Can I respond in disagreement to a Proposed Order for ReClassification, Leave to ....

[750Chestnut]

In California Superior Court--

The Plaintiff in my civil case (I am the Defendent, pro se) filed a motion to Leave to Amend a Second Amended Complaint. I answered/opposed the pleading on paper, but did not make the hearing. I missed the hearing, because I had no idea I was supposed to call the court the day before! Arrrgh! I was all ready with clothes ironed the night before, ready to go. Checked the Superior Court website for directions, and then saw the info that I was supposed to call in! So frustrating. So, the tentative ruling of "motion granted" stuck.

Now, I have received the proposed order from Plaintiff's counsel. It looks like per Calif. Court Rules (Title Three) that I can still oppose the ruling? Is this true,and what instrument do I use to do this? A written response?

I have a para legal, but no attorney as I could not keep up with the billings, and the attny dropped me. The case is possession over property, and the plaintiff has now been granted permission to add negligence, conspiracy, intentional emotional neglingence, etc. etc.--a bunch of crazy charges.

Thanks for your advice.


>>"Unless the parties waive notice or the court orders otherwise, the party prevailing on any motion must, within five days of the ruling, serve by any means authorized by law and reasonably calculated to ensure delivery to the other party or parties no later than the close of the next business day a proposed order for approval as conforming to the court's order. Within five days after service, the other party or parties must notify the prevailing party as to whether or not the proposed order is so approved. The opposing party or parties must state any reasons for disapproval. Failure to notify the prevailing party within the time required shall be deemed an approval. The extensions of time based on a method of service provided under any statute or rule do not apply to this rule. "<<

 

[latigo]

In California Superior Court--

The Plaintiff in my civil case (I am the Defendent, pro se) filed a motion to Leave to Amend a Second Amended Complaint. I answered/opposed the pleading on paper, but did not make the hearing. I missed the hearing, because I had no idea I was supposed to call the court the day before! Arrrgh! I was all ready with clothes ironed the night before, ready to go. Checked the Superior Court website for directions, and then saw the info that I was supposed to call in! So frustrating. So, the tentative ruling of "motion granted" stuck.

Now, I have received the proposed order from Plaintiff's counsel. It looks like per Calif. Court Rules (Title Three) that I can still oppose the ruling? Is this true,and what instrument do I use to do this? A written response?

I have a para legal, but no attorney as I could not keep up with the billings, and the attny dropped me. The case is possession over property, and the plaintiff has now been granted permission to add negligence, conspiracy, intentional emotional neglingence, etc. etc.--a bunch of crazy charges.

Thanks for your advice.


>>"Unless the parties waive notice or the court orders otherwise, the party prevailing on any motion must, within five days of the ruling, serve by any means authorized by law and reasonably calculated to ensure delivery to the other party or parties no later than the close of the next business day a proposed order for approval as conforming to the court's order. Within five days after service, the other party or parties must notify the prevailing party as to whether or not the proposed order is so approved. The opposing party or parties must state any reasons for disapproval. Failure to notify the prevailing party within the time required shall be deemed an approval. The extensions of time based on a method of service provided under any statute or rule do not apply to this rule. "<<

To begin this paralegal that is lending legal assistance without being under the direct supervision of a licensed attorney, which is obviously so, is committing a crime! And if you intend to rely on such inexperienced, nonprofessional advise you will be deserving of any adverse consequences.

Secondly, it is the policy of the system to be liberal in allowing amendments to pleadings when it best serves the ends of justice and avoids multiplicity. Moreover, failing to join all claims against the defendant arising out of the same transaction or set of circumstances may result in the abandonment of those claims.

Furthermore, the judge didn't grant the proposed amendments simply because you did not show. If the motion lacked legal merit it would have been denied.

Additionally, what prejudice - other than that the case is to reclassified and assigned to a higher court - could you show as a result of the granting of the plaintiff's motion. Just because you think the added counts are crazy won't suffice.

Obviously you and the plaintiff don't share the same opinion as to the frivolity of the amendments. Nor does it appear that they were as obvious to the judge as you claim they appear to you. But you have other means of challenging them once they are merged in the complaint.

But does it not seem a bit absurd that the defendants should be allowed to dictate to the plaintiffs what causes of action they can plead.

