HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018CV3112 - Sean Slatton V. Fort Collins Police Department, Todd Hopkins, Brandon Barnes And John Hutto - 042 - Reply In Support Of Hopkins Motion To Stay DiscoveryIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 1:18-CV-03112-RBJ-STV
SEAN SLATTON,
Plaintiff,
v.
TODD HOPKINS,
BRANDON BARNES,
JOHN HUTTO,
AND FORT COLLINS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Defendants.
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF OFFICER HOPKINS MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY
Defendant, Todd Hopkins, appearing separately from the other named Defendants, by
and through his attorneys at Nathan Dumm & Mayer P.C., hereby submits his Reply in Support
of his Motion to Stay [ECF 30] and in response to Mr. Slatton’s “Response to Fort Collins City
Attorney’s Motion/Pending Motion to Stay Pending Discovery . . .” [ECF 36]. In support of
Officer Hopkins’ Motion to Stay, he alleges as follows:
First, because Mr. Slatton’s pleading is confusing, the undersigned conferred with him
about it on or about June 17, 2019. As part of that exchange Mr. Slatton confirmed that ECF 36
was intended to be a Response to the Motion to Stay and not a separate motion. Officer Hopkins
is relying on Mr. Slatton and treating the pleading solely as a response and not as a separate
motion.
Case 1:18-cv-03112-RBJ-STV Document 42 Filed 06/20/19 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 4
-2-
Second, in reviewing ECF 36 with that in mind, Mr. Slatton’s Response does not in any
way substantively dispute the key case relied upon or legal analysis contained in Officer
Hopkins’ original Motion to Stay. In fact, other than requesting in the paragraph entitled “1.” on
page 1 of the Response that the court deny the Motion to Stay, Mr. Slatton’s entire pleading
simply indicates materials he would potentially want during discovery.
Third, with respect to Mr. Slatton’s statements as to records he would like as part of
discovery, those items are not relevant to the pending Motion to Dismiss filed by Officer
Hopkins at ECF 28. The body camera footage from Officer Hopkins, as to the specific conduct
at issue, was already attached as an exhibit to the Motion to Dismiss. None of the other materials
referenced by Mr. Slatton are relevant to the legal arguments contained in the pending Motion to
Dismiss. As such, these materials do not need to be provided at this stage and can be addressed,
as appropriate, in discovery, should this case proceed past the Motion to Dismiss.
Fourth, Mr. Slatton’s attempt to seek his own relief, instead of simply requesting a denial
of the Motion to Stay, is not appropriate and, thus, should be ignored. See D.C.COLO.LCivR
7.1(d)(“A motion shall not be included in a response or reply to the original motion. A motion
shall be filed as a separate document”).
In conclusion, the case law and legal analysis contain in Officer Hopkins’ Motion to Stay
is unrebutted. As set forth in that Motion, when looking at the five factors pertinent to the
requested stay, all five factors weigh in favor of a stay of all discovery pending a determination
on Officer Hopkins’ Motion to Dismiss and, specifically, a determination on the defense of
qualified immunity.
Case 1:18-cv-03112-RBJ-STV Document 42 Filed 06/20/19 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 4
-3-
WHEREFORE, Officer Hopkins continues to request that a stay of all discovery be
issued.
Respectfully submitted this 20th day of June, 2019.
/s/ Marni Nathan Kloster
Marni Nathan Kloster
NATHAN DUMM & MAYER P.C.
7900 E. Union Avenue, Suite 600
Denver, CO 80237-2776
Phone Number: (303) 691-3737
Fax: (303) 757-5106
Attorney for Defendant Todd Hopkins
Case 1:18-cv-03112-RBJ-STV Document 42 Filed 06/20/19 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 4
-4-
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 20th day of June, 2019, I electronically filed the foregoing
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF OFFICER HOPKINS MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY with
the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the
following at their e-mail addresses:.
Sean Slatton
951 20TH ST #1227
Denver, CO 80201
shslatton@gmail.com
Mark S. Ratner
Hall & Evans, L.L.C.
1001 17th Street, Suite 300
Denver, CO 80202
ratnerm@hallevans.com
/s/ Marni Nathan Kloster
Marni Nathan Kloster
Attorney for Defendants
NATHAN DUMM & MAYER P.C.
7900 E. Union Avenue, Suite 600
Denver, CO 80237-2776
Phone Number: (303) 691-3737
Facsimile: (303) 757-5106
MNathan@ndm-law.com
Case 1:18-cv-03112-RBJ-STV Document 42 Filed 06/20/19 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 4