California / San Mateo County
Case dismissed with prejudice against Midland - 1/28/16 (yesterday!)
Never posted before, but really wanted to share the good result:
The "rent-a-lawyer" asked if i wanted to settle for 65% (the authorized settlement offer). Me: my internet research found that the JDBs buy these for pennies on the dollar, so if you want to divide those numbers by 100 we can talk settlement, otherwise i'm ready to proceed. MF's atty: you subpoenaed a witness? Me: yes, she might be blond (it was the person who signed their CCP 98, but she never showed).
When we finally got in front of thejudge (i was the only case of this type at that time), the Judge asked MF's atty to present her case. MF's atty: i have this declaration in lieu. Judge: Ms. GRIMM71? Me: i am objecting to the ccp 98 declaration as untimely. Judge: explain. Me: proof of service date-12/23 via 3-day FedEx, CCP 1013, does not include or define 3-day service. As the label indicates, it was not scheduled to arrive until after the 30 day pretrial cutoff & deadline. They had plenty of time to get it to me in time, including delivery on the 28th, a Monday. They did none of these. Judge: you are correct. Evidence excluded. (To MF) do you have any other evidence? MF: no. Judge: Ms GRIMM71? Me: i move to dimiss in my favor with prejudice. Judge: done. Me: thank you your honor.
I would also like to thank all of the people on this forum that made this moment possible:
Sadinca - for great samples & a quick response when the links to the samples weren't working
ASTMedic - for all of the great samples
Seadragon - for the valuable pre-trial checklist
Rivertime - for being in the same situation re: untimely responses
RTE - for the response full of case law re: missing deadlines
Calawyer, Anon Amos, H8spleadingpaper, and Homeless in California - for ALL of the valuable advice posted on the forum