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 October 09, 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