Recommended Posts

There's an example of a MTC on ASTMedic's thread. I have never seen it, and he ended up not using it; but I'm sure it will help.

 

You're doing a good job BTW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's an example of a MTC on ASTMedic's thread. I have never seen it, and he ended up not using it; but I'm sure it will help.

 

You're doing a good job BTW.

thanks- its hard work- hopefully I can beat this thing as an example  to others here can learn; and have the faith it can be done.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's an example of a MTC on ASTMedic's thread. I have never seen it, and he ended up not using it; but I'm sure it will help.

 

You're doing a good job BTW.

So far no response from my M&C, From the date of receipt on the CCRR that they received it it worked out perfect with the date I gave them (10 days from letter date) to respond  if they had the info they sure would of by now responded. So I will be filing a MTC asap. I guess this is just more fuel for the fire when it gets to that point of face to face confrontation court date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QUESTION ON THE MTC

 

This is what I found here to use on ASTmedics thred, but why does it list a court date at the begining?  I have to file with court before sending one to the plaintiff I assume so how can a date be listed as in the example of this one. This is what I use to file with the court? What is the procedure to do this with the court exactly? Do I call the court and ask for date and then do this so I can submit to plaintiff?

 

I also found this link here - does this mean I have to file 2 motions for each claim, I made? Claims I made were itemization of bills,  underlying contract that plaintiff was referring to

http://www.saclaw.org/Uploads/files/Step-by-Step/sbs-compel-responses.pdf

 

Please note this example in above link is for the Sacremento court. I would assume to have to check with  Southern Cal Los Angeles to see how it is done there.I found this- but a little confusing

http://www.courts.ca.gov/cms/rules/index.cfm?title=three&linkid=rule3_1345

 

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE
that on May 15th, at 8:30 a.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the Superior Court of the County of {YOUR COURT}, Defendant {YOUR NAME HERE}, will and hereby does move this Court for an order compelling Plaintiff Midland Funding to further produce responses to Defendants Request for Production, Set 1. This motion is brought pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.310(a)(3), on the grounds that Plaintiff was served with requests for valid and relevant categories of documents as part of Defendant's Request for Production of Documents, Set 1, and Plaintiff has objected to producing certain categories of documents on baseless grounds and has failed to produce documents responsive thereto. A declaration in conformance with Code of Civil Procedure section 2016.040, attesting to efforts to meet and confer on these issues is provided herewith. This motion is based upon this notice, the attached memorandum of points and authorities, the supporting declaration of {YOUR NAME HERE}, the separate statement of items in dispute concurrently served and filed with this motion, the request for judicial notice filed in support of this motion, upon all papers and pleadings currently on file with the Court, and upon such oral and documentary evidence as may be presented to the Court at the time of the hearing.

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Background

Plaintiff filed a generic complaint in this matter alleging that defendant owed money to plaintiff's assignor. No evidence of the alleged account was attached to the complaint. The complaint contained so little information that is was difficult to answer. Nonetheless, Defendant filed a general denial and served on the plaintiff with Defendants Request for Production of Documents No1.

B. Procedural History of the Discovery Dispute at Issue

As a preliminary matter, Defendant served only 3 requests on plaintiff. All seek the most basic information in this debt collection case. All seek information that plaintiff should have at the ready in its files to form a good faith basis to sue.

Nonetheless, Plaintiff objected to each request using boilerplate and general objections. Those objections were raised as bases for non-production (1) that the request called for the production of documents protected by the Attorney-Client privilege and Work Product doctrines, and under general objections (2) that the request was vague, ambiguous, overly broad, burdensome, and oppressive. These objections are wholly without merit. Despite the objection based upon a purported privilege, no privilege log was served with the responses. A discussion of each request follows.

C. Requests No. 2 Seek ALL DOCUMENTS relating to or constituting ANY assignment to Plaintiff of the account referred to in the complaint.

