Preview
NO: UWY-CV-21-5028294-S : COMPLEX LITIGATION DKT
NANCY BURTON : JUDICIAL DISTRICT WATERBURY
v. : AT WATERBURY, CONNECTICUT
DAVID PHILIP MASON : JULY 26, 2021
BEFORE THE HONORABLE BARBARA N. BELLIS, JUDGE
APPEARANCES
Self -Represented Plaintiff
NANCY BURTON
Representing the Defendant:
ATTORNEY ROBERT HILLSON
53 State Street
Boston, MA 02109
Representing the Defendant Carmody & Gibbon:
ATTORNEY PHILIP NEWBURY
Howd & Ludorf
Representing the Defendant Winters:
ATTORNEY STEVE BANKS
Melick & Porter
900 Main Street South, Suite 102
Southbury, Connecticut 06488
Representing Town of Redding:
ATTORNEY JAMES TALLBERG
Karsten & Tallberg, LLC
500 Enterprise Drive, Suite 4b
Rocky Hill, Connecticut 06067
Representing Town Counsel:
ATTORNEY STEVE STAFSTROM
Pullman & Comley, LLC
Representing Department of Agriculture:
ATTORNEY JONATHAN HARDING
165 Capitol Avenue, 5t* floor
Hartford, Connecticut 06106
Recorded By:
Darlene Orsatti
Transcribed By:
Darlene Orsatti
Court Recording Monitor
400 Grand Street
Waterbury, CT 0670210
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
THE COURT: All right. It’s almost afternoon.
Good afternoon everyone, this is Judge Bellis. We’re
on the record in Burton versus Mason. Waterbury
Complex Litigation Docket No. 215028294. I’m going
to run through the list of parties and get counsel’s
and plaintiff’s appearance. But just as a gentle
reminder, make sure your device is muted. I see
there are quite a few people whose devices are not
muted. And I try to mute mine as well, unless I’m
asking a lot of questions, so that we don’t get
feedback.
Also as a courtesy to the Court Reporter, each
time you address the Court, just restate your name
for the record, since there is quite a few of us and
it will be easier for the Court Reporter to take down
who is speaking. So - and I see most of your names
and faces, but I do want it done on the record,
because I want to make sure I have everyone’s video
too. And when you speak generally your video will
come on the screen. So for the plaintiff Nancy
Burton.
MS. BURTON: Yes, good morning.
THE COURT: Good morning. For the defendant
David Mason.
ATTY. HILLSON: Robert Hillson, your Honor.
THE COURT: Just looking for your picture. Here
we are. Good afternoon. For the defendant’s Carmody10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
and Gibbon.
ATTY. NEWBURY: Philip Newbury, your Honor.
THE COURT: Good afternoon.
ATTY. NEWBURY: Good afternoon.
THE COURT: For the defendant Winters.
ATTY. BANKS: Steve Banks from Melick and
Porter.
THE COURT: Good afternoon. For the Redding
defendant’s.
ATTY. TALLBERG: Good morning, your Honor.
James Tallberg. I’m at the desk of my colleague
Attorney Kim Bosse. I’m in her office. We’ve had
some computer issues this morning, so if our system
crashes, we’ll try to dial right back in. I’m for
the Redding defendant’s, along with our town
attorney.
THE COURT: Okay.
ATTY. STAFSTROM: Steve Stafstrom, Town Counsel,
your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Good afternoon. An
then for the state defendant’s.
ATTY. HARDING: Good afternoon, your Honor.
Jonathan Harding.
THE COURT: Here were are. And I don’t thi
d
nk
I’ve missed any appearances. All right. So I did
spend a lot of time yesterday going through the
pleadings to try to straighten everything out.
So,
I10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
just note that the pro hac application I have
diaried, so I will rule on that when I said I would
rule on it. I’ve also did that briefing schedule for
the plaintiff's motion for limited discovery. I see
there are a few objections in already. They weren’t
even due yet, but I have that briefing schedule as
well, and I will make sure I rule on that. So what
I’d like to do is to go through each set of parties
and make sure I’m understanding properly what the
status of the pleadings are. And to enter briefing
schedules, if it needs to be done.
I will tell you that since my last briefing
schedule, it looks like everyone’s been really busy.
Since that time there had been subsequent motions to
dismiss filed. So we need to get those briefed. But
I am - and I see that we had ours scheduled for
August 18t®, I’m going to move that August 18*
argument date to our September date, because all the
motions to dismiss will be argued at the same time.
So I’m not going to argue a couple of them in August,
and then a couple in September. It just won’t work
well.
So I’m going to - I have it in the order that I
looked at it. So I’m going to hear from the
defendant first, and then I’1l hear from Ms. Burton
just to make sure that I have it right. This is your
opportunity to tell me either that I’ve got it wrong,10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
and then we can address what needs to be filed.
So for the Winters defendant, Attorney Banks, I
don’t see that any pleadings have been filed yet.
ATTY. BANKS: Yeah, we just filed an appearance
a week ago today, So...
THE COURT: Okay. So I guess what I’m trying to
say is if you’re going to get on board any motion to
dismiss, whether it’s a subject matter or a special
motion to dismiss, I need to get that - those dates
briefed, so that I can impede you. I don’t want to
keep moving this argument date.
ATTY. BANKS: Absolutely.
THE COURT: Every time. So do you know yet
whether you -
ATTY. BANKS: I don’t know yet. I’m actually
not the attorney. I’m filing in. He’s away, so he
gets back tomorrow. But, I’m sure looking at all
these motions, we’re probably going to be involved
somewhat.
THE COURT: All right. So I don’t want to put
you on the spot either. But if it turns out that
you’re going to file any kind of motion to dismiss,
and you’re not going to be able to work with Ms.
Burton and get it fully briefed, and to me in time to
review before your argument date, you’re going to
have to figure out a way to make that happen. I
don’t want all -— because I am going to hear all the10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
motions to dismiss at once. And I really don’t want
to have to bump everybody again. So -—
ATTY. BANKS: And that’s in December you were
saying?
THE COURT: No, no, September. So our next —- we
originally were going to argue them August 18*, but
because of the additional motions to dismiss that
were filed, it looks like our next date, I think we
were going to argue them the 18th. It might have
been September 13th. So we - I’m going to argue all
the motions to dismiss on September 13t8. Might have
been when we had them anyway. But so make every
effort to have yours fully briefed by then.
