EVANS et al v. DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA, CITY OF et al

Filing 16

MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages re Briefs in Support of Motion to Dismiss by DNA SECURITY, INC., RICHARD CLARK. Responses due by 11/30/2007 (DAVIS, KEARNS)

Download PDF
EVANS et al v. DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA, CITY OF et al Doc. 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA NO. 1:07CV739 DAVID F. EVANS; COLLIN FINNERTY; and READE SELIGMANN, Plaintiffs, v. THE CITY OF DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA; MICHAEL B. NIFONG; MAR K GOTTLIEB; BENJAMIN HIMAN; DAVID ADDISON; LINWOOD WILSON; STEVEN CHALMERS; BEVERLY COUNCIL; RONALD HODGE; JEFF LAMB; STEPHEN MIHAICH; MICHAEL RIPBERGER; LEE RUSS; DNA SECURITY, INC.; RICHARD CLARK; and BRIAN MEEHAN, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MOTION OF DEFENDANTS DNA SECURITY, INC. AND RICHARD CLARK TO EXTEND PAGE LIMITATIONS FOR BRIEFS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS Defendants DNA Security, Inc. ("DSI"), and Richard Clark, through counsel and pursuant to Local Rule 7.3(b), respectfully move this Court for leave to exceed the page limitations set forth in Local Rule 7.3(d). In support of this Motion, DSI and Mr. Clark show the Court the following: 1. 2. Plaintiffs filed a Civil Complaint in this case on October 5, 2007. DSI and Mr. Clark are scheduled to respond to the Complaint on or before Monday, December 10, 2007. Dockets.Justia.com 3. The Complaint raises substantial legal issues regarding the sufficiency of the plaintiffs' claims, including immunity, duty, state action, and the adequacy of the facts pled to state valid causes of action. 4. Consequent ly, counsel for DSI and Mr. Clark are preparing to file a Motion to Dismiss the claims against them. 5. The plaintiffs' Complaint is 148 pages long, contains 559 paragraphs, and includes more than a dozen separate claims against DSI and Mr. Clark. 6. Therefore, thorough discussion of the legal issues raised by the Civil Complaint will require briefs in excess of the page limits established by Local Rule 7.3(d). 7. After researching and outlining the pertinent legal issues, counsel for DSI and Mr. Clark anticipate that fifty pages will be sufficient for their initial brief, and that twenty-five pages will be adequate for their reply brief. 8. Counsel for DSI and Mr. Clark have consulted about this Motion with the plaintiffs' respective attorneys, by telephone and in writing, and have offered them equivalent extensions--to fifty pages--of the page limits applicable to the plaintiffs' response briefs. Counsel for plaintiff Seligmann expressed consent to the requested extensions. Counsel for plaintiffs Evans and Finnerty have not expressed a position. WHEREFORE, DSI and Mr. Clark respectfully request that the Court grant them leave to file a Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss of no more than fifty (50) pages, and leave to file a Reply Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss of no more than twenty-five (25) pages. 2 Respectfully submitted this 7th day of November, 2007. /s/ Kearns Davis Robert J. King III N. C. State Bar No. 15946 rking@brookspierce.com Kearns Davis N. C. State Bar No. 22014 kdavis@brookspierce.com Brooks, Pierce, McLendon Humphrey & Leonard, L.L.P. P.O. Box 26000 Greensboro, NC 27420 (336) 373-8850 Attorneys for Defendants DNA Security, Inc., and Richard Clark 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that the foregoing was electronically filed today with the Clerk of the Court usin g the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to the following: Brendan V. Sullivan, Jr., Esq. Robert M. Cary, Esq. Christopher N. Manning, Esq. Charles Davant IV, Esq. William s & Connolly LLP 725 Twelfth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 200005 Attorneys for Plaintiffs David F. Evans and Collin Finnerty David S. Rudolf, Esq. Rudolf Widenhouse & Fialko 312 West Franklin Street Chapel Hill, NC 27516 Attorney for Plaintiff Reade Seligmann James B. Craven, III P.O. Box 1366 Durham NC 27702 Attorney for Defendant Michael B. Nifong I further certify that a copy of the foregoing was served today upon each of the following nonCM/ECF participants by United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Barry C. Scheck, Esq. Attn: Elizabeth Vaca, Esq. 100 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10011 Attorneys for Plaintiff Reade Seligmann Richard D. Emery, Esq. Eme ry Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady LLP 75 Rockefeller Plaza, 20th Floor New York, NY 10019 Attorney for Plaintiff Reade Seligmann This the 7th day of November, 2007. /s/ Kearns Davis Kearns Davis 4

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?