The Attorney General Office found it necessary to send a Reply to my Opposition Memo to its Motion to Dismiss. This is allowed by Rule 9(A). Usually the courts frown on pleadings beyond the Motion and its Opposition Memo.
The opposing party is allowed to send a Sur reply to the Reply when the party seeks the Leave of the Court and permission to file the Sur reply. In this particular situation I will not write a Sur reply. After reading the Attorney General's Reply, a Sur reply does not seem necessary.
Replies and Sur replies were intended for events that could not have been foreseen by a party. There is nothing that could not have been foreseen by the Attorney General Office in its Reply. It consisted of just a rehash of its Motion to Dismiss.
Although nothing is certain in Court, I think that the Reply by the Attorney General is evidence supporting an inference of a strong Opposition Memo by the Plaintiff.
No comments:
Post a Comment