ATTY. BANKS: Absolutely. Okay.
THE COURT: If not, I’m going to end up moving
all of them again. Okay. Ms. Burton, did you have
anything to add on that, or are you okay. with that
game plan?
MS. BURTON: So far it’s fine.
THE COURT: Okay. All right. So that is that
defendant. Then I have the Mason defendant’s. So
what I have on that, Attorney Hillson and Ms. Burton,
is I have it looks like the special motion to dismiss
has been filed, objected to and we just need a reply.
Does that sound correct, Attorney Hillson?
ATTY. HILLSON: Yes, your Honor. We’re filing a
reply today and then we also filed a third - or not a10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
third special motion to dismiss, but a special motion
to dismiss the second amended complaint. So that
will -
THE COURT: Well, here’s what I want. So we
have an operative compliant, right? I want to make
sure it’s going to be very easy for me to make a
mistake and to get the entry numbers and motions
wrong. So what I’m going to - what I’1l1 do now is,
I’1l ask you and Attorney Ferraro, we’ll write this
down. Your - the only special motion to dismiss that
you’re going to argue, what is the date and the entry
number? I think I have the third one was July 15th -
ATTY. HILLSON: I believe it was filed on the
15th,
THE COURT: And it was entry number 144 and 145.
So that is your operative special motion to dismiss
Attorney Hillson? Because I’m sure not going to go
back and read two prior ones. I’m going to read one
for each set of defendant’s.
ATTY. HILLSON: Yes, your Honor. I actually
incorporated the new arguments into the new one that
was filed, so you can just read that one brief and
you don’t have to go back and read the other ones.
THE COURT: That’s all I am going to read. Now
the plaintiff, Ms. Burton, I see that your objection
was actually filed at entry numbers 139 to 142. So
your objection was actually filed before the third10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
motion to dismiss. So it looks to me either you're
going to adopt that objection, or you’re going to
refile your objection. Because it looks like your
objection was filed to the second special motion to
dismiss. So would you like an opportunity to refile
your objection to the third special motion to
dismiss?
MS. BURTON: Yes, I would. Thank you.
THE COURT: All right. So when would - when do
you plan on doing that?
MS. BURTON: Well, I was looking at my calendar,
and the hearing has been moved, so maybe we have a
little bit more flexibility. But I was going to be
requesting that I file a supplemental documents as
appropriate by the 6t® of August.
THE COURT: So here’s how - let me just say,
here’s how I operate. I have one special motion to
dismiss. I’m going to have one objection and then
I’m going to have one reply. So I will not jump
around to 18 different parts of a file. Look for
exhibits, supplemental exhibits. Anything that is
going to be filed will be filed in connection with
the original pleading. Okay. So it looks like since
there is a third special motion to dismiss, that you
want to file your objection to that. And that’s at
entry number 144 and 145.
So I’m simply trying to get a date from you. It10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23)
24
ao}
26
27
was filed on July 15t8. You propose a date that
works for you, for you to file your objection, and
then we’ll get a date for Attorney Hillson to file
his reply.
MS. BURTON: Yes. I was looking at August 6th
before we began our proceedings today. August 13th
would work better for me, but I’m -
THE COURT: All right. I think August 13 is
fine. It’s not even 30 days from the filing. So
that’s fine. And Attorney Hillson, your reply?
ATTY. HILLSON: We won’t need much time, your
Honor, to -
THE COURT: Just give me a date. I’m just going
to diary it and just give me a date.
ATTY. HILLSON: I’m sorry, bear with me for one
second,
THE COURT: That’s all right.
ATTY. HILLSON: The 27th, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. So for the Mason
defendant, the plaintiff’s objection will be filed on
or before August 13. And the defendant’s reply will
be filed on or before August 27th. And Attorney
Ferraro, I am - I know as jetlagged as you are from
your lovely vacation in Greece, this is a big ask.
But I’m going to ask you to keep notes on the filing
dates. Welcome back, by the way. Okay.
So let’s move on. Just give me one moment. You10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
know I’m actually dairying this as we speak, because
as your pleadings come in it will pop up for me to
review your filing. So I actually diary them for the
due dates. So I will say these are Court ordered
deadlines. I’m certainly happy to get your input,
and I’m happy to try to work with your suggested
timeframes. But once I order them I expect them in
on the order date.
Okay. So now let’s go to the next set of
defendant’s on my list. I have Carmody and Gibbons
defendants. I have, it looks like a fully briefed
special motion to dismiss. So what I have for
Attorney Ferraro’s notes, and just for clarification,
and you'll correct me if I’m wrong. I have the
special motion to dismiss filed on June 10, entry
numbers 115, 116, 116.
ATTY. NEWBURY: Correct.
THE COURT: Then I have July 12, 2021 filing at
138. What is that, Attorney Newbury?
ATTY. NEWBURY: That was I did a supplemental
motion addressed to her second amended complaint,
which was -
THE COURT: So I don’t - that’s - I’m going to
stop you right there. So I just - I want a good
appellate record, and I want to make it so that it is
hard for me to make a mistake. And I can tell you it
is easy to make a mistake in this case already. So10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
10
I’m not doing supplements. I’m not doing - so
there’s going to be - like I said, I know I don’t
need to repeat myself. So if you’re telling me in
only need to look at your entry number 138 filed on
July 12th, I will do that. What I’m not going to do
is look at two different sets.
So do you want to refile or how do you want to
do it?
ATTY. NEWBURY: Well, I want to make sure we’re
making a correct appellate record as well, your
Honor. And here’s my concern. After we filed and
fully briefed our special motion to dismiss on June
10th, the plaintiff filed a second amended complaint.
And I was concerned that my original motion was not
directed to that. So, I have briefed all of the
allegations she’s made in her second amended
complaint in my reply brief, which is number 147
filed on July 21. It’s - whatever’s easiest for your
Honor. It’s the ~ the issues are fully briefed.
THE COURT: All right. So if I can look then
for you. If I am only looking at your July 12 filing
at 138. The plaintiff’s objections at 139 to 142 and
it looks like 146. And your reply that was filed on
July 21st, which is 147. That’s fine for me.
ATTY. NEWBURY: Well, except that my original
memo, which is 115, 116, you would also need to look
at, unless if you prefer, I will do a memo in support10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
11
of number 138 file the supplemental memo and
incorporate all of the arguments that have already
been made. I’m just - I’m not trying to create more
work for you. I’m trying to make it easier for you,
but I want to make sure the record is clear here.