As to Requests No.2, Defendant is seeking ALL DOCUMENTS relating to or constituting ANY assignment to Plaintiff of the account referred to in the complaint. The Plaintiff objected to the request and provided a generic card member agreement that has no reference to the alleged account in question.

 

II. LEGAL AUTHORITIES

 

A. The Documents Sought Are Not Subject to Attorney-Client/Work Product Privileges

 

The Documents Sought Are Not Subject to Attorney-Client/Work Product Privileges. In addition to not providing a privilege log with initial responses, Plaintiff never identified during the meet-and-confer process how the disputed documents were privileged. The burden of establishing that a particular matter is privileged is on the party asserting the privilege. (See San Diego Prof a$$ ‘n v. Superior Court)  (Padrewski, Mitchell, Dean & Associates) (1962) 58 Cal.2d 194, 199.) There seem to be no cognizable bases for Plaintiffs’ assertions that the documents sought, or a portion thereof, are protected by the Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product doctrine. Plaintiff has not attempted to satisfy the burden to establish that a particular responsive document is privileged, and thus, it is likely that Plaintiffs’ objections are instead nuisance objections designed to delay discovery rather than preserve a legitimate privilege. Therefore, to the extent documents within Plaintiffs’ possession are not properly subject to Attorney-Client or Work Product privileges, those documents must be produced. If the documents sought are indeed subject to Attorney-Client or Work Product Privileges, then a privilege log must be provided. It is generally known that a responding party who objects to the demand for inspection of a document based upon a valid claim of privilege, must “(1) identify with particularity [the] document. . ., and (2) set forth clearly the extent of, and the specific ground for, the objection.. the particular privilege.. . [and] f an objection is based on a claim that the information sought is protected work product under Section 2018, that claim shall be expressly asserted.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 203 1.240, subd. ( B); and see Hernandez v. Superior Court (Acheson md.) (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 285, 292.) Plaintiffs’ claims of privilege appear dubious given that no privilege log was produced concurrently with the responses and objections or in response to meet-and-confer efforts by Petitioners. If the plaintiff legitimately had identified some privileged documents in the five weeks provided to produce responses, then a privilege log would have been generated and produced. No such log was produced because it is unlikely any privileged documents have been identified.

 

B. General Objections to Discovery Requests Are Disfavored and No Specific Basis for Their Application to These Requests Has Been Provided

 

General objections, such as vagueness, ambiguity, overbreadth, burdensomeness, or oppressiveness of the request, with no specific explanation supporting these objections, are disfavored as proper objections to discovery requests. (See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 783.) Unless the ambiguity renders the request unintelligible, the request should be answered to the extent possible. (See id; see also L.A. Cnty. Sup. Ct. Local R. 3.A., subd. (0(2).) It is entirely unclear what the Plaintiff claims was “vague” or “ambiguous” about each of the requests since the Plaintiff did not identify any allegedly vague or ambiguous term or phrase in response to any of the requests. As to the alleged overbreadth and burdensomeness of the requests, again, no explanation was provided by the Plaintiff as to how a particular request was overbroad or what the alleged burden would be on Respondents in providing the requested documents; no such burden was identified in response to the meet-and-confer letter. If the Plaintiff had identified the sources or number of documents responsive to the disputed requests and contended that compiling the documents from the identified sources or the size of the final production would be burdensome, then the Defendant could have offered to alleviate the Plaintiffs burden. Thus, any claim of burden by the Plaintiff, if genuinely made, is not supported by the historical characterization by the Plaintiff of the availability of the documents to anyone who asks for them, and any alleged burden in the form of copying costs can readily be borne by the Defendant if necessary. But because the Plaintiff is refusing to produce the documents without regard to costs, no discussion of Petitioners bearing such costs has even been raised.

 

III. CONCLUSION

 

For the foregoing reasons, the Defendant requests this Court to order the Plaintiff to produce further responses, as well as responsive documents, to Requests No. 2, without further objection.

