UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
March 16, 2009
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
DAWN SCHLEGEL, SANDRA HATFIELD, AND DAVID H. BROOKS, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Seybert, District Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On February 28, 2009, this Court issued an Order providing Defendant David H. Brooks ("Brooks") and the Government with an opportunity to file briefs in support of their privilege arguments. The Order specified that both parties were to file their briefs by March 10, 2009, and the briefs were limited to seven pages in length. The Court did not grant the parties an opportunity to file responses or replies.
Defendant Brooks filed his brief on the Court's electronic case filing system by 5:00 p.m. on March 10, 2009; the Government did not file its brief until later that evening. Defendant Brooks now objects to the timing and size of the Government's submission, and argues that the Court should strike the memorandum.
The Court declines to strike the Government's memorandum for its late timing; however, the Court will not accept any arguments in the memorandum that are responsive to Brooks' filing. The Government is directed to re-submit its filing with all references to Brooks' memorandum stricken. Further, all future filings by all parties must be electronically filed by 5:00 p.m.
The Court also declines to strike the Government's memorandum for exceeding the seven-page limit. The eighth page of the Government's submission is merely a signature. The Court declines to address minor nuances such as an excess quarter-page used purely for a signature. However, to avoid any difficulties in the future, future filings from all parties must strictly comply with any page limitations set by this Court, and all filings must be in 12-point Times New Roman font, with one inch margins on the top, bottom, left, and right side of each page.
Joanna Seybert, U.S.D.J.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.