THE COURT: Once there was a new operative
complaint, wouldn’t there just be a new special
motion to dismiss directed to the new operative
complaint?
ATTY. NEWBURY: That’s what I filed as 138, was
THE COURT: Right.
ATTY. NEWBURY: - motion to dismiss directed to
that operative complaint, and I incorporated the
brief that I had previously filed. But if you
prefer, I can file a -
THE COURT: Did you incorporate it in writing in
138?
ATTY. NEWBURY: No. It’s not in 138. It’s
incorporated by reference at 138. I did not
actually -
THE COURT: All right. Well, let’s - let’s try
to make that work.
ATTY. NEWBURY: All right.
THE COURT: But it’s going to be incumbent upon
you when you argue this to make sure that you make
sure that you make it crystal clear.10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
12
ATTY. NEWBURY: Understood.
THE COURT: Because it literally took me several
hours yesterday to even try to straighten out who
filed the subject matter motion to dismiss. Who
filed the special motion to dismiss? Who filed a
motion to strike? It could not have been more
confusing. So I’m happy to work with it this way.
But it’s incumbent upon you to remind me so that I
don’t miss your original filing. Ms. Burton, do you
agree that it’s fully briefed? It looks like you
filed your objection at 139, 142, 146 and then a
reply is filed at 147. Do you agree with that?
MS. BURTON: My understanding is that I have not
yet responded to the second filing of the Carmody and
Gibbons defendant’s, and what I would like to do is
simply present a refiling, that would incorporate
everything and avoid confusion.
THE COURT: All right. So your objection was
filed subsequent to his July 12**, but you did not -
I understand what you’re saying. All right. So do
you want to use the same deadlines that we used
before August 13th for your new objection? So I will
not be looking at 139 to 142 and 146. You’re going
to file a new objection and then Attorney Newbury can
either refile his original reply, or file a new
reply. So does that August 13t8 date work for you?
MS. BURTON: That would be fine.10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
13
THE COURT: Okay. Attorney Newbury, how does
August 27th work for you? I’m trying to keep the
same deadlines for everyone if we can.
ATTY. NEWBURY: That’s fine.
THE COURT: So I’m going to ask you Attorney
Newbury, in your new reply, not to incorporate your
old reply, especially since - yeah, just so I don’t
have to cross reference very much. Okay. And just
give me one moment.
I think what I’m going to do is, I’m going to
order a copy of the transcript and have it just filed
in the file. I’m not going to sign it like I would I
sign a decision. But I’1l just have it - I’11 order
it now and Attorney Ferraro just have it scanned in
the file, if you would. And this way if anybody
needs to go back and check on any of their filing
deadlines, it will be in writing. Okay.
So now I have the state defendant’s. I have it
looks like a motion to strike filed on June 1st at
106 and 107. But that we are going to hold off on
because there was a subject matter motion to dismiss.
So for that, I have a subject matter motion to
dismiss that was filed June 2274 at entry number 122.
I have the plaintiff's objection filed on July 22,
entry numbers 148 and 151. And it looks like a reply
is needed. So let me start with Attorney Harding.
Is that correct, Attorney Harding? And what is your10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23)
24
25"
26
27
14
proposal as to when you can file your reply?
ATTY. HARDING: Yes, judge. This is Jonathan
Harding for the state defendant’s. By my count, your
Honor, I have until August 5t to file my reply, and
I am on track to meet that deadline.
THE COURT: Okay. Attorney Burton, did I recite
correctly the filings to your understanding?
MS. BURTON: I believe that is correct, but, I
would also like to mention that I would like to file
a - refile my objection to the state filings, with
the same deadline. And incorporate new information
that has just been disclosed.
THE COURT: Well that’s unusual. This is the -
this is a subject matter motion to dismiss, right?
MS. BURTON: But it’s fact based. That’s right.
But it is fact based, and I have a fuller
understanding of the underlying facts, some of which
have been withheld, but have just within the past
week been released to me. And they’re critical to
the outcome, I believe.
THE COURT: Attorney Harding, do you have an
objection to that or no?
ATTY. HARDING: I do, your Honor. I would not
consent to that. I mean, it’s a subject matter
jurisdiction motion to dismiss. It’s based primarily
on sovereign immunity basis, and I don’t see any
facts that would change the merits of our motion.10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
15
Furthermore, as a practical matter I think it also
makes this litigation, which is already sort of
tricky, more complicated and harder to follow.
THE COURT: So —
MS. BURTON: May I respond, your Honor?
THE COURT: - here’s what I would say, Ms.
Burton, to that. I think that you can renew, if it
turns out at the argument, that evidence is needed,
that this is a motion to dismiss where evidence is
needed. You'll make that request and as I hear the
argument, if it is that kind of motion to dismiss
where you need an evidentiary hearing, then you would
have an opportunity to present your evidence that
way. So I don’t - I’m not precluding you from asking
for that. But I don’t - at this point I haven’t
looked at the motion to dismiss, so I don’t know if
your request is appropriate or not. So I’m going to
deny it - your request now. But remember, you have
the opportunity once the argument gets under the way,
to argue why evidence would be needed, okay? So make
sure you raise that with the Court at that time.
MS. BURTON: I’m just wondering if it wouldn’t
be more efficient for me to raise it now in a written
motion.
THE COURT: Well, I can’t stop you from filing
whatever you file. So you can file whatever it is
that you feel you have a good faith basis to file.10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
16
But that’s where I’m going to leave that discussion,
okay?
MS. BURTON: Thank you.
THE COURT: But certainly you can file whatever
you think you have a good basis to file.
So that leaves the last set of defendant’s. The
town set of defendant’s. But I first have to - so
let me go through what I believe the operative
pleadings are. But my question is, I know when we
originally started out, it was a hybrid motion and I
indicated that I don’t entertain hybrid motions. It
was entitled I believe, motion to dismiss and/or
motion to strike. So that in my mind is not
appropriate, so it was refiled as a motion to
dismiss.
