Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-cv-2306-RM-KLM - Perry v. State of Colorado, et al - 026 - Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages in Df's Motion to DismissIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 1:21-CV-02306-RM-KLM ROBERT LAWRENCE PERRY, Plaintiff, v. THE STATE OF COLORADO, THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, CSU BOARD OF GOVERNORS FOR CSU, COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY and STEVEN VASCONSELLOS, Judicial Administrator; Defendants. DEFENDANT CITY OF FORT COLLINS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE IN EXCESS OF PAGE LIMITATION IN DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant City of Fort Collins (“Defendant”), via counsel, Mark S. Ratner, Esq., and Katherine N. Hoffman, Esq., of Hall & Evans, L.L.C., and pursuant to this Court’s Practice Standards, hereby requests permission to exceed the standard 20-page restriction by 5-pages (thus, allowing for a 25-page response) for Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint [ECF 24], as follows: D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1 CONFERRAL STATEMENT Undersigned counsel attempted to confer with Plaintiff via email on September 30, 2021, and Plaintiff did not respond this request. 1. Plaintiff previously filed a Complaint which was 42-pages in length. [ECF 1]. Thereafter, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint which added 24-pages of allegations Case 1:21-cv-02306-RM-KLM Document 26 Filed 10/01/21 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 4 2 to his original Complaint. [ECF 24]. In total, Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is 66- pages and 279-paragraphs. [Id.]. 2. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint raises complex issues concerning the constitutionality of the Defendant’s trespass and camping ordinances. Specifically, Plaintiff challenges both ordinances under the Fifth, Eighth, and the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause. Additionally, Plaintiff challenges the validity of his underlying conviction for trespass under the City’s ordinance. Each of these claims requires separate analysis as each is tested under a different legal standard. 3. Additional words are necessary to adequately brief the Court on each claim and defense. 4. Counsel for Defendant has made their best effort to keep the Motion to Dismiss to a reasonable volume, given the breadth of material that must be covered, but require more than 20-pages to adequately address the complex and numerous issues raised by Plaintiff. Undersigned counsel does not file this Motion lightly and understands the reasons for this Court’s page limitations. However, counsel for Defendant believe the presentation in the Motion to Dismiss is appropriate and warranted under the totality of the circumstances. 5. Defendant is requesting a total of 25-pages excluding the certificate of compliance in accordance with this Court’s practice standards. This increase in page limit will allow Defendant to adequately address the arguments raised in Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint while keeping in line with and being responsive to Plaintiff’s lengthy and complicated pleading. Case 1:21-cv-02306-RM-KLM Document 26 Filed 10/01/21 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 4 3 6. The granting of this Motion for Leave to Exceed Page Limitation and its requested page limit increase will serve the interests of justice and will not prejudice any party. 7. Good cause exists for extending the page limitation. WHEREFORE, and for the foregoing reasons, Defendant City of Fort Collins respectfully requests this Court grant this Motion to Exceed the Page Limitation and allow Defendant up to 25 pages for their response to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint. Respectfully submitted this 1st day of October 2021. s/Katherine N. Hoffman Katherine N. Hoffman, Esq. Mark S. Ratner, Esq. Hall & Evans, L.L.C. 1001 17th Street, Suite 300 Denver, CO 80202 Phone: 303-628-3300 Fax: 303-628-3368 Hoffmank@hallevans.com Ratnerm@hallevans.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS Case 1:21-cv-02306-RM-KLM Document 26 Filed 10/01/21 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 4 4 ` CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (CM/ECF) I hereby certify that on the 1st day of October 2021, a true and correct copy of the foregoing was filed with the Court via CM/ECF and served on all parties of record, as well as the below- listed party by email: Robert Lawrence Perry fort_scout@yahoo.com Pro se Plaintiff s/Marlene Wilson, Legal Assistant to Mark S. Ratner, Esq. Katherine N. Hoffman, Esq. Hall & Evans, L.L.C. 1001 17th Street, Suite 300 Denver, CO 80202 Phone: 303-628-3300 Fax: 303-628-3368 Ratnerm@hallevans.com Hoffmank@hallevans.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS Case 1:21-cv-02306-RM-KLM Document 26 Filed 10/01/21 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 4