 

Dated May 14th, 2012

 

 

 

{YOUR NAME HERE}

In Pro Per

 

 

DECLARATION OF {YOUR NAME HERE}

I, {YOUR NAME HERE}, declare as follows:

1. I have personal knowledge of the following facts, and if called as a witness, I could and would competently testify thereto.

2. On March 9th, 2021, I served on Midland Funding — a Request for Production of Documents, Set 1. On April 17th, 2012, I received the Plaintiff’s written responses to the Request for Production along with some documents responsive to some of the enumerated requests. As to Requests No. 2, the Plaintiff refused to produce any documents responsive to the requests, and objected to the requests.

3. On May 4th, 2012, I sent a letter to Stelios A. Harris, counsel for the Plaintiff in this matter, in an attempt to meet and confer regarding the refusal to produce responses to Requests, No. 2. A true and correct copy of that meet-and-confer letter is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, and is incorporated herein by reference.

 

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this day May 14th, 2012.

 

 

 

 

{YOUR NAME HERE}

In Pro Per

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check your local court rules for motions and motion hearings. Also find out from your courts website if it uses the "tentative ruling" method.

 

You need to give the plaintiff "notice" of motion and get "on calendar" with your court. You have to find out what day your judge hears motions. Then you need to give the lawyer 16 days notice + 5 days for mailing. So if your court has motion hearings on Thursdays then you pick the next Thursday 21 COURT DAYS (not calendar days) from then, you may add a week to be safe. 

 

Once you have the day picked you add it to the motion and send it to the lawyer. That's why ASTMedic's motion has the hearing date on it, and that is how you give your opponent "notice" of the motion.

 

Later when you file an MIL (motion in limine) you do not give the plaintiff "notice:, and that's the difference with the 2 types of motions.  I think most people are now calling the MIL an "objection" when they draft it however.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check your local court rules for motions and motion hearings. Also find out from your courts website if it uses the "tentative ruling" method.

 

You need to give the plaintiff "notice" of motion and get "on calendar" with your court. You have to find out what day your judge hears motions. Then you need to give the lawyer 16 days notice + 5 days for mailing. So if your court has motion hearings on Thursdays then you pick the next Thursday 21 COURT DAYS (not calendar days) from then, you may add a week to be safe. 

 

Once you have the day picked you add it to the motion and send it to the lawyer. That's why ASTMedic's motion has the hearing date on it, and that is how you give your opponent "notice" of the motion.

 

Later when you file an MIL (motion in limine) you do not give the plaintiff "notice:, and that's the difference with the 2 types of motions.  I think most people are now calling the MIL an "objection" when they draft it however.

thanks- TREMENDOUSLY HELPFUL what you just posted

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your court will be using the tentative ruling method, and if so, you can read some of those rulings made by your judge. They may be helpful. It should also tell you the rules if you want to argue the motion, and explain a bit about the tentative ruling method etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your court will be using the tentative ruling method, and if so, you can read some of those rulings made by your judge. They may be helpful. It should also tell you the rules if you want to argue the motion, and explain a bit about the tentative ruling method etc.

I called the court and they asked me what type of motion  I was filing. I told her  a motion to compel for documents requested."Should the answer be Motion to Compel Responses (or Further Responses) to Requests for Production of Documents."?

 

She kept stating I need to know what type of motion you are filing? She also asked how many motions? I am not sure. Would I be filing one or two? My M&C was for claims I made were itemization of bills and   underlying contract that plaintiff was referring to. Does this fall under 2 separate motions or can do under one?