What I don’t see, and I’m more than happy to
have Attorney Tallberg or whoever direct me to it. I
don’t see the basis under the Practice Book for the
motion to dismiss under 1030. So what I’m trying to
get at is, I didn’t see subject matter jurisdiction
in there. Maybe it is and you can point me to that,
so that the Court’s educated. But it’s either going
to be one of the - either lack of jurisdiction of the
subject matter over the person, insufficiency of
process, of insufficiency of service and process. So
I’m not sure that this motion - what category or
categories this motion to dismiss falls under, or if10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
17
fact it should be refiled as a motion to strike.
So let me first tell you what I believe the
operative pleadings are. What I think is needed.
And then the movant can tell me what the basis is.
Where I can find it in the filings. So I have the
document was refiled, as I said, as a motion to
dismiss on June 22.4, Entry numbers 123 and 124.
Then I have the plaintiff's objection, filed on July
2294, at 1:52. So my notes indicate that a reply was
needed.
So let me first ask Attorney Tallberg if she
agrees with those entry numbers, and where I can find
what the basis for the motion to dismiss is.
ATTY. TALLBERG: Sure. For the record, Attorney
Tallberg here for the Redding defendant’s. Yes, your
Honor, we understood that you were not going to
entertain the original motion to strike, the hybrid
motion. And I wasn’t sure if your Honor was going to
deny that without prejudice, or whether we should
rather withdraw that.
And I think since we subsequently filed the
motion to dismiss, which is based on collateral
estoppel essentially, we’re going to clean up the
record, withdraw that original motion to strike.
Plaintiff had filed the reply to our most recent
motion to dismiss, and I understand our ~- she filed
an objection, rather, in our reply I have calculated10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
18
for August 5, which we did propose to file.
THE COURT: So I guess what I’m asking you is,
where in your new motion to dismiss filed at 123 or
124, are you reciting the basis for the motion to
dismiss? For example, subject matter jurisdiction.
Personal jurisdiction. Insufficiency of process. So
that’s what I’m trying to figure out to determine if
this is actually a proper motion to dismiss, or if it
should be something else.
So if you could direct me to that, I’d
appreciate it.
ATTY. TALLBERG: Yeah. It may not be
articulated in the motion, your Honor. It’s really a
collateral estoppel argument, and if I need to recast
it as a motion to strike, we could certainly do that.
THE COURT: Well, I’m not telling you what -
what I think I’m entitled to and what I think you
want to do for the Court is to just tell me what this
falls under, right? It’s going to fall - if it’s a
motion to dismiss, it’s going to fall under one of
those four categories. If it doesn’t properly fall
under one of those four categories, and I’m not
opining whether it does or doesn’t, then you would
want to recast it as motion to strike. But I - when
I just glanced at it, I just was trying to figure
out, okay, is this a subject matter jurisdiction? Is
this a personal jurisdiction? And I still don’t10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
19
know. So that’s what I need.
And I understand you're saying collateral
estoppel, but I think you need to refile. And if it
is a motion to dismiss, cite the basis. It’s a
subject matter or it’s a personal jurisdiction. If
it’s not, you’ll refile whatever request to revise or
motion to strike, whatever your next pleading is.
And it might be helpful - because I didn’t see it in
there. But again, I just scanned, I didn’t read
every word on this. That if it is a motion to
dismiss, that you have some case law saying why it’s
a motion to dismiss. Why the collateral estoppel is
an issue of subject matter jurisdiction. Or why
collateral estoppel affects personal jurisdiction.
I’m not opining, I’m just saying I need something in
there.
So I’m almost thinking that you probably just
want to refile for the third time, and hopefully the
third time’s a charm. And then we give the plaintiff
an opportunity to refile on objection. And then you
refile your reply. Does that sound like a plan to
you?
ATTY. TALLBERG: We can certainly do that,
especially if our argument is not until September.
THE COURT: Okay. So can you give me, and
Attorney Ferraro will write this down. Can you give
me a proposal as to when your next pleading will be10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
filed? Especially if we want to get it considered in
September. We want to give Ms. Burton enough time to
object. So whether it’s a motion to dismiss or it
could be a request to revise, or a motion to strike.
Whatever you want to categorize it as. So give me
a-
ATTY. TALLBERG: Can we do that for August 5,
your Honor? That’s when we had anticipated closing
briefing on this.
THE COURT: I think that’s more than reasonable.
With that August 5 deadline, Ms. Burton, what’s your
proposal as to when you would like to file a new
objection? It may be that you just refile the same
objection, or you may have to based on many different
arguments, you may have to actually draft a new one.
So just give yourself enough time.
MS. BURTON: Well, I’d be happy with August
19th,
THE COURT: That’s only two weeks from the
filing.
MS. BURTON: Well then let me go to the 26th.
THE COURT: I think that’s probably more
reasonable. And then a reply?
ATTY. TALLBERG: Within one week of that, your
Honor.
THE COURT: Okay. What’s that date, Attorney
Ferraro? I don’t have a calendar in front of me. A10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
21
week from August 26th. September 3°47? September 274.
Okay. September 2.4 it is. All right. So I think I
covered everything that I needed to cover. I’m going
to start with the plaintiff and see if there is
anything that’s been filed that the plaintiff needs,
either adjudicated now because it’s ready, or that a
briefing schedule is needed.
So Ms. Burton, starting with you. Is there
anything that you filed that you think is ready to be
adjudicated today, or anything that you filed that
needs a briefing schedule?
MS. BURTON: I think everything is covered, your
Honor.
THE COURT: Okay. And how about any of the
defendant’s? I think I did - I looked at everything,
so I think we covered everything. But I’m not saying
I couldn’t have missed something. Have any of the
defendant’s filed anything that they feel is ready to
be adjudicated today, or that needs a briefing
scheduled that I haven’t covered in detail? No.
Okay. That’s good news then. So then we made some
good progress.
So as I have it now, we will have argument on
the motions on September 13t® at 2 o’clock. It looks
like we should have everything fully briefed at that
point. And then we also have monthly status
conferences scheduled throughout the rest of 2021.10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
22
And when we get closer, I can’t even believe I’m
saying this, but when we get closer to 2022, we’1l
start getting those dates on the schedule for the
monthly status conferences. And as I always say, if
we have a status conference scheduled and none of the
parties have anything that they need to discuss, and
the Court doesn’t have anything, I’m more than happy
to mark it off by agreement.
I have a feeling that in the beginning of this
case we’re going to need these monthly status
conferences to get everything scheduled. But
certainly I don’t want to waste anyone’s time either.
