Elliott et al v. City of Hartford et al

MOTION for Extension of Time until 8/31/12 to complete Discovery

D. Conn.June 28, 2012

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT ____________________________________ Sandra Elliott, individually and as the : Administratrix of the Estate of Asher : Tamara Glace : : Plaintiffs : : CIVIL ACTION NO.: vs. : 309-cv-00948 (AWT) : City of Hartford Police Department, et al : June 27, 2012 : : : MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT Defendants : OF TIME TO COMPLETE : DISCOVERY AND TO RESPOND : TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION ____________________________________: FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO COMPLETE DISCOVERY 1. Pursuant to Local Rule 7 (b), and FRCP 6 (b), Plaintiffs Sandra Elliott, individually and as the Administratrix of the Estate of Asher Tamara Glace, by and through their attorney, Richard C. Gordon, Esq., respectfully request an extension of time of four sixty days to August 31, 2012 to complete discovery with respect to Defendants’ motions for summary judgment 2. On March 31, 2011, the parties met for a status conference and all parties agreed pursuant to a Joint Scheduling Order dated April 11, 2011 that Defendants would file their motions for summary judgment by May 16, 2011 along with supporting papers to Plaintiffs’ counsel. Case 3:09-cv-00948-AWT Document 66 Filed 06/28/12 Page 1 of 9 2 3. Pursuant to the scheduling order, Plaintiff could take any discovery addressed to the issues raised on summary judgment until the time for responses to the motions for summary judgments are due to be served. 4. Plaintiffs were also required by the Joint Scheduling Order to file responses by October 16, 2011, but counsel for the moving parties was to hold all supporting and opposing papers on the motion for summary judgment until October 30, 2011. 5. Because of the prosecution of Ms. Asher Glace’s murder is still pending all related discovery and related proceedings with respect to that case are stayed until further order of the court. 6. Around May 2011, Plaintiffs’ counsel became very ill necessitating his undergoing a surgical procedure. 7. This procedure caused Plaintiff counsel to temporarily suspend aspects of his practice for two months. 8. Because of the circumstances herein represented by Plaintiffs’ counsel he was not able to fulfill the full scope of his discovery on behalf of the Plaintiffs in order to contest the Defendants’ pending motions for summary judgment. 9. Thereafter Plaintiffs’ counsel with the joint consent of both Defendants’ counsels requested an enlargement of time on September 15, 2011 to complete discovery by December 30, 2011. 10. The motion was subsequently granted by the court. 11. Around late September and early October 2011, Plaintiffs’ counsel learned through investigations that there were an abundance of relevant discoverable testimonial Case 3:09-cv-00948-AWT Document 66 Filed 06/28/12 Page 2 of 9 3 evidence that were material to the Plaintiffs’ prosecution of their claims that are already in the public domain, but was never disclosed to the Plaintiff. 12. Plaintiffs’ counsel also learned that these discoverable documents implicated various and numerous state and city actors including, but not limited to Former City of Hartford Detectives, Jerry Bilbo, Michael Sheldon, Former City of Hartford Chief of Police, Patrick Harnett, State Attorneys, David Gazaja, Richard Rubino, and retired state prosecutor John Fahey. 13. On October 31, 2011, Plaintiffs motioned the court to take leave to depose two incarcerated inmates, Everton Gardner and Steve Nelson, both of whom warned the Hartford Police as well as the State Attorney’s Office in 2005 that Ms. Glace was targeted for death by Anthony Thompson and his confederates. 14. The motions were granted by the court, but the Defendants have subsequently opposed these depositions, despite the fact neither Defendant has complied with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 with respect to required disclosures. [Emphasis added] 15. In December 2011, depositions which were scheduled by the Plaintiffs with respect to other deponents were not completed on the basis the Defendants needed additional time to locate the deponents, as well as time to complete their trial commitments. At no point did either Defendant forward or suggest new dates to complete depositions in order to facilitate Plaintiffs meeting the December 30, 2011, or February 28, 2012 response deadlines. 16. Around the latter part of November 2011, Mr. Terrence O’Neill, Assistant Attorney General and counsel for Defendants Kane and Morano was on trial and was therefore unavailable to participate in the discovery proceedings. Case 3:09-cv-00948-AWT Document 66 Filed 06/28/12 Page 3 of 9 4 17. Because Mr. O’Neill was on trial he requested time to prepare and participate in his trial, unencumbered by requests from Plaintiffs with respect to the present matter, and that consideration was extended by the Plaintiffs. 18. On November 16, 2011, Plaintiffs made a request to Mr. James Hawkins the Court’s Para-Judicial Officer for an emergent status conference to discuss some of the problems outline above. 19. Plaintiffs’ request was acted upon by Mr. Hawkins and he suggested that Plaintiffs file a motion for enlargement of time to complete discovery after securing consent from Mr. Beamon and Mr. O’Neill, and their consents were subsequently garnered. 20. The Defendants’ consents were also impliedly contingent upon the fact that Plaintiffs would publish the complete list of deponents, along with the dates and time for each deposition. 21. Plaintiff has previously requested an extension of time on September 19, 2010 because Plaintiffs’ counsel’s wife was “gravely ill.” Since then, Plaintiffs’ counsel has requested another extension on and September 15, 2011, because counsel was ill. 22. Thereafter, subpoenas were served interstate and intrastate upon various witnesses for Defendants, with the only exception being a former City of Hartford Police detective. 