From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. EEOC v. Lockheed Martin Global Telecomm

United States District Court, D. Maryland
Jun 14, 2007
Case number: 05cv287 RWT (D. Md. Jun. 14, 2007)

Opinion

Case number: 05cv287 RWT.

June 14, 2007


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER


The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff's Motion Seeking Leave to File a Brief in Excess of 50 Pages in Response to Defendant's Second Motion for Summary Judgment on the Age Discrimination Claims [Paper No. 159], which was filed contemporaneously with Plaintiff's 77-page opposition to Defendant's Second Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendant consents to Plaintiff's motion, provided that it is granted an equal reprieve from the apparently stifling limitations (25 pages) of Local Rule 105.3, and permitted to file a 38-page reply.

The Court has already granted leave to the Defendant to file two summary judgment motions, with each motion permitted the full allotment of pages under Local Rule 105.3. See Paper No. 117. Mercifully, the Defendant's second Motion is a mere 47 pages in length.

Under the parties' proposal, the Court could expect to receive a total of 162 pages in support of and in opposition to Defendant's second motion, putting aside the hundreds (if not thousands) of pages of exhibits accompanying those memoranda, and the 104 pages already consumed in the filings on the first motion.

The Court cannot help but be reminded of a poem by Justice Joseph Story, entitled "Advice to a Young Lawyer," written in 1831:

Be brief, be pointed; let your matter stand
Lucid in order, solid, and at hand;
Spend not your words on trifles, but condense;
Strike with the mass of thought, not drops of sense;
Press to the close with vigor, once begun,
And leave, (how hard the task!) leave off, when done.
Who draws a labored length of reasoning out,
Puts straws in line, for winds to whirl about;
Who drawls a tedious tale of learning o'er,
Counts but the sands on ocean's boundless shore.
Victory in law is gain'd, as battles fought,
Not by the numbers, but the forces brought.
What boots success in skirmish or in fray,
If rout and ruin following close the day?
What worth a hundred posts maintained with skill,
If these all held, the foe is victor still?
He, who would win his cause, with power must frame
Points of support, and look with steady aim;
Attack the weak, defend the strong with art,
Strike but few blows, but strike them to the heart;
All scatter'd fires, but end in smoke and noise,
The scorn of men, the idle play of boys.
Keep, then, this first great precept ever near,
Short be your speech, your matter strong and clear,
Earnest your manner, warm and rich your style,
Severe in taste, yet full of grace the while;
So may you reach the loftiest heights of fame,
And leave, when life is past, a deathless name.

LIFE AND LETTERS OF JOSEPH STORY: ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES AND DANE PROFESSOR OF LAW AT HARVARD UNIVERSITY 88 (William Wetmore Story ed., Charles C. Little and James Brown 1851).

Unfortunately, the Court's earlier generosity in permitting two summary judgment motions has been rewarded by a seemingly endless avalanche of paper. The Court is understandably reluctant to permit the parties to continuing drowning each other, and the Court, in reams of paper. The Court ultimately concludes, however, that it would be an inefficient use of governmental resources to force Plaintiff to significantly revise and refile its opposition. While, in the interest of fairness, the Court will likewise grant Defendant's request to file a 38-page reply, the Court urges Defendant to "state [its] cause in a clear, simple, and succinct manner, and then stop." Jungwirth v. Jungwirth, 240 P. 222, 223 (Or. 1925).

Accordingly, it is, this 14th day of June, 2007, by the United States District Court for the District of Maryland,

ORDERED, that Plaintiff's Motion Seeking Leave to File a Brief in Excess of 50 Pages in Response to Defendant's Second Motion for Summary Judgment on the Age Discrimination Claims [Paper No. 159] is GRANTED, albeit reluctantly; and it is further

ORDERED, that Plaintiff's Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Second Motion for Summary Judgment on the Age Discrimination Claims [Paper No. 159-2] is deemed FILED; and it is further

ORDERED, that Defendant is granted leave (but is not required) to file a reply, not to exceed 38 pages, on or before July 9, 2007.


Summaries of

U.S. EEOC v. Lockheed Martin Global Telecomm

United States District Court, D. Maryland
Jun 14, 2007
Case number: 05cv287 RWT (D. Md. Jun. 14, 2007)
Case details for

U.S. EEOC v. Lockheed Martin Global Telecomm

Case Details

Full title:U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Plaintiff v. LOCKHEED MARTIN…

Court:United States District Court, D. Maryland

Date published: Jun 14, 2007

Citations

Case number: 05cv287 RWT (D. Md. Jun. 14, 2007)