So if we do get to a point where there’s nothing to
discuss, you can file something jointly. Okay. All
right. So, I hope everyone stays cool today, it’s
going to be hot one. And I will see you all next
month. All right. We are adjourned.
(The matter concluded. )NO: UWY-CV-21-5028294-S : COMPLEX LITIGATION DKT
NANCY BURTON : JUDICIAL DISTRICT WATERBURY
ve : AT WATERBURY, CONNECTICUT
DAVID PHILP MASON : JULY 26, 2021
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify the foregoing pages are a true and
correct transcription of the audio recording of the above-
referenced case, heard in Superior Court, G.A. #4, Waterbury,
Connecticut, before the Honorable Barbara Bellis, Judge, on the
26th day of July, 2021.
Dated this 30th day of July, 2021 in Waterbury,
nS
Darlene Orsatti
Court Recording Monitor
Connecticut.
Preview
NO: UWY-CV-21-5028294-S : COMPLEX LITIGATION DKT NANCY BURTON : JUDICIAL DISTRICT WATERBURY v. : AT WATERBURY, CONNECTICUT DAVID PHILIP MASON : JULY 26, 2021 BEFORE THE HONORABLE BARBARA N. BELLIS, JUDGE APPEARANCES Self -Represented Plaintiff NANCY BURTON Representing the Defendant: ATTORNEY ROBERT HILLSON 53 State Street Boston, MA 02109 Representing the Defendant Carmody & Gibbon: ATTORNEY PHILIP NEWBURY Howd & Ludorf Representing the Defendant Winters: ATTORNEY STEVE BANKS Melick & Porter 900 Main Street South, Suite 102 Southbury, Connecticut 06488 Representing Town of Redding: ATTORNEY JAMES TALLBERG Karsten & Tallberg, LLC 500 Enterprise Drive, Suite 4b Rocky Hill, Connecticut 06067 Representing Town Counsel: ATTORNEY STEVE STAFSTROM Pullman & Comley, LLC Representing Department of Agriculture: ATTORNEY JONATHAN HARDING 165 Capitol Avenue, 5t* floor Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Recorded By: Darlene Orsatti Transcribed By: Darlene Orsatti Court Recording Monitor 400 Grand Street Waterbury, CT 0670210 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 THE COURT: All right. It’s almost afternoon. Good afternoon everyone, this is Judge Bellis. We’re on the record in Burton versus Mason. Waterbury Complex Litigation Docket No. 215028294. I’m going to run through the list of parties and get counsel’s and plaintiff’s appearance. But just as a gentle reminder, make sure your device is muted. I see there are quite a few people whose devices are not muted. And I try to mute mine as well, unless I’m asking a lot of questions, so that we don’t get feedback. Also as a courtesy to the Court Reporter, each time you address the Court, just restate your name for the record, since there is quite a few of us and it will be easier for the Court Reporter to take down who is speaking. So - and I see most of your names and faces, but I do want it done on the record, because I want to make sure I have everyone’s video too. And when you speak generally your video will come on the screen. So for the plaintiff Nancy Burton. MS. BURTON: Yes, good morning. THE COURT: Good morning. For the defendant David Mason. ATTY. HILLSON: Robert Hillson, your Honor. THE COURT: Just looking for your picture. Here we are. Good afternoon. For the defendant’s Carmody10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 and Gibbon. ATTY. NEWBURY: Philip Newbury, your Honor. THE COURT: Good afternoon. ATTY. NEWBURY: Good afternoon. THE COURT: For the defendant Winters. ATTY. BANKS: Steve Banks from Melick and Porter. THE COURT: Good afternoon. For the Redding defendant’s. ATTY. TALLBERG: Good morning, your Honor. James Tallberg. I’m at the desk of my colleague Attorney Kim Bosse. I’m in her office. We’ve had some computer issues this morning, so if our system crashes, we’ll try to dial right back in. I’m for the Redding defendant’s, along with our town attorney. THE COURT: Okay. ATTY. STAFSTROM: Steve Stafstrom, Town Counsel, your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Good afternoon. An then for the state defendant’s. ATTY. HARDING: Good afternoon, your Honor. Jonathan Harding. THE COURT: Here were are. And I don’t thi d nk I’ve missed any appearances. All right. So I did spend a lot of time yesterday going through the pleadings to try to straighten everything out. So, I10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 just note that the pro hac application I have diaried, so I will rule on that when I said I would rule on it. I’ve also did that briefing schedule for the plaintiff's motion for limited discovery. I see there are a few objections in already. They weren’t even due yet, but I have that briefing schedule as well, and I will make sure I rule on that. So what I’d like to do is to go through each set of parties and make sure I’m understanding properly what the status of the pleadings are. And to enter briefing schedules, if it needs to be done. I will tell you that since my last briefing schedule, it looks like everyone’s been really busy. Since that time there had been subsequent motions to dismiss filed. So we need to get those briefed. But I am - and I see that we had ours scheduled for August 18t®, I’m going to move that August 18* argument date to our September date, because all the motions to dismiss will be argued at the same time. So I’m not going to argue a couple of them in August, and then a couple in September. It just won’t work well. So I’m going to - I have it in the order that I looked at it. So I’m going to hear from the defendant first, and then I’1l hear from Ms. Burton just to make sure that I have it right. This is your opportunity to tell me either that I’ve got it wrong,10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 and then we can address what needs to be filed. So for the Winters defendant, Attorney Banks, I don’t see that any pleadings have been filed yet. ATTY. BANKS: Yeah, we just filed an appearance a week ago today, So... THE COURT: Okay. So I guess what I’m trying to say is if you’re going to get on board any motion to dismiss, whether it’s a subject matter or a special motion to dismiss, I need to get that - those dates briefed, so that I can impede you. I don’t want to keep moving this argument date. ATTY. BANKS: Absolutely. THE COURT: Every time. So do you know yet whether you - ATTY. BANKS: I don’t know yet. I’m actually not the attorney. I’m filing in. He’s away, so he gets back tomorrow. But, I’m sure looking at all these motions, we’re probably going to be involved somewhat. THE COURT: All right. So I don’t want to put you on the spot either. But if it turns out that you’re going to file any kind of motion to dismiss, and you’re not going to be able to work with Ms. Burton and get it fully briefed, and to me in time to review before your argument date, you’re going to have to figure out a way to make that happen. I don’t want all -— because I am going to hear all the10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 motions to dismiss at once. And I really don’t want to have to bump everybody again. So -— ATTY. BANKS: And that’s in December you were saying? THE COURT: No, no, September. So our next —- we originally were going to argue them August 18*, but because of the additional motions to dismiss that were filed, it looks like our next date, I think we were going to argue them the 18th. It might have been September 13th. So we - I’m going to argue all the motions to dismiss on September 13t8. Might have been when we had them anyway. But so make every effort to have yours fully briefed by then. ATTY. BANKS: Absolutely. Okay. THE COURT: If not, I’m going to end up moving