23. Thereafter, on December 16, 2011, the plaintiffs again motioned the court for additional time to complete depositions and responses to summary judgments by February 28, 2012. Around this time, the Plaintiffs also published to the Defendants a complete schedule of depositions to be completed in January 2012 in order to meet the February 28, 2012 date referenced above. Case 3:09-cv-00948-AWT Document 66 Filed 06/28/12 Page 4 of 9 5 24. As part of the effort to complete Plaintiffs’ responses to defendants’ motions for summary judgment, the Plaintiffs deposed former Chief of Police for The City of Hartford, Patrick Harnett on January 4, 2012 in New York. 25. At the deposition of Patrick Harnett, the Defendants were presented with all notices for deposition and production of documents necessary to complete discovery in order to meet the February 28, 2012 filing date for summary judgment. 26. Subsequently, the parties have met with the Court’s Para Judicial Officer, Mr. James Hawkins on at least three occasions in an attempt to have him guide the parties through the discovery process just before and after the deposition of Chief Harnett, which occurred on January 4, 2012 in New York. 27. On February 2, 2012, the parties were summoned before Judge Alvin Thompson for a hearing on Defendants’ motions in opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion to amend their complaint to include new parties, and to thwart their efforts to depose certain city and state officials having knowledge about the circumstances surrounding Ms. Glace’s murder. 28. After the deposition of Patrick Harnett, the court summoned the parties to court for a status conference on February 2, 2012. 29. Immediately thereafter, the Defendants made motions to quash the subpoenas on the basis they infringed upon the state’s prosecutorial privilege. 30. The Defendants also filed motions in opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion to take leave to amend their complaint to add new and previously undisclosed, and undiscovered parties. 31. The Plaintiffs’ motion to take leave to amend their complaint and the Defendants’ motion to quash are both pending before the court. Case 3:09-cv-00948-AWT Document 66 Filed 06/28/12 Page 5 of 9 6 32. The Plaintiffs’ assert that the Defendants efforts to quash the subpoenas are clearly designed to shield from view documents, and testimonial evidence which are already in the public domain, as Plaintiffs learned from their investigations from September/October 2011. 33. At the February 2, 2012 hearing, the judge ordered that three depositions should be completed including that of a named party, Former Chief of Hartford Police Daryl Roberts prior to completion of Plaintiffs’ responses to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment due on February 28, 2012. 34. The judge also ordered that Ms. Tracey Kelly, Coordinator for the Witness Protection Program at The Office of The Chief State’s Attorney should be deposed in accordance with the Plaintiffs’ responsibilities to file their responses to Defendants’ motions for summary judgment. 35. The judge also ordered that Dennis House, a reporter with WFSB Channel 3 be deposed in accordance with Plaintiffs’ responsibilities to file their responses to Defendants’ motions for summary judgment. 36. Plaintiffs were successful in deposing City of Hartford Chief of Police, Daryl Roberts, and Tracy Kelly, Coordinator for the Witness Protection Program at The Office of the Chief States’ Attorney on June 21, 2012 and June 27, 2012 respectively. 37. Plaintiffs have learned that Mr. House has left the United States on an emergency trip and will not return until, or around July 7, 2012. 38. The Plaintiffs’ have successfully garnered the consent of the Defendants in extending the time for Plaintiffs depose Mr. House upon his return to the United States, as well as respond to their motions for summary judgment by August 31, 2012. Case 3:09-cv-00948-AWT Document 66 Filed 06/28/12 Page 6 of 9 7 39. Plaintiff has previously requested an extension of time on September 19, 2010 because Plaintiffs’ counsel’s wife was “gravely ill”. Since then, Plaintiffs’ counsel has requested another extension on September 15, 2011, because counsel was ill. 40. This request is the fifth request for an enlargement of time to complete discovery, and for the time to comply via other discovery items to be also enlarged in accordance with the August 31, 2012 date. 41. The undersigned counsel believes the Defendants will not be prejudiced by this request for an extension of time primarily because most of the discovery in this matter is already in the public domain, and any matters related to the prosecution of Earl and Anthony Thompson for the murder of Asher Glace are already stayed. WHEREFORE, for good cause shown, the Plaintiffs respectfully move this court to grant their motion for an extension of time. ______________ Dated: June 27, 2012 /S/ Richard C. Gordon, Esq., Counsel for Plaintiffs, Fed Juris #27288 697 Blue Hills Avenue Hartford, CT 06112 (860) 534-0547 (860) 656-6889 FAX Email: Therichard_06002@yahoo.com Case 3:09-cv-00948-AWT Document 66 Filed 06/28/12 Page 7 of 9 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT ____________________________________ Sandra Elliott, individually and as the : Administratrix of the Estate of Asher : Tamara Glace : : Plaintiffs : : CIVIL ACTION NO.: vs. : 309-cv-00948 (AWT) : City of Hartford Police Department, et al : June 27, 2012 : : ORDER FOR : MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT Defendants : OF TIME TO COMPLETE : DISCOVERY AND TO RESPOND : TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION ____________________________________: FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ motion for an extension of time to complete discovery and file a response to defendants’ motions for summary judgment is hereby granted____, denied _____ to _____________ _____, 2012, and for the time to comply with other discovery. . ___________ ______________________________ Dated Hon. Alvin Thompson, U.S.D.J. Case 3:09-cv-00948-AWT Document 66 Filed 06/28/12 Page 8 of 9 9 CERTIFICATION This is to certify that on June 27, 2012 a copy of the foregoing motion was filed with the clerk of court and copies were mailed to the Defendants. Dated: June 27, 2012 /S/ Richard C. Gordon, Esq., Counsel for Plaintiffs, Fed Juris #27288 697 Blue Hills Avenue Hartford, CT 06112 (860) 534-0547 (860) 656-6889 FAX Email: Therichard_06002@yahoo.com Case 3:09-cv-00948-AWT Document 66 Filed 06/28/12 Page 9 of 9