Stipulated Scheduling Order

[Dangermouse]

First, here's my initial thread regarding the details of the lawsuit.  The plaintiff's MSJ was denied by the court; following which both myself and the plaintiff received a stipulated scheduling order.  The plaintiff recently sent a proposed list of dates, and I'm pretty shocked.  

 

 

The first deadline is the 14th of August, 2013, and the last (a scheduled mediation with a mutually agreed upon mediator) must occur on or before May 30, 2014---nearly ONE YEAR from now!  Holy ^&**%**

 

 

My questions are:

 

1) Are these dates normal; as in, does it usually take one year for the lists of witnesses, evidence, filing of motions etc. to occur?

 

2) Should I push for an accelerated timeline?  I have a feeling like the plaintiff is trying to get more time to build a case they, as of right now, do not have.

 

3) Is there a 'regular' or 'reasonable' schedule I can refer to in my response?  i.e.  I say "I feel like plaintiffs timeline is not proper, I propose a schedule in-line with what regularly occurs for these types of cases"

[Anon Amos]

First, here's my initial thread regarding the details of the lawsuit.  The plaintiff's MSJ was denied by the court;

 

Nice job

following which both myself and the plaintiff received a stipulated scheduling order.  The plaintiff recently sent a proposed list of dates, and I'm pretty shocked.  

I think that's why they did it; and what they were going for. They are trying to push you into a settlement. You are supposed to think "this is terrible, it's going to take over a year, I just want this to be over with, etc." Use everything they do  against them.

 

 

The first deadline is the 14th of August, 2013

You did not say what type of hearing is to be scheduled by this date. I would guess It's a mandatory settlement hearing. This is the one the bottom feeder is in a rush to get to. My guess is they are trying to intimidate you as much as possible, and regardless of what type of hearing is to be held before this date; this is where they will want to convince you to settle (assuming they can't do it sooner (they may call you)

, and the last (a scheduled mediation with a mutually agreed upon mediator) must occur on or before May 30, 2014---nearly ONE YEAR from now!  Holy ^&**%**

That's what they want you to say. And that's why this one is so far out.  They will want to give themselves plenty of time to get you to settle, and they do not want the case headed to trial. unfortunately it looks like you have to pick a mediator since the judge ordered it, so I would find one that you can appeal and go to civil court if you lose.

You can use this against them by having a "no problem, I want my day in court attitude". They could be very close to dismissing if you keep pressure on them and fight correctly (you are doing good so far by beating  the MSJ)

 

 

My questions are:

 

1) Are these dates normal; as in, does it usually take one year for the lists of witnesses, evidence, filing of motions etc. to occur?

 

Usually no one fights and it goes straight to default, more commonly a settlement is reached (then the defendant gets burned again later), but as far as fighting a case goes 1 year is not uncommon, 2 years is not out of the question, 3 years has been known to happen (appeals etc.) but most commonly they will dismiss.

2) Should I push for an accelerated timeline?  

NO. I would not. The longer you drag it out (and keep pressure on them) the better of you will be. I think some people will disagree with this, but I would say "no problem, take all the time you need, as long as I have a trial to cross examine YOUR WITNESS"

I have a feeling like the plaintiff is trying to get more time to build a case they, as of right now, do not have.

I think a lot of people will have that feeling (it may be hard not to) but; I would completely disagree with that. They are not looking for a way to spend time on your case (you have to force the ways on them) They are not looking to build a case; they are looking to build an empire, mostly by way of default, MSJ if necessary, but they do not want to go to trial (I am not saying they won't, but there is as good chance to get them to dismiss). They pretty much "create for the sake of litigation" everything they need, and for the most part they can do it anytime. There may be time constraints from the OC on what they can get, but what they would get there would be minimal anyway.

It's like poker. They will expect you to want to get it over with, be afraid of the trial or mediation, and settle. I would do the opposite and encourage the trial. In fact; if it were mine I would be trying to get a jury trial out of this, or at least dropping hints or laying  a foundation for one (just to really shake things up(even if it's a bluff) The bottom feeder will not expect it, and they need to get a sense that pursuing this case will just not be worth it.

 

3) Is there a 'regular' or 'reasonable' schedule I can refer to in my response?  i.e.  I say "I feel like plaintiffs timeline is not proper, I propose a schedule in-line with what regularly occurs for these types of cases"

I would drag it out as long as possible an use the time to your advantage to learn how to beat these bottom feeders. I would try something like: "defendant plans to litigate actively in defense of this case, and in good faith, and therefore will approve of any trial date which pleases the court" and Possibly adding something to the effect of "defendant does wish to demand the constitutional right to a jury trial at this time" something like that.

 

That's just my opinion and something more on the lines of how I would handle it if it were mine. Good Luck.