Opinion ID: 1984918
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Exclusion of Untimely Plan Filings

Text: Enforcement of the February 11 filing deadline with respect to statewide proposals has been necessary to assure that the courts would have a reasonable opportunity to consider the plans which were timely filed. All parties have had many months to prepare a proper plan. If the court had opened this time-constrained case to late plans and amendments filed after the February 11 deadline plainly stated in Judge Barry's order, the proceedings would have been endless because (1) new intervenors would have required many new plans to be reviewed, and (2) the earlier parties could have amended their timely plans repeatedly, to surpass the new plans. Hence, the late amendment of the Loeper Plan was excluded, although Loeper counsel was allotted full participation and the amended data was received in Court Exh. AA. Similarly, the Ryan-Cornell Plan proponents were accorded status as parties with full participation in cross-examination. Ryan Plan data was received in Court Exh. AA. Exclusion of full consideration of the Ryan Plan was justified because that plan was in existence on and before February 11. There was no reason that the plan could not have been timely presented. It was knowingly withheld from being filed in the court on that date, on the ground that further legislative action then was possible. The President Judge did not exclude plans on the basis of political party. The President Judge excluded all untimely proposals and considered all timely ones of all parties.