Corrected Motion for Extension to File Appellant's Brief and Extension of Page Limits

    September 3, 1981

Re: Garner v. Memphis Police Dept., Case No. 81-5605

Sincerely yours,
i

Steven L. Winter
SLW/ac

: 1 

■̂\nnu r g 3

' Hon. John P. Hehman, Clerk 
United States Court of Appeals 
for the Sixth Circuit 
U.S. Post Office & Courthous Bldg, 
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Dear Sir :
Please find enclosed the corrected original 

and four copies of two motions in the above noted 
appeal. Please disregard the papers dated 
September 2, 1981 which will be arriving by regu­
lar mail.

r.

Opposing counsel has been served with the 
corrected document.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this 
matter.

cc: Henry I.. Klein, Esq.
Walter L. Bailey, Jr., Esq.

1 0  C O L U M B U S  C I R C L E 5 8 6 - 8  3 9 7 N E W  Y O R K ,  N . Y .  1 0 0 1 9

[_1

it’



,.V i- V*.

5 i

v\
V.'
T•*aif

th>.

Xr

‘̂'v
■w

%

-Si- <V
S4.
,'»vV;j

•5... m

i

i>if

'v S  :

-
i*V

Ai-

-XI.•V
c

KV:
--crv,

■̂w

u.

*«-/

.1

• t ,:̂

F r iIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS *- A 
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT o:J ■ 1̂ 8!

NO. 81-5605
JO H M E  HSHIViAî L Cbrl<

C-:

CLEAMTEE GARNER, et al.,
Plaintiff-Appellant, 

VS.
MEMPHIS POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 
Western District of Tennessee 

Western Division

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPELLANT'S 
BRIEF AND MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF PAGE LIMITS ON

APPELLANT'S BRIEF

STEVEN L. WINTER 
Suite 2030 
10 Columbus Circle 
New York, New York 10019
WALTER L. BAILEY, JR. Bailey, 
Higgs & Bailey 161 Jefferson 
Avenue Memphis, Tennessee 
38103
Counsel for Plaintiff-Appellant



l \  L; C E i V l:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS I L- E  D  
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

SEP -  1981
NO. 81-5605

JOHN P. HEHMAN, Clork

rZ? ^1381

r. C'crk CLEAMTEE GARNER, et al . ,
Plaintif f-Appel1 ant, 

VS.
MEMPHIS POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 
Western District of Tennessee 

Western Division

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPELLANT'S 
BRIEF AND MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF PAGE LIMITS ON

APPELLANT'S BRIEF

STEVEN L. WINTER
Suite 2030
10 Columbus Circle
New York, New York 10019
WALTER L. BAILEY, JR. Bailey, 
Higgs & Bailey 161 Jefferson 
Avenue Memphis, Tennessee 
38103
Counsel for Plaintiff-Appellant



IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT 

NO. 81-5605

CLEAMTEE GARNER, et aL,
Plaintiff-Appellant

VS.
MEMPHIS POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al. 

Defendants-Appellees.

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the 
Western District of Tennessee 

Western Division

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPELLANT'S 
BRIEF AND MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF PAGE LIMITS ON

APPELLANT'S BRIEF

Pursuant to Rules 26(b) & 28(g) of the Federal Rules
j

of Appellate Procedure and Rule 8(c) of the Rules of the United 
States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, appellant 
respectfully:., moves the Court for a 60 day extension of time to 
file appellant's brief and a twenty-five page extension of the 
page limit on that brief. In suppo-rt of this we show the 
following:

1. The appeal was docketed on August 25, 1981.



Appellant's brief is due on October 5, 1981. The instant 
case involves the important constitutional question of 
the parameters governing the use of deadly force by 
police officers in the attempted apprehension of unarmed 
fleeing felony suspects.

2. The undersigned counsel has a brief due in 
the United States Supreme Court in Ledbetter v. Jones,
No. 80-1804 on Octobet 5, 1981. The undersigned also has 
a brief due in the United States Court of Appeals for the 
Fifth Circuit in Ruiz v. Estelle, No. 81-2224, on 
November 9, 1981. Each of these cases raises substantial 
issues which require extensive research and briefing.

3. The undersigned has long standing plans to 
be out of the country from September 12 to October 12, 
1981.

4. The issues raised on the instant appeal 
are many and complex. The opinion below failed to deal 
with most of the appellant's major constitutional argu-I
ments. Accordingly, the brief on appeal will necessarily

- 2 -



be more extensive. In i,ight of the importance of the 
issues, and in light of counsel's other commitments, the 
brief in the instant case cannot be adequately prepared 
in the time or within the page limits alloted by the 
Rules.

WHEREFORE, appellant prays that this motion 
for a sixty day extension of time to file appellant's 
brief and for a twenty-five page extension of the page 
limit on said brief be granted.

Respectfully submitted.

STEVEN L. WINTER 
Suite 2030 
10 Columbus Circle 
New York, New York 10019
WALTER L. BAILEY, JR. 
Bailey, Higgs & Bailey 
161 Jefferson Ave. 
Memphis Tennessee 38103
Counsel for Appellant

- 3 -



CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
1

I hereby certify that two copies of the fore­
going Motions have been served by United States 
Mail, postage prepaid, to Henry L. Klein, Esq., 2108 
First Tennessee Bank Bldg. Memphis, Tn 38103.

This 3rd day of September, 1981.

!

I , . t; A
STEVEN L. WINTER



O F F I C E  O F  T H E  C L E R K  

U N I T E D  S T A T E S  C O U R T  O F  A P P E A L S
C I N C I N N A T I .  O H I O  4 5 2 0 2

O F F I C I A L  B U S I N E S S  
P E N A L T Y  F O R  P R I V A T E  U S E  $ 3 0 0

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID 

UNITED STATES COURTS

Mr. Steven L. Winter Suite 2030 
10 Columbus Circle 
New York, New York 10019

1i J  1!
p11 .f c

JLL

mill
SEP 14 1981ILWHEil



i r

r