Preview
E-Filed 01/16/2012 02:57 PM James B. Jett
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR
CLAY COUNTY, FLORIDA
JASON and RACHELLE LANKHORST,
individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v. Case No.: 11-CA-963
WATER EQUIPMENT TECHNOLOGIES,
INC. OF FLORIDA, a Florida corporation, and
JEFFREY L. STANPHILL, an individual,
Defendants.
/
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME
TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Defendants, WATER EQUIPMENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. OF FLORIDA
(“WET”) and JEFFREY L. STANPHILL (“Stanphill”) (collectively, “Defendants”), pursuant
to Rule 1.090(b), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby file this Motion for Enlargement of Time
to Respond to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Class Action Complaint (“Motion”), and request an
extension of time of up to and including February 1, 2012, to respond to the First Amended Class
Action Complaint, and state as follows:
1. Plaintiffs, JASON and RACHELLE LANKHORST (“Plaintiffs”), filed their First
Amended Class Action Complaint on December 30, 2011 (“the Complaint”). Defendants’ response
to the Complaint is due on or before January 17, 2012.
2. This matter involves a purported class action lawsuit involving the one-time sale of a
water treatment device to the Plaintiffs.
3. The Defendants are presently in the process of developing and assembling defenses
and issues that will form the basis of their response to the Complaint, and are in need of additionaltime to gather the necessary facts underlying their response and conclude their and their counsel’s
assessment.
4. Simply put, the Defendants need enough time to properly and thoroughly investigate
each of the causes of action stated against them so that they may proceed in good faith and with a
valid basis. Further, the Defendants do not want to waste the Court’s or Plaintiff’s time in having to
later move for leave to amend or re-plead their response because they did not have enough time to
adequately prepare it. The requested additional time will necessarily assist the Defendants in their
efforts to avoid wasting time and judicial resources in the future.
5. Additionally, due to Defendants’ counsel’s case load, scheduling conflicts, and
vacation schedule, Defendants’ counsel is in need of additional time to adequately prepare a
response to the Complaint.
6. This Motion is not submitted for the purposes of delay, but rather, to allow counsel
the additional time necessary to file an appropriate response to the Complaint.
7. No party to this matter will be prejudiced or harmed in any way by the granting of
this request for an enlargement of time.
8. Pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.090(b), “[W]hen an act is required or allowed to be
done at or within a specified time by order of court, by these rules, or by notice given thereunder,
for cause shown the court at any time in its discretion (1) with or without notice, may order the
period enlarged if request therefor is made before the expiration of the period originally
prescribed or as extended by a previous order...” Fla.R.Civ.P. Rule 1.090(b). Further, it is
within the trial court’s sound discretion to grant the relief requested. See CPI Mfg. Co., Inc. v.
Industrias St. Jack's, S.A. De C.V., 870 So. 2d 89, 91 -92 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003) (the tule is a
discretionary rule); see also Goldy v. Corbett Cranes Services, Inc., 692 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 5thDCA 1997) (recognizing that timely requests for extensions of time effectively toll the
prescribed period to act pending a ruling on the motion); Pinnacle Corp. Of Cent. Florida, Inc. v.
RL. Jernigan Sandblasting & Painting, Inc., 718 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (holding that
the entry of a default judgment was inappropriate pending resolution of a motion to extend time).
9. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 1.090(b), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendants
respectfully request that the Court grant them an extension of time of up to and including
February 1, 2012, within which to serve their response to Plaintiff’s Complaint.
10. Counsel for Defendants contacted Plaintiffs’ counsel on January 13, 2012,
concerning the relief requested herein, and as of the filing of this motion, Plaintiffs’ counsel has
not yet agreed to the relief requested.
WHEREFORE, Defendants, WATER EQUIPMENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. OF
FLORIDA and JEFFREY L. STANPHILL, respectfully request this Court enter an Order
granting them an enlargement of time of up to and including February 1, 2012, within which to
serve their response to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Class Action Complaint and grant such other and
further relief as this Court may deem necessary and proper.
Dated: January 16, 2012.
/s/ Jason H. Klein
DANIEL H. COULTOFF, ESQ.
Florida Bar No.: 994480
JASON H. KLEIN, ESQ.
Florida Bar No.: 0016687
LATHAM, SHUKER,
EDEN & BEAUDINE, LLP
111 N. Magnolia Avenue, Suite 1400
Orlando, Florida 32801
Tel.: (407) 481-5800
Fax: (407) 481-5801
Attorneys for DefendantsCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on January 16, 2012, a true and accurate copy of the
foregoing was filed using the Court’s ECF filing system, which will send notice to all counsel of
record.
