Spreadbury v. Bitterroot Public Library et al

Filing 226

RESPONSE to Motion re 217 MOTION to Amend/Correct 182 Scheduling Order LEE ENTERPRISES' RENEWED MOTION FOR NEW SCHEDULING ORDER filed by Michael E. Spreadbury. (APP, )

Michael E. Spreadbm)'
700 S. 4th Street

FILED

Hamilton, MT 59840

FEB

1~

2012

PATRICK E. DUFFY, CLERK

Telephone: [phone]

ill'

iffi
1ioEiiiiipufYI'V'NCI.'i1lERt.;k.-;;M""'(Saoo=LA
r-::-

[e-mail]
Pro Se Plaintiff

IN TIlE UNITED STATES DISTRlCT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA

MISSOULA DIVISION

MICHAEL E. SPREADBURY

) Cause No: 9:llcv-0064-DWM-JCL

Plaintiff

)

v.

)

OBJECION TO LEE

CITY OF HAMILTON,

)

REQUEST FOR NEW

LEE ENTERPRISES, INC.,

)

SCHEDULING ORDER

BOONE KARLBERG, PC,

)

----------------------)

Comes now Plaintiff with respectful objection to Defense motion requesting a

continuance of a November 30, 2011 order (Doc. # 181) before this court.
Motion:
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff moves court rejects Lee motion as non-compelling;
Defendant Lee counsel misrepresents actions, rules of court, requests 90 days as
well established discovery deadline known, only 2 week bankruptcy stay.
1

Objection to LEE continuance

Cause 9:2011-CV-1l-64-DWM-JCl

February 10, 2012

Defendant opposes motion.
Brief in Support
Defendant Lee Counsel makes request for discovery deadline continuance of
November 30, 2011 order (Doc. # 181) before this court, does not give compelling
reason. On Lee pleading before this court, Anita Harper Poe esq. listed as co­
counsel with Jeffrey B. Smith esq. although Ms. Poe has not issued a notice of
appearance LR 12.2 before this court in the aforementioned.
Lee counsel was aware of Honorable Court's November 30, 2011 order by ECF or
electronic filing, Plaintiff was informed by US Mail arriving December 3, 201 land
respected Discovery Deadline of to day's date February 10,2012 although stay for
Lee Bankruptcy interrupted court proceeding for 13 business days in January 2012.
Unreasonable and not compelling for Lee to request 90 days continuance for 16
day stay ofproceedings before this Honorable Court. Plaintiff, pro se adhered to
Honorable courts wishes and deadline. Lee request (Doc. #217) ~I pg. 2 indicates
Honorable Court denied motion from Lee due to no contact with Plaintiff and
indication of opposition. Lee failed to contact Plaintiff or obtain approval for
continuance of discovery deadline required in LR 7.1 (c )(1).
Lee counsel claim to have contacted Plaintiff via email. Neither Ms. Poe, Mr.
Smith made contact, careful search of all possible areas of published Plaintiff email
2

Objection to LEE continuance

Cause 9:2011-CV-11-64-DWM-JCl

Februa ry 10, 2012

account for this case without recent Lee contact. Lee have given false information
to this court in attempt to circumvent a court order (Doc. 181), local rule LR
7.1 (c)(l) requires contact, approval of opposing party. Knowingly violating a
court order in Montana is actionable by Montana Code Ann. MCA§45-7-309(c)
Criminal Contempt; misrepresentation to this court by Lee precludes continuance.
Plaintiff opposes Lee continuance: non-adherence to Court Order, court rules for
notice of appearance, opposed pleading without brief, no compelling reason as
Bankruptcy stay totaled 16 days. Lee made clear of deadline by court order two
weeks prior to stay, had 10 days after stay was lifted to enter discovery evidence,
and failed to do so. Lee did not provide court authority, or brief the Honorable
Court; neither did Lee answer discovery questions within 30 days Plaintiff objects
via FRCP 33, 36.
A Corporate defendant who files Bankruptcy, and stay of proceedings must obey
orders ofa Magistrate Judge (Honorable Lynch November 30,2011 Doc. #181)
with respect to discovery before, during and after a stay David v. Hooker Ltd. 560

F. 2d at 418-419 (tjh Gir., 1977). Lee has failed to comply with the order of this
Honorable Court, its court rules for pleading LR 7.1 d (1 )(A), notice of appearance
of Counsel LR 12.2, continuance request not for compelling reasons, should be
rejected by this Honorable Court.

Objection to LEE continuance

Cause 9: 20 ll-CV-ll-64-DW M-JCL

February 10, 2012

Certificate of Compliance
From LR 7(d)(2)(E) US District Court Rules Montana, I certify that this brief
confonns with 14 point font, New Times Roman typeface, is double spaced,
contains 499 words excluding title page, this compliance.

Respectfully submitted this

BY:'__

, :!f1.-­

,0

day of Feb"",,,,,,,,, 2012

~~~'~/_'~~~~

_______

Michael E. Spreadbuty, SelfRepresented Plaintiff

4

Certificate of Service
Cause No.9: II-cv-II-0064-DWM-JCL
I certify as Plaintiff in this action, a copy of the below named pleading was served
upon the US District Court Missoula Division and all opposing counsel for parties
in this above named cause of action by first class maiL The following addresses
were used for service:
Objection to Lee request for new scheduling order

Russell Smith Federal Courthouse
Clerk of Court
201 E. Broadway
Missoula, MT 59803

Defendant Counsel:

Plaintiff Counsel:

William L. Crowley

Michael E. Spreadbury

Boone Karlberg PC

PO Box416

POBox 9199

Hamilton, MT 59840

Missoula MT 59807

(self-represented)

Jeffrey B Smith
Garlington, Lohn, & Robbinson PLLP
POBox 7909
Missoula MT 59807

Dated _ _ _-. 011 _____