arrow left
arrow right
  • JOHN DOE I  vs.  THE ANDERSON PRIVATE SCHOOL, et alOTHER PERSONAL INJURY document preview
  • JOHN DOE I  vs.  THE ANDERSON PRIVATE SCHOOL, et alOTHER PERSONAL INJURY document preview
						
                                

Preview

CAUSE NO, DC-15-07174 JOHN DOE I, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF JOHN DOE II, A MINOR Plaintiffs, IN THE DISTRICT COURT eaeaeee vs. 44TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT THE ANDERSON PRIVATE SCHOOL, WILLIAM C. ANDERSON, INDIVIDUALLY, LEVONNA C. ANDERSON, INDIVIDUALLY, ALEXANDER A. ANDERSON, INDIVIDUALLY, RIPLEY ENTERTAINMENT, INC. AND JIM PATTISON US,A,, INC. Defendants. (0) 2 GO? CO) CO) GO) LO) GU Ca WO) DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANT RIPLEY ENTERTAINMENT, INC. AND JIM PATTISON U.S.A, INC.’S MOTION TO EXTEND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT HEARING DEADLINE Ripley Entertainment, Inc. and Jim Pattison U.S.A., Inc. (hereinafter “Defendants”) file this Motion to Extend Motion for Summary Judgment Hearing Deadline, and respectfully show the Court as follows. Defendants would show that the deadline for the court to hear Motions for Summary Judgment is currently December 16, 2016. Defendants have filed Motions for Summary Judgment in a timely manner that would allow for these motions to be heard by this date in accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. However, the court’s availability does not allow for the motions to be heard prior to the December 16, 2016, deadline. Defendant has requested that the hearings be scheduled as soon as the court is able to place them on it on its docket, and the court is working with the Defendants to schedule the hearing(s). Defendant requests that, based on the court’s availability limitations, the court extend the deadline to hear Motions for Summary Judgment to allow for the timely-filed motions to be heard. DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO EXTEND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT HEARING DEADLINE PAGE 1 0287/78669CONCLUSION & PRAYER Wherefore, premises considered, Defendant requests that the court extend the deadline by which Motions for Summary Judgment may be heard to allow for Defendants’ timely-filed motions to be heard by the court, and for all such further relief that this Court deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted, WALTERS, BALIDO & Bas LLP i