed O2/28/2006 Page 1 of 2
n IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
ELSMERE PARK CLUB, L.P., a )
Delaware limited partnership, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 04~l32l—SLR
)
TOWN OF ELSMERE, a Delaware )
municipal corporation, )
ELLIS BLOMQUIST, EUGENE BONEKER, )
and JOHN GILES, ) lury Trial Dernanded
)
l Defendants. )
PLAINTIFINS OPPOSITION
TO DEFENDAN'I`S’ MOTION TO STRIKE
Plaintiff Elsinere Park Club, LP. (“Plaintiff") submits this Opposition to Defendant?
Motion to Strike (DI. 106).
1. Contrary to their assertions, Defendants’ Reply (concerning their Motion to Extend
Deadlines) (DI. l0l) contained new infonnation, as set forth in Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to
File a Sur—Reply (D.l. 104).1
2. Plaintiff inadvertently tiled its Sur~Reply (D.l. 105) immediately after filing Plaintiff s
Motion for Leave. The Court’s case manager advised Plaintiff that withdrawing the Sur—Reply
was unnecessary.
3. For the reasons set forth in Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File a Snr—Repty, Plaintiff s
Motion should be granted and the Motion to Strike should be denied.
I The new information in the Reply included Det`endants’ statement in their Reply that they were then evaluating
their “need" for an expert. This was new because previously Defendants had stated that they had retained an expert
but did not yet have that expert’s report. In addition, in their Reply, the Defendants indicated for the first time that
they had previously asked for an extension of the expert report deadline; in fact, they did not ask for an extension
until one day before the deadline for submitting the report.
nam 63567-Il

Case 1:04-cv—O1321—SLR Document 108 Filed O2/28/2006 Page 2 of 2
Dated: February 28, 2006 KLEHR, HARRISON, HARVEY,
BRANZBURG & ELLERS LLP
By: {
David S. Eagle, (Bar No. 3387)
Douglas F. Schleicher, pro hczc vice
Patrick A. Costello (Bar No. 4535)
919 Market Street, Suite 1000
Wilmington, DE 198018062
(302) 426-1 I89 (Telephone)
(302) 426-9193 (Fax)
[email protected]
[email protected]
Attorneys for Pldihfmfv
2
1i:»a1.1 62567-1