all of them again. Okay. Ms. Burton, did you have anything to add on that, or are you okay. with that game plan? MS. BURTON: So far it’s fine. THE COURT: Okay. All right. So that is that defendant. Then I have the Mason defendant’s. So what I have on that, Attorney Hillson and Ms. Burton, is I have it looks like the special motion to dismiss has been filed, objected to and we just need a reply. Does that sound correct, Attorney Hillson? ATTY. HILLSON: Yes, your Honor. We’re filing a reply today and then we also filed a third - or not a10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 third special motion to dismiss, but a special motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. So that will - THE COURT: Well, here’s what I want. So we have an operative compliant, right? I want to make sure it’s going to be very easy for me to make a mistake and to get the entry numbers and motions wrong. So what I’m going to - what I’1l1 do now is, I’1l ask you and Attorney Ferraro, we’ll write this down. Your - the only special motion to dismiss that you’re going to argue, what is the date and the entry number? I think I have the third one was July 15th - ATTY. HILLSON: I believe it was filed on the 15th, THE COURT: And it was entry number 144 and 145. So that is your operative special motion to dismiss Attorney Hillson? Because I’m sure not going to go back and read two prior ones. I’m going to read one for each set of defendant’s. ATTY. HILLSON: Yes, your Honor. I actually incorporated the new arguments into the new one that was filed, so you can just read that one brief and you don’t have to go back and read the other ones. THE COURT: That’s all I am going to read. Now the plaintiff, Ms. Burton, I see that your objection was actually filed at entry numbers 139 to 142. So your objection was actually filed before the third10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 motion to dismiss. So it looks to me either you're going to adopt that objection, or you’re going to refile your objection. Because it looks like your objection was filed to the second special motion to dismiss. So would you like an opportunity to refile your objection to the third special motion to dismiss? MS. BURTON: Yes, I would. Thank you. THE COURT: All right. So when would - when do you plan on doing that? MS. BURTON: Well, I was looking at my calendar, and the hearing has been moved, so maybe we have a little bit more flexibility. But I was going to be requesting that I file a supplemental documents as appropriate by the 6t® of August. THE COURT: So here’s how - let me just say, here’s how I operate. I have one special motion to dismiss. I’m going to have one objection and then I’m going to have one reply. So I will not jump around to 18 different parts of a file. Look for exhibits, supplemental exhibits. Anything that is going to be filed will be filed in connection with the original pleading. Okay. So it looks like since there is a third special motion to dismiss, that you want to file your objection to that. And that’s at entry number 144 and 145. So I’m simply trying to get a date from you. It10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23) 24 ao} 26 27 was filed on July 15t8. You propose a date that works for you, for you to file your objection, and then we’ll get a date for Attorney Hillson to file his reply. MS. BURTON: Yes. I was looking at August 6th before we began our proceedings today. August 13th would work better for me, but I’m - THE COURT: All right. I think August 13 is fine. It’s not even 30 days from the filing. So that’s fine. And Attorney Hillson, your reply? ATTY. HILLSON: We won’t need much time, your Honor, to - THE COURT: Just give me a date. I’m just going to diary it and just give me a date. ATTY. HILLSON: I’m sorry, bear with me for one second, THE COURT: That’s all right. ATTY. HILLSON: The 27th, your Honor. THE COURT: All right. So for the Mason defendant, the plaintiff’s objection will be filed on or before August 13. And the defendant’s reply will be filed on or before August 27th. And Attorney Ferraro, I am - I know as jetlagged as you are from your lovely vacation in Greece, this is a big ask. But I’m going to ask you to keep notes on the filing dates. Welcome back, by the way. Okay. So let’s move on. Just give me one moment. You10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 know I’m actually dairying this as we speak, because as your pleadings come in it will pop up for me to review your filing. So I actually diary them for the due dates. So I will say these are Court ordered deadlines. I’m certainly happy to get your input, and I’m happy to try to work with your suggested timeframes. But once I order them I expect them in on the order date. Okay. So now let’s go to the next set of defendant’s on my list. I have Carmody and Gibbons defendants. I have, it looks like a fully briefed special motion to dismiss. So what I have for Attorney Ferraro’s notes, and just for clarification, and you'll correct me if I’m wrong. I have the special motion to dismiss filed on June 10, entry numbers 115, 116, 116. ATTY. NEWBURY: Correct. THE COURT: Then I have July 12, 2021 filing at 138. What is that, Attorney Newbury? ATTY. NEWBURY: That was I did a supplemental motion addressed to her second amended complaint, which was - THE COURT: So I don’t - that’s - I’m going to stop you right there. So I just - I want a good appellate record, and I want to make it so that it is hard for me to make a mistake. And I can tell you it is easy to make a mistake in this case already. So10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 10 I’m not doing supplements. I’m not doing - so there’s going to be - like I said, I know I don’t need to repeat myself. So if you’re telling me in only need to look at your entry number 138 filed on July 12th, I will do that. What I’m not going to do is look at two different sets. So do you want to refile or how do you want to do it? ATTY. NEWBURY: Well, I want to make sure we’re making a correct appellate record as well, your Honor. And here’s my concern. After we filed and fully briefed our special motion to dismiss on June 10th, the plaintiff filed a second amended complaint. And I was concerned that my original motion was not directed to that. So, I have briefed all of the allegations she’s made in her second amended complaint in my reply brief, which is number 147 filed on July 21. It’s - whatever’s easiest for your Honor. It’s the ~ the issues are fully briefed. THE COURT: All right. So if I can look then for you. If I am only looking at your July 12 filing at 138. The plaintiff’s objections at 139 to 142 and it looks like 146. And your reply that was filed on July 21st, which is 147. That’s fine for me. ATTY. NEWBURY: Well, except that my original memo, which is 115, 116, you would also need to look at, unless if you prefer, I will do a memo in support10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 11 of number 138 file the supplemental memo and incorporate all of the arguments that have already been made. I’m just - I’m not trying to create more work for you. I’m trying to make it easier for you, but I want to make sure the record is clear here. THE COURT: Once there was a new operative complaint, wouldn’t there just be a new special motion to dismiss directed to the new operative complaint? ATTY. NEWBURY: That’s what I filed as 138, was THE COURT: Right. ATTY. NEWBURY: - motion to dismiss directed to that operative complaint, and I incorporated the brief that I had previously filed. But if you prefer, I can file a - THE COURT: Did you incorporate it in writing in 138? ATTY. NEWBURY: No. It’s not in 138. It’s incorporated by reference at 138. I did not actually - THE COURT: All right. Well, let’s - let’s try to make that work. ATTY. NEWBURY: All right. THE COURT: But it’s going to be incumbent upon you when you argue this to make sure that you make sure that you make it crystal clear.