Mandatory Settlement Conference - California

[Cindo]

Hi.

I'm being sued by Midland Funding LLC, Hunt & Henriques is attorney.  I've been on this forum for months researching and completed step by step all that you've suggested to do on this forum to fight this debt collection. Thanks for everything by the way.

I just had a mandatory settlement conference yesterday, 8/23.  The lawyer who attendedt on behalf of hunt & henriques who stated at the conference that she was just hired to appear at the MSC said she was representing them and had authority to settle.  She was the same lawyer who was hired for the day to come to the Case Management Conference the month before too.  At that time she had written down some settlement offers on the back of her business card and told me to contact Hunts and Henriques to settle. 

I thought both parties were supposed to come in good faith to the mandatory settlement conference. She didn't have any information on the complaint, case number or even who the plaintiff was which is Midland Funding. She didn't know anything. It was a waste of time. The Temp Judge suggested it go to trial.

When I got home from the MSC, I saw on the napa county case look up on line that there is now DECLARATION OF PLAINTIFF IN LIEU OF PERSONAL TESTIMONY AT TRIAL (CCP 98) which was filed the date of the MSC.  I haven't received it yet.

I had planned to send out a CCP96 Request for witness and evidence to be used at trial on Monday, 8/27.  Trial Management Conference is scheduled for 9/27 and Trial is scheduled for 10/1.

Should I still send out CCP96 or how do you think I should respond?  I want to have my response prepared so I can just send as soon as I receive the DECLARATION OF PLAINTIFF IN LIEU OF PERSONAL TESTIMONY AT TRIAL (CCP 98)

Thanks in advance!

Cindo