From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stoney v. Cingular Wireless L.L.C

United States District Court, D. Colorado
Apr 18, 2008
Civil Action No. 06-cv-02003-WYD-KLM (D. Colo. Apr. 18, 2008)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 06-cv-02003-WYD-KLM.

April 18, 2008


ORDER


THIS MATTER is before the Court on several motions. For the reasons stated below, Defendant's Motion to Strike (filed March 25, 2008) is denied in part and deferred in part. Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Defendant's Motion to Strike (filed April 14, 2008) is denied. Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Portions of Defendant's Reply Brief in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the Alternative, Motion for Leave to File Surreply Brief (filed April 14, 2008) is denied as moot.

I first address Defendant's Motion to Strike. This motion is denied as to the request to strike the Statement of Additional Disputed and Undisputed Facts in Plaintiff's Amended Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. While that portion of the brief did not technically comply with Section III.B.4 of my Practice Standards, Plaintiff has corrected this through her Notice of Errata and Corrections filed April 14, 2008.

As to the portion of Defendant's motion which seeks to strike other parts of Plaintiff's brief because statements conflict with her deposition testimony or are nonresponsive, this portion of the motion is also denied. Defendant can and should make these arguments in its reply brief, to be refiled as set forth below. The portion of the motion to strike portions of the supplemental brief because they are based on inadmissible hearsay or other arguments is denied for the same reasons. Finally, the portion of the motion to strike the affidavit submitted in support of Plaintiff's brief is deferred and will be considered in connection with the merits of the summary judgment motion.

Also, Defendant's Reply Brief in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment (filed March 25, 2008) is stricken with leave to refile within ten (10) days. The text of the Reply Brief (not including the reply concerning disputed facts) exceeds the ten (10) page limitation for reply briefs set out in Section II.C.1 of my Practice Standards. Further, since I have denied Defendant's Motion to Strike, Defendant is ordered in its reply brief to respond to Plaintiff's Statement of Additional Disputed Facts per Section III.B.6 of my Practice Standards.

Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Defendant's Motion to Strike (filed April 14, 2008) is denied. While I believe Defendant should have met and conferred with Plaintiff on the motion to the extent it made challenges based on my Practice Standards, I find no prejudice to Plaintiff as I denied Defendant's motion to strike on that basis. I also find no other basis that requires me to strike Defendant's Motion to Strike.

Finally, Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Portions of Defendant's Reply Brief in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the Alternative, Motion for Leave to File Surreply Brief (filed April 14, 2008) is denied as moot since Defendant's Reply Brief was stricken. Further, Plaintiff's Surreply (docket # 101) is stricken since it addresses the Reply Brief which was stricken. However, Plaintiff is hereby granted leave to refile a surreply without seeking leave of court within seven (7) days of the refiling of the Reply Brief.

In conclusion, it is

ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Strike (filed March 25, 2008) is DENIED IN PART AND DEFERRED IN PART as set forth above. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Reply Brief in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 96 filed March 25, 2008) is STRICKEN with leave to refile within ten (10) days. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Defendant's Motion to Strike (filed April 14, 2008) is DENIED. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Portions of Defendant's Reply Brief in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the Alternative, Motion for Leave to File Surreply Brief (filed April 14, 2008) is DENIED AS MOOT. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Surreply Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 101 filed April 14, 2008) is STRICKEN since it addresses the Reply Brief which was stricken. Finally, it is

ORDERED that Plaintiff is granted leave to refile a surreply without seeking leave of court within seven (7) days of the filing of Defendant's Reply Brief.


Summaries of

Stoney v. Cingular Wireless L.L.C

United States District Court, D. Colorado
Apr 18, 2008
Civil Action No. 06-cv-02003-WYD-KLM (D. Colo. Apr. 18, 2008)
Case details for

Stoney v. Cingular Wireless L.L.C

Case Details

Full title:PAMELA J. STONEY, Plaintiff, v. CINGULAR WIRELESS L.L.C., a Delaware…

Court:United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: Apr 18, 2008

Citations

Civil Action No. 06-cv-02003-WYD-KLM (D. Colo. Apr. 18, 2008)