R
rapunzel41
Guest
What is the name of your state? florida
small claims, landlord/tenant
i, plantiff (pro se-tenant), received answers to interrogatories to co-parties (married couple represented by attorney).
one was signed, notarized. one was not, this is the one described as "unverifiable".
in addition, some answers are extremely vague, some answers are not addressed in full, and some answers regarding the party's own physical presence in the apartment throughout the tenancy were ignored.
Q1. is this grounds for a directed verdict under FRCP 1.380 a(2) and FRCP1.380 b(1) & b(2)C ?
Q2. or is this strictly lawyer play? don't judges get pissed at those who do not comply with discovery?
thanks for your opinions.
small claims, landlord/tenant
i, plantiff (pro se-tenant), received answers to interrogatories to co-parties (married couple represented by attorney).
one was signed, notarized. one was not, this is the one described as "unverifiable".
in addition, some answers are extremely vague, some answers are not addressed in full, and some answers regarding the party's own physical presence in the apartment throughout the tenancy were ignored.
Q1. is this grounds for a directed verdict under FRCP 1.380 a(2) and FRCP1.380 b(1) & b(2)C ?
Q2. or is this strictly lawyer play? don't judges get pissed at those who do not comply with discovery?
thanks for your opinions.