How would that differ from a defensive assistant running in plays to the opposing quarterback?

 

[750Chestnut]

Just wanted to know....

.....how to file a disagreement with the ruling. Title 3 looks like it says it's a letter to the plaintiff, via counsel.
My para legal is attorney supervised, fyi.

So, how do I file the response that I don't approve of the ruling?

 

[tranquility]

.....how to file a disagreement with the ruling. Title 3 looks like it says it's a letter to the plaintiff, via counsel.
My para legal is attorney supervised, fyi.

So, how do I file the response that I don't approve of the ruling?

A stubborn man will not be successful pro per. You just got good advice, read it again.

A plaintiff is required to plead all causes of action coming from the same transaction or occurrence. A court wants to handle all matters at the same time. Your opposition to this usually granted amendment to the pleadings is would not have been successful unless you have some true (legal) reason that you have not alleged so far. "Disagreement" with a ruling will be worth even less.

Move on and prepare your defense and stop playing civil procedure games.

 

[750Chestnut]

I am female, thanks.

A stubborn man will not be successful pro per.


However, if I don't disagree, at least on paper in a response, as I am entitled, won't it look like I am agreeing? The plaintiff can then use that against me--that I obviously agree with the ruling/charges, since I didn't disagree in the least?

Thanks.

 

[Zigner]

A stubborn man will not be successful pro per.


However, if I don't disagree, at least on paper in a response, as I am entitled, won't it look like I am agreeing? The plaintiff can then use that against me--that I obviously agree with the ruling/charges, since I didn't disagree in the least?

Thanks.

Or, it could mean that you are willing and able to disprove the charges in court.

 

[tranquility]

A stubborn man will not be successful pro per.


However, if I don't disagree, at least on paper in a response, as I am entitled, won't it look like I am agreeing? The plaintiff can then use that against me--that I obviously agree with the ruling/charges, since I didn't disagree in the least?

Thanks.

Unless you are planning on appealing the judges ruling on allowing the amendment, does it really make a difference?

 

[750Chestnut]

Thanks Zigner!

Or, it could mean that you are willing and able to disprove the charges in court.

Thanks Zigner. At least for telling me what I wanted to read! I think I need not sit by silent and at least need to speak my mind. I would hate to go to court and appear in agreement with the decision.

 

[tranquility]

I don't think you correctly read what he wrote.

 

[750Chestnut]

Or....

I don't think you correctly read what he wrote.

.....are you implying that by NOT RESPONDING, or sending a written disagreement, I am therefore saying I can disprove it in court?
Thanks for your reply!

 

[tranquility]

.....are you implying that by NOT RESPONDING, or sending a written disagreement, I am therefore saying I can disprove it in court?
Thanks for your reply!

I believe he meant that you can get over it and prepare to defend against the additional charges in trial.

 

[750Chestnut]

Yeah, I can see your point...

I believe he meant that you can get over it and prepare to defend against the additional charges in trial.

.....but if by not sending a written disagreement, would the court look at me as not caring enough about these additional charges, and therefore not caring about my own defense, and irresponsible. I don't want to go in with any added prejudice against me from the court's perspective. I face a challenge as it is, and want to lessen all hurdles!

 

[tranquility]

.....but if by not sending a written disagreement, would the court look at me as not caring enough about these additional charges, and therefore not caring about my own defense, and irresponsible. I don't want to go in with any added prejudice against me from the court's perspective. I face a challenge as it is, and want to lessen all hurdles!

And, that is why you are going to lose. You are stubborn and unable to understand the simplest recommendations of people you came to ask. It seems you have no idea of the legal system. You are nothing but a number at this point. There is no judge carefully reviewing every jot and tittle of the process. The motion was probably one of dozens and dozens (on an easy day) he granted/denied without much of a thought based on common principles. He probably didn't spend a minute reading it and got the summary from the clerk and decided upon that. He has no idea who you are or what your argument is and he really doesn't care. Your "disagreement" will be nothing but a disagreement WITH HIS DECISION.

Now, you tell me what is going to earn you more prejudice. Failure to disagree with something that is routinely approved and implies nothing about the truth of the charges or disagreement with his decision and being a general PITA? Your call.