Expected Motion for Continuance of Trial

Home Browse Search

complete, the parties will not have access to all of the exhibits that possibly will be presented at trial. 4. Further, the parties requested that the Trial Management Conference be delayed until August 29, 2003 in order to allow the parties to prepare fully. Because of the Court's busy schedule, the Trial Management Conference will take place August 22, 2003, the day after the deposition of the Applicant's primary witness. 5. Based upon the unexpectedly slow pace and complexity of the depositions, the fact that this is a case of first impression, and the unavailability of all potential exhibits, the State strongly believes that trial will last more than the one week during which it has been scheduled. Additionally, because the depositions are scheduled so close to the commencement of trial, the parties will have insufficient time to streamline witness examination, to determine whether there are issues appropriate for the filing of appropriate motions, to stipulate to the resolution of any issues of law or fact or to settle the case. 6. A Motion for Continuance should be granted for good cause. C.R.C.P. 121(1 -11). The Rules of Civil Procedure are to be liberally construed to guarantee all relevant evidence is available for trial. Todd v. Bea Valley Village Apartments 980 p2d 973, 982. J.P. v. District Court 873 P2d 745, 750. The prejudice that might occur from late disclosure can be cured by continuing a trial. J.P. at 751, A continuance is a matter within the discretion of the trial court to be determined by the totality of the circumstances. People in Interest of D.J.P. 785 P.24 129, 131 (Colo. 1990). 7. The totality of the circumstances show that good cause exists to grant this Motion to continue the trial. Granting this Motion will not prejudice any party because the water right is conditional. Further, continuing this trial will afford the parties the opportunity to see the subject whitewater course as it is finally constructed instead of in its current incomplete state. Granting this Motion is in the best interest of judicial economy and would give the parties the opportunity to complete discovery and to streamline this matter before the commencement of trial. Under C.R.C.P. 121(c) § 1- 15(1), this Court may, within its discretion, require a party to respond to a motion in less than or greater than 15 days. Williams v. Dowdle Sheet Metal Co. 867 P.2d 208, 209 (Colo.App. 1993). Because trial is set for September 15, 2003, the State hereby respectfully requests this Court to order the Applicant to respond to this Motion within 5 days of its service. WHEREFORE, the CWCB and the Engineers, hereby respectfully request that. this Court order the Applicant to file its response to this Motion, and to grant this Motion for Continuance of Trial and vacate the trial date of the week of September 15, 2003.