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 12 ATTY. NEWBURY: Understood. THE COURT: Because it literally took me several hours yesterday to even try to straighten out who filed the subject matter motion to dismiss. Who filed the special motion to dismiss? Who filed a motion to strike? It could not have been more confusing. So I’m happy to work with it this way. But it’s incumbent upon you to remind me so that I don’t miss your original filing. Ms. Burton, do you agree that it’s fully briefed? It looks like you filed your objection at 139, 142, 146 and then a reply is filed at 147. Do you agree with that? MS. BURTON: My understanding is that I have not yet responded to the second filing of the Carmody and Gibbons defendant’s, and what I would like to do is simply present a refiling, that would incorporate everything and avoid confusion. THE COURT: All right. So your objection was filed subsequent to his July 12**, but you did not - I understand what you’re saying. All right. So do you want to use the same deadlines that we used before August 13th for your new objection? So I will not be looking at 139 to 142 and 146. You’re going to file a new objection and then Attorney Newbury can either refile his original reply, or file a new reply. So does that August 13t8 date work for you? MS. BURTON: That would be fine.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 13 THE COURT: Okay. Attorney Newbury, how does August 27th work for you? I’m trying to keep the same deadlines for everyone if we can. ATTY. NEWBURY: That’s fine. THE COURT: So I’m going to ask you Attorney Newbury, in your new reply, not to incorporate your old reply, especially since - yeah, just so I don’t have to cross reference very much. Okay. And just give me one moment. I think what I’m going to do is, I’m going to order a copy of the transcript and have it just filed in the file. I’m not going to sign it like I would I sign a decision. But I’1l just have it - I’11 order it now and Attorney Ferraro just have it scanned in the file, if you would. And this way if anybody needs to go back and check on any of their filing deadlines, it will be in writing. Okay. So now I have the state defendant’s. I have it looks like a motion to strike filed on June 1st at 106 and 107. But that we are going to hold off on because there was a subject matter motion to dismiss. So for that, I have a subject matter motion to dismiss that was filed June 2274 at entry number 122. I have the plaintiff's objection filed on July 22, entry numbers 148 and 151. And it looks like a reply is needed. So let me start with Attorney Harding. Is that correct, Attorney Harding? And what is your10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23) 24 25" 26 27 14 proposal as to when you can file your reply? ATTY. HARDING: Yes, judge. This is Jonathan Harding for the state defendant’s. By my count, your Honor, I have until August 5t to file my reply, and I am on track to meet that deadline. THE COURT: Okay. Attorney Burton, did I recite correctly the filings to your understanding? MS. BURTON: I believe that is correct, but, I would also like to mention that I would like to file a - refile my objection to the state filings, with the same deadline. And incorporate new information that has just been disclosed. THE COURT: Well that’s unusual. This is the - this is a subject matter motion to dismiss, right? MS. BURTON: But it’s fact based. That’s right. But it is fact based, and I have a fuller understanding of the underlying facts, some of which have been withheld, but have just within the past week been released to me. And they’re critical to the outcome, I believe. THE COURT: Attorney Harding, do you have an objection to that or no? ATTY. HARDING: I do, your Honor. I would not consent to that. I mean, it’s a subject matter jurisdiction motion to dismiss. It’s based primarily on sovereign immunity basis, and I don’t see any facts that would change the merits of our motion.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 15 Furthermore, as a practical matter I think it also makes this litigation, which is already sort of tricky, more complicated and harder to follow. THE COURT: So — MS. BURTON: May I respond, your Honor? THE COURT: - here’s what I would say, Ms. Burton, to that. I think that you can renew, if it turns out at the argument, that evidence is needed, that this is a motion to dismiss where evidence is needed. You'll make that request and as I hear the argument, if it is that kind of motion to dismiss where you need an evidentiary hearing, then you would have an opportunity to present your evidence that way. So I don’t - I’m not precluding you from asking for that. But I don’t - at this point I haven’t looked at the motion to dismiss, so I don’t know if your request is appropriate or not. So I’m going to deny it - your request now. But remember, you have the opportunity once the argument gets under the way, to argue why evidence would be needed, okay? So make sure you raise that with the Court at that time. MS. BURTON: I’m just wondering if it wouldn’t be more efficient for me to raise it now in a written motion. THE COURT: Well, I can’t stop you from filing whatever you file. So you can file whatever it is that you feel you have a good faith basis to file.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 16 But that’s where I’m going to leave that discussion, okay? MS. BURTON: Thank you. THE COURT: But certainly you can file whatever you think you have a good basis to file. So that leaves the last set of defendant’s. The town set of defendant’s. But I first have to - so let me go through what I believe the operative pleadings are. But my question is, I know when we originally started out, it was a hybrid motion and I indicated that I don’t entertain hybrid motions. It was entitled I believe, motion to dismiss and/or motion to strike. So that in my mind is not appropriate, so it was refiled as a motion to dismiss. What I don’t see, and I’m more than happy to have Attorney Tallberg or whoever direct me to it. I don’t see the basis under the Practice Book for the motion to dismiss under 1030. So what I’m trying to get at is, I didn’t see subject matter jurisdiction in there. Maybe it is and you can point me to that, so that the Court’s educated. But it’s either going to be one of the - either lack of jurisdiction of the subject matter over the person, insufficiency of process, of insufficiency of service and process. So I’m not sure that this motion - what category or categories this motion to dismiss falls under, or if10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 17 fact it should be refiled as a motion to strike. So let me first tell you what I believe the operative pleadings are. What I think is needed. And then the movant can tell me what the basis is. Where I can find it in the filings. So I have the document was refiled, as I said, as a motion to dismiss on June 22.4, Entry numbers 123 and 124. Then I have