Degenaars Co. v. United States
United States Court of Claims
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
NETTESHEIM, Judge.
This matter has reached the court on defendant’s motion for a 45-day enlargement of time to file its cross-motion for summary judgment, which was filed on January 10, 1983, the date the previous extension expired.1
The primary reason for this motion is that “agency counsel assigned to this case, who was expected to provide substantial assistance in preparing the Government’s motion, was obliged to go on maternity leave for a period of four months.” Defendant’s initial request for 30 days’ additional time also recited the “unavailability of agency counsel who tried the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Whorton v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1982
3Cited by4 opinions
- White Mountain Apache Tribe v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1984
- Louisiana-Pacific Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1983
- Osberg Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1983
- M.R.K. Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1984