Leslie R. Barth - Page 10

                                                - 10 -                                                  
                  By notice served January 5, 1994, this case was set for                               
            trial in Hartford, Connecticut, on June 6, 1994.  On April 8,                               
            1994, petitioner filed a Motion for Continuance.  Petitioner                                
            represented that he was in the process of seeking to set aside a                            
            guilty verdict entered against him in the mail fraud case and                               
            that, therefore, he could not prepare for trial of this case.                               
                  On April 18, 1994, respondent filed a Motion to Compel                                
            Production of Documents, and, on April 25, 1994, respondent filed                           
            a Motion to Compel Responses to Respondent's Interrogatories.                               
            Respondent's Motion to Compel Production of Documents was                                   
            granted, and petitioner was ordered to produce the documents on                             
            or before May 6, 1994.  Respondent's motion with respect to                                 
            interrogatories was granted, and petitioner was ordered to                                  
            respond to the interrogatories on or before May 16, 1994.  The                              
            motions were set for hearing with respect to sanctions on June 6,                           
                  Meanwhile, on April 28, 1994, Ms. Barth filed a Motion to                             
            Consolidate this case with her case.  That motion was granted                               
            May 3, 1994.  In a subsequent telephone conference call among the                           
            parties and the Court, the Court indicated that petitioner's                                
            Motion for Continuance would be granted only if he cooperated                               
            with respondent with respect to the stipulation of facts and                                
            responded to the outstanding discovery.  Thereafter, Ms. Barth                              
            moved for a severance of the cases, representing that her                                   

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011