Claridge Associates, LLC v. Schepis

Background

Defendants requested a six-day extension, through November 25, 2020, to file any potential motion for reconsideration or reargument under Local Civil Rule 6.3 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59. The proposed motion would concern the court’s November 5, 2020 opinion and order addressing plaintiffs’ second motion for partial summary judgment.

Defendants explained that their lawyer had recently prepared for and participated in a four-day trial and argued an appeal in separate Connecticut matters. Defendants also stated that the November 5 ruling appeared contrary to an August 1, 2019 order denying plaintiffs’ first motion for partial summary judgment, but said counsel had not yet had enough time to determine whether reconsideration or reargument was appropriate.

Parties’ Positions

Plaintiffs objected to the requested extension. According to the letter, plaintiffs argued that defendants’ request lacked a basis and was solely for delay. The opinion text does not identify the individual parties included under “et al.” in the caption.

Ruling

Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. The order granted the requested extension but did not decide whether defendants could ultimately succeed on a motion for reconsideration or reargument, and the provided text does not decide the underlying summary-judgment dispute.