/s/ Jason H. Klein
JASON H. KLEIN, ESQ.
Preview
E-Filed 01/16/2012 02:57 PM James B. Jett IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR CLAY COUNTY, FLORIDA JASON and RACHELLE LANKHORST, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Case No.: 11-CA-963 WATER EQUIPMENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. OF FLORIDA, a Florida corporation, and JEFFREY L. STANPHILL, an individual, Defendants. / DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT Defendants, WATER EQUIPMENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. OF FLORIDA (“WET”) and JEFFREY L. STANPHILL (“Stanphill”) (collectively, “Defendants”), pursuant to Rule 1.090(b), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby file this Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Class Action Complaint (“Motion”), and request an extension of time of up to and including February 1, 2012, to respond to the First Amended Class Action Complaint, and state as follows: 1. Plaintiffs, JASON and RACHELLE LANKHORST (“Plaintiffs”), filed their First Amended Class Action Complaint on December 30, 2011 (“the Complaint”). Defendants’ response to the Complaint is due on or before January 17, 2012. 2. This matter involves a purported class action lawsuit involving the one-time sale of a water treatment device to the Plaintiffs. 3. The Defendants are presently in the process of developing and assembling defenses and issues that will form the basis of their response to the Complaint, and are in need of additionaltime to gather the necessary facts underlying their response and conclude their and their counsel’s assessment. 4. Simply put, the Defendants need enough time to properly and thoroughly investigate each of the causes of action stated against them so that they may proceed in good faith and with a valid basis. Further, the Defendants do not want to waste the Court’s or Plaintiff’s time in having to later move for leave to amend or re-plead their response because they did not have enough time to adequately prepare it. The requested additional time will necessarily assist the Defendants in their efforts to avoid wasting time and judicial resources in the future. 5. Additionally, due to Defendants’ counsel’s case load, scheduling conflicts, and vacation schedule, Defendants’ counsel is in need of additional time to adequately prepare a response to the Complaint. 6. This Motion is not submitted for the purposes of delay, but rather, to allow counsel the additional time necessary to file an appropriate response to the Complaint. 7. No party to this matter will be prejudiced or harmed in any way by the granting of this request for an enlargement of time. 8. Pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.090(b), “[W]hen an act is required or allowed to be done at or within a specified time by order of court, by these rules, or by notice given thereunder, for cause shown the court at any time in its discretion (1) with or without notice, may order the period enlarged if request therefor is made before the expiration of the period originally prescribed or as extended by a previous order...” Fla.R.Civ.P. Rule 1.090(b). Further, it is within the trial court’s sound discretion to grant the relief requested. See CPI Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Industrias St. Jack's, S.A. De C.V., 870 So. 2d 89, 91 -92 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003) (the tule is a discretionary rule); see also Goldy v. Corbett Cranes Services, Inc., 692 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 5thDCA 1997) (recognizing that timely requests for extensions of time effectively toll the prescribed period to act pending a ruling on the motion); Pinnacle Corp. Of Cent. Florida, Inc. v. RL. Jernigan Sandblasting & Painting, Inc., 718 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (holding that the entry of a default judgment was inappropriate pending resolution of a motion to extend time). 9. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 1.090(b), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendants respectfully request that the Court grant them an extension of time of up to and including February 1, 2012, within which to serve their response to Plaintiff’s Complaint. 10. Counsel for Defendants contacted Plaintiffs’ counsel on January 13, 2012, concerning the relief requested herein, and as of the filing of this motion, Plaintiffs’ counsel has not yet agreed to the relief requested. WHEREFORE, Defendants, WATER EQUIPMENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. OF FLORIDA and JEFFREY L. STANPHILL, respectfully request this Court enter an Order granting them an enlargement of time of up to and including February 1, 2012, within which to serve their response to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Class Action Complaint and grant such other and further relief as this Court may deem necessary and proper. Dated: January 16, 2012. /s/ Jason H. Klein DANIEL H. COULTOFF, ESQ. Florida Bar No.: 994480 JASON H. KLEIN, ESQ. Florida Bar No.: 0016687 LATHAM, SHUKER, EDEN & BEAUDINE, LLP 111 N. Magnolia Avenue, Suite 1400 Orlando, Florida 32801 Tel.: (407) 481-5800 Fax: (407) 481-5801 Attorneys for DefendantsCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on January 16, 2012, a true and accurate copy of the foregoing was filed using the Court’s ECF filing system, which will send notice to all counsel of record. /s/ Jason H. Klein JASON H. KLEIN, ESQ.