Narrative Opinion Summary
In this procedural matter, Peachtree Settlement Funding, LLC, involved in an appeal against Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and Metropolitan Insurance Annuity Company, submits a second motion seeking an extension of time to file its appellate brief. The court had previously granted an extension until October 19, 2015. Peachtree now requests an additional seven-day extension, citing the lead counsel's commitments to other legal engagements, including testifying on structured settlement legislation and handling another case, which limited his availability. The request emphasizes that the extension is necessary to sufficiently address significant issues in the appeal rather than for delay. Notably, the opposing counsel does not object to the extension, facilitating a smoother procedural process. The motion is supported by a certificate of conference, indicating the non-opposition of the appellants, and a certificate of service, confirming that all relevant parties have been duly informed. The court's discretion is sought for the extension and any further appropriate relief.
Legal Issues Addressed
Certificate of Conference and Service Requirementssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The motion includes necessary certifications, affirming compliance with procedural requirements regarding communication with opposing counsel and service of documents.
Reasoning: The document includes a certificate of conference indicating that the opposing counsel does not oppose the motion, as well as a certificate of service confirming distribution of the motion to relevant parties.
Extension of Time to File Briefssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Peachtree Settlement Funding, LLC seeks an additional seven-day extension to file its brief, asserting the need for sufficient time to address crucial issues.
Reasoning: Peachtree now requests an additional seven-day extension, citing the need for adequate time to address the important issues in the case, as lead counsel Earl Nesbitt has been occupied with other legal matters and traveling.
Non-Opposition to Extension Requestssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The opposing counsel does not object to the requested extension, indicating a lack of opposition to the delay.
Reasoning: This is the second extension request, and opposing counsel from the appellants does not object to the request.