Letter from Tegeler to Court RE: Motion for Extension of Time

Working File
May 27, 1992

Cite this item
Letter from Tegeler to Court RE: Motion for Extension of Time preview

4 pages

Cite this item

  • Case Files, Sheff v. O'Neill Hardbacks. Letter from Tegeler to Court RE: Motion for Extension of Time, 1992. 7e1abc02-a246-f011-877a-002248226c06. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/a982c5bf-18c9-40c0-a1da-f0fe9e19ae3b/letter-from-tegeler-to-court-re-motion-for-extension-of-time. Accessed November 02, 2025.

    Copied!

    FOUNDATION 
ThirtyTwo Grand Street, Hartford, CT 06106 

203/247-9823 Fax 203/728-0287 

May 27, 1992 

Clerk of the Court 
Superior Court 
95 Washington Street 
Hartford, CT 06106 

RE: Sheff v. O'Neill, Cv89-0360977S 
  

Dear Sir or Madam, 

Please forward the attached Motion to Judge Hammer, who has 
responsibility for the above-captioned case. 

Sincerely, 

Philip D. Tegeler 
Attorney for Plaintiffs 

PDT/dmt 

Attachment 

CC: All Counsel 

The Connecticut Civil Liberties Union Foundation 
SER 5 

 



      

Cv89-0360977S 

  

MILO SHEFF, et al. SUPERIOR COURT 

Plaintiffs 

JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF 
HARTFORD/NEW BRITAIN 
AT HARTFORD 

v. 

WILLIAM A. O'NEILL, et al. 

Defendants May 27, 1992 

0
 

LL
] 

[1
] 

e
e
 

L
L
 

( 1
]
 

  

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO 
DEFENDANTS’ FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION 
  

  

The Plaintiffs move for an additional extension of time, to 

Friday, June 5, 1992, to respond to Defendants’ First Request for 

Production, served on March 31, 1992. The reason for this Motion is 

that, despite diligent efforts by counsel, the requested data tapes 

have not yet been obtained for review by counsel. Such review must 

be completed prior to filing a response to defendants’ request. 

Defendants have been contacted and have no objection to the 

granting of this Motion. This is the second Motion for Extension of 

Time regarding Defendants’ First Request for Production. 

  

 



      
For good cause shown, 

GRANTED/DENIED. 

DATE: 

Respectfully Submitted, 

WY Se 
Philip D. Tegeler 
Martha Stone 

Connecticut Civil Liberties 

Union Foundation 

32 Grand Street 

Hartford, CT 06106 

  

Attorney for Plaintiffs 

ORDER 

the foregoing Motion is hereby ordered 

  

Hammer, J. 

  

 



      

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
  

This is to certify that one copy of the foregoing has been mailed 

postage prepaid to John R. Whelan, Assistant Attorney General, 
77 

MacKenzie Hall, 110 Sherman Street, Hartford, CT 06105 chilis 2.7 day 

of May, 1992 

Va 
4 “a 
  

Philip D. Tegeler

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.

Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.