Peterson v. Long Island Railroad Company

Filing 33

ORDER denying 31 Motion to Strike. Ordered by Senior Judge I. Leo Glasser on 5/21/2012. (Green, Dana)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
------------------------------------------------------x
MICHAEL K. PETERSON,
Plaintiff,

Memorandum and Order
10 Civ. 480

- against LONG ISLAND RAILROAD CO.,
Defendant.
------------------------------------------------------x
GLASSER, United States District Judge:
On December 29, 2011 plaintiff Michael K. Peterson moved to strike defendant
Long Island Railroad Company’s Reply Brief in Support of Summary Judgment (Dkt.
No. 29) (the “Reply”) on the grounds that the Reply exceeded this Court’s individual
rules, limiting such briefs to ten pages. See Letter Motion dated Dec. 29, 2011 (Dkt. No.
31). Plaintiff’s motion erroneously relied upon Judge Gleeson’s individual rules. This
Court does not impose page limits, relying upon counsel to exercise professional
judgment as to the appropriate length of briefs. See Individual Rules of Senior Judge I.
Leo Glasser IV.B. Considering plaintiff submitted more than 200 pages of exhibits in
opposition to plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, the 27 page Reply was not
inappropriate. For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff’s motion is denied.

SO ORDERED.
Dated: Brooklyn, New York
May 21, 2012

___/s/______________________
I. Leo Glasser
United States Senior District Judge