Filing 49

RESPONSE re 46 MOTION for Leave to File Surreply filed by ROGER STONE. (Buschel, Robert)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ROY COCKRUM, ET AL., Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 1:17-cv-1370-ESH DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC., ROGER STONE, Defendants. DEFENDANT ROGER STONE’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SURREPLY Defendant Roger Stone opposes Plaintiffs motion for leave to file a surreply. (ECF No. 46-1). Stone adopts Defendant Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.’s opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion filed at (ECF No. 47). Stone wishes to add that Plaintiffs also had the benefit of advocating amici at the pleadings stages of this case in addition to agreement to add excess page numbers to their opposition to the respective motions to dismiss. Because Plaintiffs had a full opportunity to brief the issues in the motions to dismiss, Plaintiffs’ request for a surreply should be denied. 1 Dated: January 22, 2018 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Robert Buschel Robert C. Buschel Robert C. Buschel** Counsel of Record (FL Bar No. 0063436) BUSCHEL GIBBONS , P.A. ONE FINANCIAL PLAZA – SUITE 1300 100 S.E. THIRD AVENUE FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33394 (954) 530-5301 BUSCHEL@BGLAW-PA.COM L. Peter Farkas (DDC Bar No. 52944) HALLORAN FARKAS & KITTILA, LLP 1101 30TH STREET, NW SUITE 500 WASHINGTON, DC 20007 (202) 559-1700 PF@HFK.LAW Grant J. Smith** (FL Bar No. 935212) STRATEGYSMITH, P.A. 401 EAST LAS OLAS BOULEVARD SUITE 130-120 FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301 (954) 328-9064 GSMITH@STRATEGYSMITH.COM Counsel for Roger Stone 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on January 22, 2018 I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of electronic filing to all registered parties. /s/ Robert Buschel Robert C. Buschel Counsel for Roger Stone 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?