the plaintiff's objection, filed on July 2294, at 1:52. So my notes indicate that a reply was needed. So let me first ask Attorney Tallberg if she agrees with those entry numbers, and where I can find what the basis for the motion to dismiss is. ATTY. TALLBERG: Sure. For the record, Attorney Tallberg here for the Redding defendant’s. Yes, your Honor, we understood that you were not going to entertain the original motion to strike, the hybrid motion. And I wasn’t sure if your Honor was going to deny that without prejudice, or whether we should rather withdraw that. And I think since we subsequently filed the motion to dismiss, which is based on collateral estoppel essentially, we’re going to clean up the record, withdraw that original motion to strike. Plaintiff had filed the reply to our most recent motion to dismiss, and I understand our ~- she filed an objection, rather, in our reply I have calculated10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 18 for August 5, which we did propose to file. THE COURT: So I guess what I’m asking you is, where in your new motion to dismiss filed at 123 or 124, are you reciting the basis for the motion to dismiss? For example, subject matter jurisdiction. Personal jurisdiction. Insufficiency of process. So that’s what I’m trying to figure out to determine if this is actually a proper motion to dismiss, or if it should be something else. So if you could direct me to that, I’d appreciate it. ATTY. TALLBERG: Yeah. It may not be articulated in the motion, your Honor. It’s really a collateral estoppel argument, and if I need to recast it as a motion to strike, we could certainly do that. THE COURT: Well, I’m not telling you what - what I think I’m entitled to and what I think you want to do for the Court is to just tell me what this falls under, right? It’s going to fall - if it’s a motion to dismiss, it’s going to fall under one of those four categories. If it doesn’t properly fall under one of those four categories, and I’m not opining whether it does or doesn’t, then you would want to recast it as motion to strike. But I - when I just glanced at it, I just was trying to figure out, okay, is this a subject matter jurisdiction? Is this a personal jurisdiction? And I still don’t10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 19 know. So that’s what I need. And I understand you're saying collateral estoppel, but I think you need to refile. And if it is a motion to dismiss, cite the basis. It’s a subject matter or it’s a personal jurisdiction. If it’s not, you’ll refile whatever request to revise or motion to strike, whatever your next pleading is. And it might be helpful - because I didn’t see it in there. But again, I just scanned, I didn’t read every word on this. That if it is a motion to dismiss, that you have some case law saying why it’s a motion to dismiss. Why the collateral estoppel is an issue of subject matter jurisdiction. Or why collateral estoppel affects personal jurisdiction. I’m not opining, I’m just saying I need something in there. So I’m almost thinking that you probably just want to refile for the third time, and hopefully the third time’s a charm. And then we give the plaintiff an opportunity to refile on objection. And then you refile your reply. Does that sound like a plan to you? ATTY. TALLBERG: We can certainly do that, especially if our argument is not until September. THE COURT: Okay. So can you give me, and Attorney Ferraro will write this down. Can you give me a proposal as to when your next pleading will be10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 20 filed? Especially if we want to get it considered in September. We want to give Ms. Burton enough time to object. So whether it’s a motion to dismiss or it could be a request to revise, or a motion to strike. Whatever you want to categorize it as. So give me a- ATTY. TALLBERG: Can we do that for August 5, your Honor? That’s when we had anticipated closing briefing on this. THE COURT: I think that’s more than reasonable. With that August 5 deadline, Ms. Burton, what’s your proposal as to when you would like to file a new objection? It may be that you just refile the same objection, or you may have to based on many different arguments, you may have to actually draft a new one. So just give yourself enough time. MS. BURTON: Well, I’d be happy with August 19th, THE COURT: That’s only two weeks from the filing. MS. BURTON: Well then let me go to the 26th. THE COURT: I think that’s probably more reasonable. And then a reply? ATTY. TALLBERG: Within one week of that, your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. What’s that date, Attorney Ferraro? I don’t have a calendar in front of me. A10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 21 week from August 26th. September 3°47? September 274. Okay. September 2.4 it is. All right. So I think I covered everything that I needed to cover. I’m going to start with the plaintiff and see if there is anything that’s been filed that the plaintiff needs, either adjudicated now because it’s ready, or that a briefing schedule is needed. So Ms. Burton, starting with you. Is there anything that you filed that you think is ready to be adjudicated today, or anything that you filed that needs a briefing schedule? MS. BURTON: I think everything is covered, your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. And how about any of the defendant’s? I think I did - I looked at everything, so I think we covered everything. But I’m not saying I couldn’t have missed something. Have any of the defendant’s filed anything that they feel is ready to be adjudicated today, or that needs a briefing scheduled that I haven’t covered in detail? No. Okay. That’s good news then. So then we made some good progress. So as I have it now, we will have argument on the motions on September 13t® at 2 o’clock. It looks like we should have everything fully briefed at that point. And then we also have monthly status conferences scheduled throughout the rest of 2021.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 22 And when we get closer, I can’t even believe I’m saying this, but when we get closer to 2022, we’1l start getting those dates on the schedule for the monthly status conferences. And as I always say, if we have a status conference scheduled and none of the parties have anything that they need to discuss, and the Court doesn’t have anything, I’m more than happy to mark it off by agreement. I have a feeling that in the beginning of this case we’re going to need these monthly status conferences to get everything scheduled. But certainly I don’t want to waste anyone’s time either. So if we do get to a point where there’s nothing to discuss, you can file something jointly. Okay. All right. So, I hope everyone stays cool today, it’s going to be hot one. And I will see you all next month. All right. We are adjourned. (The matter concluded. )NO: UWY-CV-21-5028294-S : COMPLEX LITIGATION DKT NANCY BURTON : JUDICIAL DISTRICT WATERBURY ve : AT WATERBURY, CONNECTICUT DAVID PHILP MASON : JULY 26, 2021 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify the foregoing pages are a true and correct transcription of the audio recording of the above- referenced case, heard in Superior Court, G.A. #4, Waterbury, Connecticut, before the Honorable Barbara Bellis, Judge, on the 26th day of July, 2021. Dated this 30th day of July, 2021 in Waterbury, nS Darlene Orsatti Court Recording Monitor Connecticut.