Rendered from the court's authenticated repository
Searchable full text
1,432 characters extracted
—
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
OF THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY
HIGHZSPEEDTRAIN,
Plaintiff,
v.
SHAUNATHAN_N,
Defendant.
Case No. RSC-CV-3374
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendant filed a counterclaim against the plaintiff. A response was ordered to be
delivered, and a deadline set. Plaintiff submitted a motion to dismiss the counterclaim within the
deadline, and the defendant was ordered to respond to that motion, and a deadline set. The
defendant did not respond to the motion to dismiss within the deadline.
Defendant argues that as he resides in the Central timezone of North America, that time
ought to apply to his deadlines. Previous deadlines imposed by the court were in the Eastern
timezone of North America. If the deadline was construed in the Central timezone, the response
would be on time. There is no indication for the court that this would be different for this
deadline. The court is of the opinion that deadlines are typically consistent, and the default
timezone for deadlines under the court’s order is in the Eastern timezone, especially when the
previous deadlines are in that timezone as well. Consistency and precedent is key in the rule of
law in the United States.
ORDER
Therefore, it is ORDERED that the motion to dismiss is GRANTED, nunc pro tunc to
August 19, 2024. The counterclaim is DISMISSED.
Done: August 27, 2024 SO ORDERED:
At Palmer, Ridgeway
_______________________________
Hon. notsfeelings
Superior Court Judge
1
Document record
File size
70.6 KB
Uploaded
Jul 31, 2024 12:00 PM
Filed
Jul 31, 2024 12:00 PM
Filing code
COMPLAINT
Uploaded by
highzpeedtrain
Notes
MotionRuling_RSC-CV-3374_2158-082724.pdf — archived from the Trello docket (https://trello.com/c/1v6o2RlS)