 

What attachments (Exhibits) are I actually including? I assume the copy of MTC as Ex A. Do I need to also include copies of their full set of answers in plaintiff's response to BOP and POD as ? Just confused :waah:

 

Prior to me sending M&C they responded to my Bill of Particulars and request for POD in which they responded with  unacceptable concrete proof of evidence requested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "notice of motion" is the first paragraph of your post:

 

 

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE
that on May 15th, at 8:30 a.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the Superior Court of the County of
{YOUR COURT}, Defendant {YOUR NAME HERE}, will and hereby does move this Court for an order compelling Plaintiff Midland Funding to further produce responses to Defendants Request for Production, Set 1. This motion is brought pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.310(a)(3), on the grounds that Plaintiff was served with requests for valid and relevant categories of documents as part of Defendant's Request for Production of Documents, Set 1, and Plaintiff has objected to producing certain categories of documents on baseless grounds and has failed to produce documents responsive thereto. A declaration in conformance with Code of Civil Procedure section 2016.040, attesting to efforts to meet and confer on these issues is provided herewith. This motion is based upon this notice, the attached memorandum of points and authorities, the supporting declaration of {YOUR NAME HERE}, the separate statement of items in dispute concurrently served and filed with this motion, the request for judicial notice filed in support of this motion, upon all papers and pleadings currently on file with the Court, and upon such oral and documentary evidence as may be presented to the Court at the time of the hearing.

 

You will need to get a date from the Court that is at least 16 Court days plus five calendar days in the future (the minimum notice required for a motion under CCP 1005 B).  Then you put that in your notice of motion instead of "May 15".

 

If you are only seeking to compel further answers to RPD number 1, then you have only one motion.

 

I think you are gong to have at least 2 Exhibits.  The Exhibits will be attachments to your declaration.  The first should be Plaintiff's response to your RPD.  The second will be your meet and confer letter.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I called the court and they asked me what type of motion  I was filing. I told her  a motion to compel for documents requested."Should the answer be Motion to Compel Responses (or Further Responses) to Requests for Production of Documents."?

 

She kept stating I need to know what type of motion you are filing? She also asked how many motions? I am not sure. Would I be filing one or two? My M&C was for claims I made were itemization of bills and   underlying contract that plaintiff was referring to. Does this fall under 2 separate motions or can do under one?

You are filing a motion to compel discovery.

 

What attachments (Exhibits) are I actually including? I assume the copy of MTC as Ex A. Do I need to also include copies of their full set of answers in plaintiff's response to BOP and POD as ? Just confused :waah:

The MTC is not an exhibit, that's just the motion. As exhibit "a" you would attach you RFP's to them, exhibit "b" would probably be their response to it.

 

Prior to me sending M&C they responded to my Bill of Particulars and request for POD in which they responded with  unacceptable concrete proof of evidence requested.

You just need them to respond with something other than  objections. They will most likely not be able to provide "concrete proof of evidence", but rather hearsay documents which you can argue are inadmissible. You just need their case against you so you have something to attack.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "notice of motion" is the first paragraph of your post:

 

 

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on May 15th, at 8:30 a.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the Superior Court of the County of {YOUR COURT}, Defendant {YOUR NAME HERE}, will and hereby does move this Court for an order compelling Plaintiff Midland Funding to further produce responses to Defendants Request for Production, Set 1. This motion is brought pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.310(a)(3), on the grounds that Plaintiff was served with requests for valid and relevant categories of documents as part of Defendant's Request for Production of Documents, Set 1, and Plaintiff has objected to producing certain categories of documents on baseless grounds and has failed to produce documents responsive thereto. A declaration in conformance with Code of Civil Procedure section 2016.040, attesting to efforts to meet and confer on these issues is provided herewith. This motion is based upon this notice, the attached memorandum of points and authorities, the supporting declaration of {YOUR NAME HERE}, the separate statement of items in dispute concurrently served and filed with this motion, the request for judicial notice filed in support of this motion, upon all papers and pleadings currently on file with the Court, and upon such oral and documentary evidence as may be presented to the Court at the time of the hearing.

 

You will need to get a date from the Court that is at least 16 Court days plus five calendar days in the future (the minimum notice required for a motion under CCP 1005 B).  Then you put that in your notice of motion instead of "May 15".

 

If you are only seeking to compel further answers to RPD number 1, then you have only one motion.

 

I think you are gong to have at least 2 Exhibits.  The Exhibits will be attachments to your declaration.  The first should be Plaintiff's response to your RPD.  The second will be your meet and confer letter.

