• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About spacejam

  • Rank
    CIC Member

Profile Fields

  • Location
  1. UPDATE: First off I would like to apologize for the lack of responses. I did decide to leave it alone, and just wait it out and would periodically check on it online, and calling in to speak with the clerk. It looks like in September 2017 there was an ex parte disposition hearing to start the clock for want of prosecution. September 2018 notice of dismissal went out, with 30 days to respond October 2018 case closed dismissed without prejudice This is now passed the SOL, so I should be okay with this now correct even though it was dismissed withou
  2. @debtzapper are you agreeing with @fisthardcheese or are you reaffirming your stance, and think I should maybe politely readdress this with the court's clerk?
  3. @debtzapper Yes I think I will just wait it out, it has gone 3 years untouched, and hopefully it just stays forgotten especially with cach parent company filing for bankruptcy. I will continue to keep a keen eye on it, and will update this thread with anything new that arises. Thanks again to everyone on here!
  4. UPDATE: So I've been patiently waiting and randomly checking the status online, and didn't see any movement. So I decided to call and follow up. According to the latest person I spoke with, they said all the dismissals that went out in October 1, 2015 was actually a system glitch and notices did not go out. She said that it technically wasn't filed by the clerk to dismiss due to inactivity, and she also said that doesn't mean that it won't happen either, it's just that all of the ones that went out in October 1, 2015 are invalid. So now that I know that isn't the case and the
  5. @kraftykrab This is all i found as for Superior Court Civil Rules, it just expands on what @BV80 posted above which is from CR41 (2) Dismissal on Clerk's Motion. (A) Notice. In all civil cases in which no action of record has occurred during the previous 12 months, the clerk of the superior court shall notify the attorneys of record by mail that the court will dismiss the case for want of prosecution unless, within 30 days following the mailing of such notice, a party takes action of record or files a status report with the court indicating the reason for inactivity an
  6. Update: Just got off the phone with an office clerk and have some good news. Last activity was on October 1 2015. The clerk filed a Motion to Dismiss with the Plaintiff due to inactivity. December 1, 2015 it was filed to be dismissed due to no response from the Plaintiff. Was I supposed to receive a copy of that filing? As I did not and was unaware. She also mentioned the site has outdated information as they have been going through a long legacy software upgrade. Although my case was filed to be dismissed, it hasn't been officially dismissed yet. They are w
  7. @BV80 Thanks for the info will be calling the clerk later today. Will update on what I hear back. @kraftykrab When I filed the last MTD, the judge didnt rule on it and instead dismissed it (not sure if that is the correct term) due to the fact that the case has only been opened for 5 months.
  8. @CCRP626 looking online it looks like its been inactive since my original trial when I asked for a Motion to Dismiss, but thats my assumption it could just be a poorly maintained site. So i cannot confirm nor deny that this is accurate. Should I make a stop at the court house and ask about the activity? Will my inquiry start the clock again on activity? Also would you or @BV80 know if a case is open and while its open that the statute of limitations is met does that benefit me at all? Or does that not apply? I tried researching this, and couldn't find any information.
  9. Holy cow! I totally dropped the ball on this one guys! Its been nearly 3 years and no action. I was going through a divorce and other pressing things came up and disregarded this and practically forgot about it until I just recently ran across my paperwork from when I originally submitted my motion to dismiss. There has been no action from the lawfirm nor I in nearly 3 years. Is there anything I can do at this point? Also we are at the statute of limitations now, I'm wondering does that apply since a case was already open? Can I refile my motion to dismiss again? Any su
  10. @BV80 I am the OP, are you suggesting I contact an attorney and have them tell me / explain WA rules on discovery and number of requests? Thanks in advance!!
  11. @Anon Amos This is all new to me so i'm a little confused. I was under the impression that discovery remains on going? If I send them a meet and confer will I actually have to meet with them? Is it possible to just send a new request for discovery with all new questions? I'm trying to research rules that apply to WA state, but i'm even having a hard time understanding what applies and what doesnt.
  12. @shellieh98 @racecar @BV80 @Anon Amos @1stStep Should I be filing discovery with the new law firm? Or should I send a new request for discovery? If so what 5 requests, or should I request from the judge permission to more requests for discovery, or should I just put in the same requests being that i already went to court and the judge stated we are still in the discovery process?
  13. @shellieh98 I originally sent my discovery request to the first lawyer. See page 2 post 39. Are you saying i should send a new request for discovery to the new lawyer? If so what 5 requests, or should I request from the judge permission to more requests for discovery, or should I just put in the same requests being that i already went to court and the judge stated we are still in the discovery process? Thanks!!
  14. @shellieh98 I have not sent out discovery to the new lawyer. No trial date has been set, or that i know of ( no letters sent to me, no court date shows when i search online). The new lawyers have yet to send any evidence this is only the second piece of information that has come from the new lawyer. The first was to try to collect from me and to state they took over the case. Okay this maybe a dumb question, but under statement of facts they are now claiming to be an assignee and successor, will this come into play later if it is not questioned? Or is this irrelevant to the amend?