Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jones v. Hartford Life Group Insurance

August 7, 2006

JAMES JEFFREY JONES, PLAINTIFF,
v.
HARTFORD LIFE GROUP INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Curtis L. Collier

ORDER

Before the Court is a motion to continue oral argument currently scheduled for August 9, 2006 (Court File No. 24).*fn1 On December 22, 2005, the Court entered a scheduling order setting the deadlines in this case (Court File No. 12). Pursuant to the Court's order, Plaintiff was required to file a brief stating the grounds on which benefits or other relief was claimed within ninety days after Defendant filed its notice of service of the ERISA record and oral argument was set for June 14, 2006 (Id. at ¶¶ 5, 8). Plaintiff, without objection from defense counsel, requested an extension of time to file his brief because "the defendant and the plaintiff are discussing settlement possibilities" (Court File No. 14). To accommodate the parties, the Court granted the motion and gave Plaintiff until May 19, 2006 to file the brief (Court File No. 15).

Instead of filing the brief on May 19, 2006, Plaintiff again requested additional time because "plaintiff and defendant are actively engaged in settlement negations (sic)" (Court File No. 16). The Court again granted Plaintiff's request (Court File No. 17). The same day the Court granted Plaintiff's second request for more time to file a brief, the parties filed a joint motion asking the Court to move oral argument from June 14, 2006 to August 9, 2006 (Court File No. 19). The Court granted the parties' motion and set oral argument on August 9, 2006 (Court File No. 20).

On August 7, 2006, two days before oral argument, Plaintiff requests the Court continue oral argument for ten days because "[t]he parties have been diligently working on settlement, and continue negotiating the claim" (Court File No. 24). While the Court encourages settlement discussions, it will not grant another continuance in this matter. The Court has already extended multiple deadlines to aid the parties in their settlement discussions. The Court's generosity has not resulted in a settlement of Plaintiff's claims. Further delay, the Court believes, would not be beneficial. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion to continue oral argument is DENIED (Court File No. 24).

SO ORDERED. ENTER:

CURTIS L. COLLIER CHIEF UNITED STATES ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.