 

Do I have to attach just their  written responses from the POD or the entire thing as it is about 40 pages - wasteful copies of 2 yrs of statements and their Bill of Sale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are filing a motion to compel discovery.

The MTC is not an exhibit, that's just the motion. As exhibit "a" you would attach you RFP's to them, exhibit "b" would probably be their response to it.

You just need them to respond with something other than  objections. They will most likely not be able to provide "concrete proof of evidence", but rather hearsay documents which you can argue are inadmissible. You just need their case against you so you have something to attack.

Do I also need to send this to them  with the Motion To compel with attached exhibits?

Please note they did not send a credit card agreement, so I need to revise what is highlighted in red because  in their response to POD they did send an affidavit of debt with accnt # and my name on it notarized seal from loan officer at the original creditor the bank, but the affidavit of debt page  does not display my name or information It is notarized and even says they purchased a pool of debts on a particular date. Still confusing to me to what to send in regard to this statement  and what I need to revise and  include. Does this statement need to be filed separate with the court or just attached to the MTC?  and copies to plaintiff of course.....

 

Superior Court of California

for the County of {YOUR COURT}

 

 

 

                         Plaintiff,

            vs.

                         Defendant

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: {YOUR CASE NUMBER}

 

 

SEPARATE STATEMENT OF ITEMS IN DISPUTE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET ONE, FROM MIDLAND FUNDING

 

 

TO THE COURT, ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: Defendant, {YOUR NAME HERE}, hereby submits his Separate Statement of Items in Dispute in support of his motion to compel further responses to Defendants Request for Production, Set One, from Plaintiff Midland Funding. Such statement is submitted in conformance with California Rule of Court 3.1345(a).

Defendant’s Request for Production of Documents No. 2:

ALL DOCUMENTS relating to or constituting ANY assignment to Plaintiff of the account referred to in the complaint.

Plaintiff's Response to Request No 2:

“Responding Party objects to this demand on the grounds that it requests documents that are protected by the attorney-client and work product privileges, and the request also seeks documents that are privileged, trade secret and proprietary in nature. Without waiving the foregoing objections and subject thereto, plaintiff responds as follows: Attached hereto as EXHIBIT 1 are non-privileged documents responsive to this demand”

Reason Why Further Response Should be Provided:

 

Exhibit 1 is a copy of terms and agreements for a chase card account. These documents in no way show any assignment of the account in question to the Plaintiff. Nowhere is there any reference to any account number or any assignment to the Plaintiff. The documents requested, if they exist, constitute agreements between plaintiff and the original creditor. There is no good faith basis for plaintiff to contend that responsive documents are protected by the attorney-client privilege, the work product doctrine, or constitute trade secrets. 

If plaintiff does not have a valid assignment of the account at issue in the complaint, it does not have standing to pursue its claims. Please produce all documents responsive to this request.

 

{DATE}

 

{YOUR NAME HERE}

In Pro Per

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I also need to send this to them  with the Motion To compel with attached exhibits?

 

Does this statement need to be filed separate with the court or just attached to the MTC?  and copies to plaintiff of course.....

 

 

yes, you do need to serve and file a separate statement.  It's a separate document filed and served with the MTC, but not attached to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, you do need to serve and file a separate statement.  It's a separate document filed and served with the MTC, but not attached to it.

Am including the same attachments on that statement   with what I am sending with the M&C or none at all?  Also, when sending the docs( Exhibits) with the M&C do I also have to send in all the statements (copies) of everything they sent in the POD or just the plaintiffs responses they wrote addressing each objection?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am including the same attachments on that statement   with what I am sending with the M&C or none at all?  Also, when sending the docs( Exhibits) with the M&C do I also have to send in all the statements (copies) of everything they sent in the POD or just the plaintiffs responses they wrote addressing each objection?

 

You should have: notice of motion and motion, separate statement, declaration.  Exhibits will be attached to the declaration.

