Ravenswood City Sch. Dist. v. Minor

RAVENSWOOD CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff,

v.J.S., a minor, et al., Defendants.

Case No: C 10-03950 SBA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLAND DIVISION

Dated: March 1, 2011

ORDER DENYING JOINT MOTION TO FILE OVERSIZED BRIEFS

The parties have filed a joint administrative motion for leave to file opening and opposition briefs that are forty-five pages in length and a twenty-page reply. Dkt. 77. This case is not sufficiently complex to warrant briefs of that length. Moreover, the parties should be aware that arguments presented in a direct and concise manner are generally more effective that those that are not. See Fleming v. County of Kane, State of Ill., 855 F.2d 496, 497 (7th Cir. 1988) ("Overly long briefs, however, may actually hurt a party's case, making it far more likely that meritorious arguments will be lost amid the mass of detail.") (quoting in part United States v. Keplinger, 776 F.2d 678, 683 (7th Cir. 1985)); Weilert v. Health Midwest Development Group, 95 F. Supp. 2d 1190, 1192 (D. Kan. 2000) ("Judicial economy and concise argument are purposes of the page limit."). Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the parties' joint motion for leave to file oversized briefs is DENIED. Both parties are directed to avoid the excessive use of footnotes as a means of circumscribing the page limits specified in Civil Local Rules 7-2(a), 7-3(a) and 7-3(c). This Order terminates Docket 77.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 28,...