Had my first hearing today

[hereIam]

So I went to small claims court with my case against c1, there were six total defendants called I was the only one who showed. The judge had us go to a room and try to work out a deal. Well the lawyer that was there was subbing because the lawyer in the suit was "sick".

Right away I just told him I need more proof, the affidavit wasn't enough. He had no answer to anything had no paperwork...but...I guess this hearing was only to see if a deal could be worked out now I have to go back in June for the trial.

I think I need to send the law firm a letter telling them about the info I need, or do I?

[nobk4me]

What you need to do is called discovery.

Check your state's rules of civil procedure.

[usagi555]

Many small claims courts around the country do not allow discovery requests without first asking leave to conduct discovery. OP definitely needs to go through the rules of civil procedure, and specifically for whatever court small claims is under.

[hereIam]

This the rule for discovery...

Rule 6. Discovery (for small claims)

Discovery may be had in a manner generally pursuant to the rules governing any other civil action, but only upon the approval of the court and under such limitations as may be specified. The court should grant discovery only upon notice and good cause shown and should limit such action to the necessities of the case.

Rule 26. General provisions governing discovery (general civil)

(A) Discovery methods. Parties may obtain discovery by one or more of the following methods:

(1) depositions upon oral examination or written questions;

(2) written interrogatories;

(3) production of documents, electronically stored information, or things or permission to enter upon land or other property, for inspection and other purposes;

(4) physical and mental examination;

(5) requests for admission.

Unless the court orders otherwise under subdivision © of this rule, the frequency of use of these methods is not limited.

Electronic Format. In addition to serving a hard copy, a party propounding or responding to interrogatories, requests for production or requests for admission shall comply with (a) or ( of this subsection.

(a) The party shall serve the discovery request or response in an electronic format (either on a disk or as an electronic document attachment) in any commercially available word processing software system. If transmitted on disk, each disk shall be labeled, identifying the caption of the case, the document, and the word processing version in which it is being submitted. If more than one disk is used for the same document, each disk shall be labeled and also shall be sequentially numbered. If transmitted by electronic mail, the document must be accompanied by electronic memorandum providing the forgoing identifying information.

or

( The party shall serve the opposing party with a verified statement that the attorney or party appearing pro se lacks the equipment and is unable to transmit the discovery as required by this rule.

So it looks like I would have to get the courts permission first.

[hereIam]

I guess my question is...Why not just show up in June without letting them know what I want, with what they have right now I'd win. Why give them a chance to produce something?

[GreenBean]

I"m sure others with more experience will chime in but I think you would want to know what they have ahead of time.... if it isn't sufficient you can compel the courts to have it removed from trial proceedings leaving them with nothing. If what they produce in discovery is (somewhat) viable for trial you will be prepared on how to argue it and not left stumbling in front of the judge. The more work they have to do to prove their "evidence" is viable the more money it costs them - they aren't looking to spend money, they want to GET money. They might just decide before the trial it's more hassle than it's worth, both in time and expense.

[nobk4me]

If you request, in discovery, all documents they intend to present as evidence, and then, at trial, they try to present something they did not produce in discovery, you can object.

They can't introduce a document they failed to produce in discovery. But if you don't engage in discovery, you have lost that right to object.

[Coltfan1972]

I guess my question is...Why not just show up in June without letting them know what I want, with what they have right now I'd win. Why give them a chance to produce something?

Not an awful strategy but risky for sure. I prefer the no motion to compel, see you in court approach after a few rounds of discover.

Your problem is the unknown. Discovery, as Nobk4me stated, gives you a chance to see the kind of hand they are holding. It also lets you form a strategy based on any weakness you discovery.

The biggest advantage is that they can't introduce something they have not given you, if you have asked properly in discovery (generally speaking). That is huge.

Look at it this way. You said "with what they have right now you would win" Okay if that is the case all the more reason for discovery. Lock them into that losing position. Don't give them a chance to get other evidence.

If they disclose only evidence that means they can't win, they are stuck with it. If you give them free reign they can get evidence an hour before the trial and it will be allowed (assuming it's admissible evidence).

This is not a complex case, so I can see your point and I somewhat agree. If they can't beat you now, then they probably can't beat you later. Personally, I'd still do some discovery. On a side note, are you for sure they can't beat you with what they have right now? Are you sure they have even disclosed everything to you.

It's very common, more so in criminal cases, for one side to hold back until the last minute or they are forced to by discovery to disclose evidence. In other words, meeting the burden to get the case to trial is very low. They might have disclosed just enough and you really don't know the cards they are holding but just think you do.

[legaleagle]

Considering this appears to be cap 1, an OC, they may just have enough records. Best you know in advance. See waht has to be done to get permission.