• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Do I need to consolidate my two cases?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

KTMom

Junior Member
What is the name of your state?Hi -- I'm new here and have a question regarding a small claims case I am planning to file in the state of Maryland.

The facts are these. My daughter was tested by a clinical psychologist and educational diagnostician earlier this year. I paid the psychologist $900 and the diagnostician $850 to test my daughter for learning disabilities and to write a report that would enable me to get my daughter the help she needs at school.

The psychologist and diagnostician were both self-employed, billed separately and maintained separate offices out of their homes. Although they worked on cases together, the work was done separately (e.g., the diagnositician administered educational tests, the psychologist administered intelligence tests, and then they both were supposed to discuss their findings and contribute to the final written report.)

The psychologist passed away before writing the report and a student, who never tested my daughter, was assigned to take over for her. The report that he produced was filled with errors and inconsistencies and is utterly worthless.

I have written to both the diagnostician and the psychologist's executrix in an attempt to remedy the situation, but they have not responded. So I have decided to sue in small claims court.

My question is this: Can I name them both as defendants on one complaint form, do I file two separate complaints, or do I need to make a motion to have the cases consolidated?

The court clerk would not answer this question -- she said it was a legal issue and I would have to consult with an attorney for an answer.

Thanks for helping! :)
 


dcatz

Senior Member
Are you seeking different amounts of money from each - ie. are you claiming different damages - or are you claiming that they jointly produced a botched report that lost you/cost you $XX?

I hope that suggests an answer but, going one step further, if you were told that you should sue separately, could you? Are they neatly divisible?

Defendants move to consolidate, not a single plaintiff.

Court employees are not allowed to give legal advice, even if she did know.
 
Last edited:

KTMom

Junior Member
Thanks for the response. I wrote my checks separately to each individual: $900 to the dead psychologist and $850 to the educational diagnostician. The reasons why I am asking for my money back are the same -- scoring errors in report, given one diagnosis orally, a different one in writing, having a student who never tested my daughter do the interpretation, etc. But they are entirely different people who I would be suing. One is the diagnostician herself, who worked with (but independently from) the dead psychologist; the other is the dead psychologist's executrix.

From this, is there any advantage or disadvantage to me to have the cases tried separately? Is there any legal reason why they MUST be tried together or separately? From the court's perspective, I would think they would want to conserve time and resources and have them tried together. But since they won't tell me what I should do, I am at a loss as to how to proceed. I would have to file the complaints and then have the case delayed on procedural grounds.

What do you think?

Thanks again.
 

dcatz

Senior Member
You're right about the Court's perspective and the "efficient administration of justice". And the Court is not allowed to direct you one way or the other; you stand or fall on your own, procedurally and on the merit.

What do I think? I thought it would be clear that they should be named and tried together, for substantive and procedural reasons, but maybe I see some of the problems that were throwing us both.

I don't want to force the *right* answer on you but, once again, did their separate and individual work contribute to a single finished product? While you paid them separately, did you get a single bill?
 

dcatz

Senior Member
Let me flag some considerations (with explanations that are not “text book”):

Individually, jointly and severally: when two or more defendants have caused or contributed to the injury, and you’re not able or willing to ascribe individual percentages of fault, they can be named “individually, jointly and severally” and you leave it to the defendants and the court to sort out measures of culpability. Your job is to prove an injury and cause.

The thing is decided: there’s legalese, but what I’m reaching for here is the fact that, if you name them separately, the hearings are sequential. What if the Court finds in favor of the first defendant and then hears you asserting basically the same set of facts leading to the same injury against the other? A risk exists.

Bored: Describing the same problem on a more mundane level, does the Court want to hear the same case twice, regardless of the outcome of the first hearing? I’m concerned that it won’t want to and, psychologically, could punish you, whether it recognizes it or not. It will wonder why you didn’t name jointly.

Time limitations: You’re going to have about 10 minutes to explain your case, how the injury was incurred, and how you quantify and justify your claim. Maybe this works for you and maybe against you if you join, but I think the Court might give you a little extra time once to explain a complex fact situation. I don’t expect it to do it twice.

No consideration is being given to the merits of your claim. I don’t know if you have a good case. I’m suggesting some things to think about to not make presenting it more difficult than it need be.
 

KTMom

Junior Member
Thanks dcatz. While their individual work was put together to form one single product (the report), they billed me individually and tested my daughter separately (different tests, different days, different locations).

When we decided to meet with the psychologist to have my daughter tested, I was unaware that she worked with someone else. It was at our initial meeting that I was then informed that another tester would be involved.

At this meeting, I was provided with a contract which was signed by both me and the psychologist. (The educational diagnostician was not present and never signed a contract with me). That contract states that the psychologist and diagnostician are a collaborative (the letterhead calls them the "Smith-Jones Collaborative"), but then states "While the associated professionals work cooperatively, each is an independent professional and will individually bill the client for services." The only other terms listed on the contract are for fees.

Does this help clarify anything? Do you think that if I choose wrong -- if I combine the cases when I should try them separately, or vice versa -- that my case may be thrown out?
 

dcatz

Senior Member
I think that if you name jointly, the Court will hear the case and sort the issues out on its own.

I think that if you name separately, the Court may wonder why and may not. Beyond that, it will sort the issues out on its own.

I think that if the defendants don't ask for severance or consolidation, the Court will hear the case(s) in whatever way that you file.

Good luck.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top