Daniel Danforth Krueger - Page 4

                                                 - 4 -                                                    

            Court urged petitioner to present to respondent prior to the                                  
            dates on which briefs were due any documents that he claimed                                  
            supported his positions on the issues in this case, but that he                               
            did not present as evidence at trial.  The Court also urged                                   
            respondent to give serious consideration to any such documenta-                               
            tion that petitioner provided to her after trial, with a view to                              
            settling some or all of the issues herein.                                                    
                  On January 11, 1996, petitioner filed a motion for an                                   
            extension of time within which to file his opening brief in this                              
            case (petitioner's motion for an extension).  Due to its inabil-                              
            ity to reach petitioner, the Court was not able to hold a tele-                               
            phonic conference with the parties regarding petitioner's motion                              
            for an extension until January 17, 1996.  During that telephonic                              
            conference, petitioner acknowledged that he had thus far pre-                                 
            sented no documentation whatsoever to respondent in an attempt to                             
            settle some or all of the issues in this case.  During that same                              
            telephonic conference, petitioner made general allegations                                    
            relating to his inability to present documentation to respondent.                             
            Petitioner further indicated that he might obtain an affidavit                                
            from a doctor that he would send to the Court.  No such affidavit                             
            was ever received by the Court.  On January 18, 1996, the Court                               
            denied petitioner's motion for an extension.  However, since the                              
            date on which simultaneous opening briefs were due, viz., January                             
            12, 1996, had passed by the time the Court was able to have a                                 





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011