- 5 -
Petitioners’ Challenge to Respondent’s Briefs
On the basis of Rule 151(b), Time for Filing Briefs,
petitioners argue that we must disregard respondent’s opening
brief because respondent filed that brief 1 day late and did not
move before the due date for an extension of time to file.
Petitioners also argue that, because respondent “failed to file”
an opening brief and did not seek leave of the Court to file a
reply brief, he is not permitted to file a reply brief. See Rule
151(b).
Petitioners argue that respondent should have filed his
opening brief no later than August 15, 2005, the last day of the
60-day period allotted by the Court for such filings at the
conclusion of the trial on June 15, 2005, even though the trial
transcript furnished to the parties records both the trial clerk
and the Court as stating that due date to be August 16, 2005, the
date upon which respondent’s opening brief was actually filed.
Because the Court identified a due date one day after the
close of the 60-day period allocated by the Court for the filing
of opening briefs, the Court must accept some responsibility for
the tardiness, if any, in respondent’s filing of his opening
brief. Moreover, 1 day is negligible, and we do not believe that
it prejudiced petitioners in preparing their answering brief. In
fact, petitioners do not allege that they were so prejudiced;
they allege only that we “must strike and disregard” respondent’s
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007