McCarthy v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company et al

Filing 142

ORDER signed by Judge William B. Shubb on 8/18/2011 DENYING 140 Ex Parte Application to Continue. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

----oo0oo----

11
12

NO. CIV. 2:09-2495 WBS DAD

VICTORIA McCARTHY, KATHERINE
SCHMITT,

13
ORDER RE: EX PARTE APPLICATION
TO CONTINUE MOTION

Plaintiffs,
14
v.
15
16

R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO CO., and
DOES 1-10,

17

Defendants.
/

18
19
20

----oo0oo---On July 11, 2011, defendant filed a post-trial motion,

21

(Docket No. 117), that included citations to two LexisNexis

22

cases, Estate of Gonzalez v. Hickman, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84390

23

(C.D. Cal. June 28, 2007), and Davis v. Harris, 2006 U.S. Dist.

24

LEXIS 88000 (C.D. Ill. Dec. 5, 2006).

25

apparently does not have a subscription to LexisNexis.

26

Plaintiffs’ counsel filed an opposition to the motion on August

27

15, 2011, (Docket No. 139), and on the same day asked defense

28

counsel for copies of the two cases, which defense counsel
1

Plaintiffs’ counsel

1

provided.

(Mehta Decl. ¶ 5 (Docket No. 141-1).)

On August 17,

2

2011, plaintiffs’ counsel filed an ex parte application seeking a

3

one-week postponement of the hearing on defendant’s post-trial

4

motion, an opportunity to file a second opposition, and an order

5

requiring defendant to provide to plaintiffs the two cases.

6

(Docket No. 140.)

7

explanation for his failure to request the cases until this time,

8

twelve days before the hearing on defendant’s motion.

Plaintiffs’ counsel did not provide an

9

Plaintiffs’ counsel was apparently unable to find the

10

two cases by searching by case name on Westlaw, where the court

11

was easily able to find both cases, or by searching on Google

12

Scholar, where the court was able to find Davis v. Harris, or by

13

paying for access to LexisNexis.

14

apparently failed to take advantage of the free LexisNexis

15

service provided in the Sacramento County Public Law Library.

16

Plaintiffs’ counsel also

Any competent attorney should be able to get access to

17

these cases, especially one who has held himself out as

18

exceptionally competent in this field to the extent of requesting

19

attorney’s fees at an hourly rate of $375.00.

20

postpone the hearing simply because plaintiffs’ counsel cannot

21

perform the basic legal research.

22

the cases can be made at the hearing on defendant’s motion.

The court will not

Any legal argument regarding

Plaintiffs’ ex parte application to continue

23
24

defendant’s motion is therefore DENIED.

25

DATED:

August 18, 2011

26
27
28
2