Motion for Extension of Time
Public Court Documents
October 15, 1992
4 pages
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Sheff v. O'Neill Hardbacks. Motion for Extension of Time, 1992. 04b33cee-a346-f011-877a-002248226c06. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/7e34cad8-1730-4821-afcd-3ebf3d1281f4/motion-for-extension-of-time. Accessed November 23, 2025.
Copied!
CV 89-03609775
MILO SHEFF, et al., : SUPERIOR COURT
Plaintiffs, : JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF
: HARTFORD/NEW BRITAIN
Vv. : AT HARTFORD
WILLIAM A. O'NEILL, et al.,
Defendants. : OCTOBER 15, 1992
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
The defendants move for an extension of time of ten days, up
to and including October 25, 1992 in which to respond or object
to the plaintiffs' Fifth Request for Production of Documents.
The defendants request this additional time because a
substantial portion of the documents requested by the plaintiffs
(i.e., in response to items 5, 6,7, and 8) will not be available
from the State Department of Education until sometime within the
ten (10) day period following this motion.
NO ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED
NO TESTIMONY REQUIRED
Moreover, despite the tremendous amount of time and best efforts
of the many individuals being put to the task of gathering,
copying and indexing these materials, the defendants cannot
produce the documents requested in the plaintiffs’ Fifth Request
for Production of Documents within the thrity (30) days provided
for by the Connecticut Practice Book.
This is the defendants' first request for an extension of
time within which to respond or object to the plaintiffs' Fifth
Request for Production of Documents. Counsel for the plaintiffs
object to this motion to the extent that it may delay production
of the documents requested in items 5, 6, 7, and 8. Counsel for
the plaintiffs consent to this motion in all other respects.
FOR THE DEFENDANTS
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL
By:
a, tha M. x - £71
Agsistant Attorney General
110 Sherman Street
/Hartford, Connecticut 06105
f tel, 566-7173
ORDER
For a good cause shown, the foregoing motion is hereby
GRANTED/DENIED.
This is to certify that on this 15th day of October,
By the Court,
Honorable Harry Hammer
CERTIFICATION
1992 a
copy of the foregoing was mailed to the following counsel of
record:
John Brittain, Esq.
University of Connecticut
School of Law
65 Elizabeth Street
Wilfred Rodriguez, Esq.
Hispanic Advocacy Project
Neighborhood Legal Services
1229 Albany Avenue
Hartford, CT 06105 Hartford, . CT 06112
Philip Tegeler, Esq. Wesley W. Horton, Esq.
Martha Stone, Esq. Moller, Horton &
Connecticut Civil Fineberg, P.C.
- Liberties Union 90 Gillett Street
32 Grand Street Hartford, Cr 06105
Hartford, CT "06105
Ruben Franco, Esq. Julius L. Chambers, Esq.
Jenny Rivera, Esq. Marianne Lado, Esq.
Puerto Rican Legal Defense Ronald Ellis, Esq.
and Education Fund NAACP Legal Defense Fund and
99 Hudson Street Education Fund, Inc.
14th Floor 99 Hudson Street
New York, NY 10013 New York, NY 10013
John A. Powell, Esq.
Helen Hershkoff, Esq.
Adam S. Cohen, Esq.
American Civil Liberties Union
132 West 43rd Street
New York, NY 10036
fartha M. Watts
Assistant Zotomney General
MMWO1 78AC