UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
May 21, 2012
MICHAEL K. PETERSON, PLAINTIFF,
LONG ISLAND RAILROAD CO., DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Glasser, United States District Judge:
Memorandum and Order
On December 29, 2011 plaintiff Michael K. Peterson moved to strike defendant Long Island Railroad Company's Reply Brief in Support of Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 29) (the "Reply") on the grounds that the Reply exceeded this Court's individual rules, limiting such briefs to ten pages. See Letter Motion dated Dec. 29, 2011 (Dkt. No. 31). Plaintiff's motion erroneously relied upon Judge Gleeson's individual rules. This Court does not impose page limits, relying upon counsel to exercise professional judgment as to the appropriate length of briefs. See Individual Rules of Senior Judge I. Leo Glasser IV.B. Considering plaintiff submitted more than 200 pages of exhibits in opposition to plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, the 27 page Reply was not inappropriate. For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff's motion is denied.
I. Leo Glasser United States Senior District Judge
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.