Coachman v. Seattle Auto Management, Inc., 17-187RSM. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Washington
Number: infdco20181113f14
Visitors: 17
Filed: Nov. 06, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 06, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO FILE OVER-LENGTH MOTION RICARDO S. MARTINEZ , Chief District Judge . This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Motion to File Over-Length Motion. Dkt. #100. Under the Court's Local Civil Rules, Defendants' anticipated motion for a new trial is limited to 12 pages. LCR 7(e)(4). Defendants seek leave to file a 16-page motion. Dkt. #100 at 1. Defendants believe an over-length motion is justified in this case as there was a seven day jury trial with nume
Summary: ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO FILE OVER-LENGTH MOTION RICARDO S. MARTINEZ , Chief District Judge . This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Motion to File Over-Length Motion. Dkt. #100. Under the Court's Local Civil Rules, Defendants' anticipated motion for a new trial is limited to 12 pages. LCR 7(e)(4). Defendants seek leave to file a 16-page motion. Dkt. #100 at 1. Defendants believe an over-length motion is justified in this case as there was a seven day jury trial with numer..
More
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO FILE OVER-LENGTH MOTION
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ, Chief District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Motion to File Over-Length Motion. Dkt. #100. Under the Court's Local Civil Rules, Defendants' anticipated motion for a new trial is limited to 12 pages. LCR 7(e)(4). Defendants seek leave to file a 16-page motion. Dkt. #100 at 1. Defendants believe an over-length motion is justified in this case as there was a seven day jury trial with numerous witnesses and exhibits. Id. at 1-2.
Motions for over-length briefs are disfavored under the Local Civil Rules: "Motions seeking approval to file an over-length motion or brief are disfavored but may be filed subject to" several procedural requirements. LCR 7(f). Defendant has complied with the procedural requirements. But Defendants' general justifications do not support deviating from the Court's normal practice. The trial in this matter was not overly lengthy or complex and the Court is confident that Defendants can focus on the relevant facts and arguments in the number of pages allowed under the Local Rules.
Accordingly, having reviewed Defendants' Motion and the remainder of the record, the Court hereby finds and ORDERS that Defendants' Motion to File Over-Length Motion (Dkt. #100) is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
