Determined1 Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 (edited) I'm in a long running small claims lawsuit in Florida. Per Florida Rules of Procedure, in order to initiate discovery against a Defendant unrepresented by an attorney (me), the Plaintiff's attorney must obtain leave of the court to do so. They requested this of the court about a year ago, the court gave them the go ahead by Court Order, but no subpoena was issued and no discovery or deposition was ever requested. I then proved the Plaintiff was in fact a dissolved entity that had no relevance to this dispute or standing before the court (the Plaintiff was a corporate entity dissolved in 2002). The Plaintiff fired its attorney, hired new ones, and re-filed claiming a new entity was the proper party to the dispute. Now I receive a call from the Plaintiff's attorney asking to schedule my deposition. Can they do so without first going back to the court with the newly named Plaintiff obtaining leave of the court to initiate discovery, and then filing a subpoena?I suspect they think they might get me to agree without knowing the rules. I intend to enforce the rules and force their hand. Any thoughts or feedback would be greatly appreciated. Edited February 14, 2012 by Determined2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentWA Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 Did they dismiss and refile or just amend the pleadings. If they dismissed, then I would send the attorney a nice letter M&C format and tell them they need to warm up the motion machine. I always stick them with the rules, no matter how much pain or embarrassment I cause them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Determined1 Posted February 14, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 They amended the Pleadings. However, this is an entirely new party. Even if the original Plaintiff, no longer a party to the dispute and long since dissolved, obtained Leave of the Court, don't they have to issue a subpoena? My issue is, this is a new Party, how can they claim rights improperly obtained by a dissolved entity unrelated to the case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentWA Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 Hmm, what does the order say? Does it grant leave to a generic plaintiff or does it name them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Determined1 Posted February 14, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 (edited) It was an Order that granted the original Plaintiff, specifically named, very limited discovery. The Plaintiff's attorney at the time was upset that he failed to bring a Court reporter to a prior hearing, where he claimed there was proof revealed critical to his case. That case was eventually dismissed, as I was able to prove the original Plaintiff had no standing and in fact was dissolved. As soon as a new Judge was appointed to the court and this case, the knucklehead re-filed, and then Motioned for Discovery. The Judge gave him a limited Discovery Order, and then again I proved the Plaintiff ceased to exist. Now, new attorney, newly named Plaintiff, seeking to depose me. Don't they need a new Order and/or a subpoena? Edited February 14, 2012 by Determined2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Determined1 Posted February 18, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 18, 2012 anyone...anyone...Bueller? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts