Opposing counsel is lying

[mrsjohnson]

I am not heartless and I do understand when folks have a bad day. I'm sorry about your dog - that is a very tough situation to be in.

Thank you. That means a lot. She will be 14 next month and though she has lived a good long life, I can't imagine mine without her.

 

[Taxing Matters]

@Taxing Matters thank you for responding.

I just got off the phone with the Magistrate Judge assigned to the mediation and he said a case being stayed like this is not usual.

You need to be careful. Most ex parte communications with the judge (which are communications you have without the opposing side being present) are prohibited. Generally if you are going to talk to the judge, you need to ensure the other side also has the opportunity to be there and speak with the judge, too. Frankly, I'm surprised the judge was willing to speak to you at all without the opposing attorney also on the call.

 

[quincy]

You need to be careful. Most ex parte communications with the judge (which are communications you have without the opposing side being present) are prohibited. Generally if you are going to talk to the judge, you need to ensure the other side also has the opportunity to be there and speak with the judge, too. Frankly, I'm surprised the judge was willing to speak to you at all without the opposing attorney also on the call.

There is a lot about mrsjohnson's described case that falls outside the norm.

 

[mrsjohnson]

You need to be careful. Most ex parte communications with the judge (which are communications you have without the opposing side being present) are prohibited. Generally if you are going to talk to the judge, you need to ensure the other side also has the opportunity to be there and speak with the judge, too. Frankly, I'm surprised the judge was willing to speak to you at all without the opposing attorney also on the call.

This magistrate was assigned specifically to conduct the mediation and the district judge ordered that he speak to the parties individually before we scheduled the mediation. Once mediation is over, I supposed the other magistrate (the one I have a problem with) will be reassigned to the case once it is reopened because I stated earlier, I highly doubt it is going to settle. It's not about the money either; I'm not signing any kind of confidentiality agreement not to talk about this because I'm actually starting a new business to specifically talk about this. I already have a website up and running, just not able to market it yet because I don't have the time.

The fact that this case is not proceeding as usual is even more challenging. I've bookmarked cases to follow from start to settlement and from start to trial that are similar to mine so that I can understand the process better. I have not encountered one that was administratively closed like this thus the confusion but it seems we're all on track. I just hate that it has been delayed because I'm ready to move for partial summary judgement.

 

[mrsjohnson]

There is a lot about mrsjohnson's described case that falls outside the norm.

Nothing seems to happen to me normally. Not sure if that's why I'm a quirky, eccentric person or if I became one for that reason.

 

[Just Blue]

Nothing seems to happen to me normally. Not sure if that's why I'm a quirky, eccentric person or if I became one for that reason.

So biting my lip right now...

 

[RJR]

Nothing seems to happen to me normally. Not sure if that's why I'm a quirky, eccentric person or if I became one for that reason.

Hang in there and just see what happens. Sorry about your Dog, I know that is painful.

 

[quincy]

Hang in there and just see what happens. Sorry about your Dog, I know that is painful.

As a pro se plaintiff, mrsjohnson does not have the luxury of just hanging in there and seeing what happens. She is the one who must direct the action.

 

[RJR]

As a pro se plaintiff, mrsjohnson does not have the luxury of just hanging in there and seeing what happens. She is the one who must direct the action.

I understand about that as a procedural matter.

 

[quincy]

I understand about that as a procedural manner.

Good.

One advantage represented parties have over pro se parties is that they do not have to worry the details. They have someone who not only knows the procedural rules and the laws but when and how to apply them. The attorney worries the details.

The represented party, in other words, can sit back and know that all is being handled for him/her - assuming, of course, the party has the money to (or wants to) hire a capable attorney.

 

[RJR]

I understand a Pro Se litigant is not to be held to the same stringent standards of pleadings, etc., but that is not a free pass. Diligence is a must.

 

[quincy]

I understand a Pro Se litigant is not to be held to the same stringent standards of pleadings, etc., but that is not a free pass. Diligence is a must.

In federal court? The pro se plaintiff is certainly held to the same standards.

We are not talking about a small claims action.

 

[RJR]

In federal court? The pro se plaintiff is certainly held to the same standards.

They are not, but like I said, it is not a free pass to mess up the Rules and just say I'm Pro SE, I can slide.

 

[quincy]

They are not, but like I said, it is not a free pass to mess up the Rules and just say I'm Pro SE, I can slide.

It is never okay in any court action to mess up court rules or procedures. Small claims courts, however, are designed for pro se parties, this to the extent that many states do not even allow for attorneys to represent the parties. The judges understand that pro se parties often don't understand what they are doing.

But federal courts are the big leagues. Pro se parties are expected to know the rules and procedures and the laws just like the attorneys that appear in the court. There is no allowance given the pro se.

 

[Just Blue]

They are not, but like I said, it is not a free pass to mess up the Rules and just say I'm Pro SE, I can slide.

From what are you basing the above assertion?