1.Intervenor U.S. House of Representatives - 30 minutes2.Intervenor United States - 30 minutes3.
George/Girgis/Anderson - 15 minutes
Frederick Douglass Foundation - 15 minutes
Human Rights Campaign/Equality Forum - 30 minutes3.The issues to be discussed by the Moving Parties are as follows:
A.Whether the Cozen Plan’s choice-of-law provision impacts the definition of “spouse,” and, if so, whether Illinois or Pennsylvania law should be utilized inthat regard.B.Whether the Cozen Plan’s definition of the word “spouse” is ambiguous. If so,whether the Court should consider extrinsic evidence to resolve the ambiguity(and what evidence should be considered).C.What impact, if any, the decisions of the Illinois courts concerning Ms. Tobits’sstatus as Ms. Farley’s heir have on determination of the issues before the Court.The Court has granted leave for a significant number of
to file briefs in this
matter. Those briefs have been well-prepared and are of great assistance to the Court. All
are free to attend this argument. However, the Court, in its discretion and bearing in mindconsiderations of judicial economy, is limiting oral presentations to the parties listed above. Thisshould in no way be interpreted as any judgment as to the arguments submitted in writing byother
. At the conclusion of the schedule set forth above, the Court may, at its discretion,opt to inquire if any additional
who are present have legal points that are non-cumulativeof prior arguments and briefing which they desire to bring to the Court’s attention. Any suchopportunity shall, not, however, be interpreted as an invitation to discuss non-legal points or reiterate prior argument.Intervenors and
shall limit their presentations to issues they have briefed.
Page 3 of 5
Case 2:11-cv-00045-CDJ Document 114 Filed 03/02/12 Page 3 of 5