 

You probably won't attach the actual documents produced; you definitely will attach the responses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should have: notice of motion and motion, separate statement, declaration.  Exhibits will be attached to the declaration.

 

You probably won't attach the actual documents produced; you definitely will attach the responses.

Thanks, quite helpful in placing it all in perspective. Is their a sample around here ?

 

I found this not sure if this is all that is needed

 

 

Any Party

Any Street

Any Town, CA 55555

 

714-555-5555

 

Petitioner, In Pro Per

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Superior Court of the State of California

County of ______________________

 

 

In re the marriage of:

Petitioner: _________________________

and

Respondent:____________________________

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.

 

DECLARATION OF __________________ IN

SUPPORT OF ________________________

Date:                                                                       

Time:

Dept:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

               

            I, ______________________________, declare:

            1.         That I am the __________ in this action. I am over the age of 18 years. I have personal knowledge of the facts contained in this declaration, and if called upon to testify I could and would testify competently as to the truth of the facts stated herein.

            2.         I make this Declaration in support of my ________________________

            3.          

            4.          

            5.        

            6.          

            I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this Declaration is executed on ______________________, 2013 at_________,California.

           

                                                                        __________________________________________

                                                                        NAME OF PERSON SIGNING DECLARATION

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Several declarations posted on various threads, a couple I used are here: http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/319956-sued-by-cach-llc-in-ca-update-i-win-its-over/?p=1295072

 

For paragraphs 2+, you can do something like:

 

2. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of (use correct title) PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET ONE, served by mail (use correct date) June 3, 2014. 

 

3. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of Defendant's Meet and Confer letter, dated June 12, 2014. 

 

4. Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of Plaintiff's reply letter (?), dated June 15, 2014.

 

5. etc.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question re Statement of Information with the Motion To Compel- Do I file this separate with the court or does it get enclosed with the filing (revised to my case of course) as stated in ReadytoWininCA  post

 

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/315816-ca-asset-acceptance-open-acct-acct-stated-s-about-discovery/page-7

SPECIFICALLY POST 131

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question re Statement of Information with the Motion To Compel- Do I file this separate with the court or does it get enclosed with the filing

 

Not certain what you're asking; it's a separate document, filed at the same time.  So, for example, it would be listed separately on the proof of service (or have its own, separate pos). 

 

Does that make sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not certain what you're asking; it's a separate document, filed at the same time.  So, for example, it would be listed separately on the proof of service (or have its own, separate pos). 

 

Does that make sense?

Ok I do get it now- All   sent together MTC, Statement to  file with court, copy of POS to the court that I send to Plaintiff- All docs listed on POS .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+ declaration

Yes-

thanks so much for all of this.But know I am seeing in that thread mentioned above that I need this ?

Proposed Order

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you haven't filed yet; a proposed order for the judge to sign is a good idea. You would title it "proposed order", put the judges name and a place for him / her to sign, above that; your case # etc, and exactly what you want or motioned for.

 

"It is hereby ordered that plaintiff will produce to defendant the documents requested in the RFP's propounded by defendant within ________ days."

 

Something like that. Then the judge can enter the amount of days, draw a line thru "proposed" and sign it. I'm sure there's better examples on here somewhere,  or google it.

 

If you don't attach a proposed order and you win the motion; the judge will probably just tell you to draft an order for the court to sign, although some local court rules do require the proposed order be attached.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you haven't filed yet; a proposed order for the judge to sign is a good idea. You would title it "proposed order", put the judges name and a place for him / her to sign, above that; your case # etc, and exactly what you want or motioned for.

 

"It is hereby ordered that plaintiff will produce to defendant the documents requested in the RFP's propounded by defendant within ________ days."

 

Something like that. Then the judge can enter the amount of days, draw a line thru "proposed" and sign it. I'm sure there's better examples on here somewhere,  or google it.

 

If you don't attach a proposed order and you win the motion; the judge will probably just tell you to draft an order for the court to sign, although some local court rules do require the proposed order be attached.

Thanks- will do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.