Mom lied

[Litigator22]

OK, last question. What form do I use to file complaint in Idaho [sic]? I can't find it anywhere on the self help website. -

PLEASE Mollie! Let me explain something to you. And I speak not from as an "advisor" whatever that is supposed to mean, but from decades as a private practitioner in this business largely devoted to trial work - recently retired.

DO NOT I repeat DO NOT make the mistake of filing you lawsuit in mom's bailiwick. If you do, her Idaho lawyer(s) will beat you senseless with pretrial motions, discovery requests, depositions, pre trial hearings, pretrial orders, personal court appearances, and cascades of paperwork of which you won't know from up or down! And no helpful lawyer is going to be sitting in the wings awaiting your beckon call!

INSTEAD file your action in California invoking California's very liberal and broadly encompassing LONG ARM STATUTE (Cal. CCP Sec. 410.10), which states:

"A court of this state may exercise jurisdiction on any basis not inconsistent with the Constitution of this state or of the United States."

I realize that its about as clear as mud, but what it means is that a California court can exercise personal jurisdiction over a non resident defendant when, for example the defendant has engaged in an activity "in which California jurisdiction was reasonably foreseeable".

A prominent example is this language from the U. S. Supreme Court the case of McGee vs. International Life Insurance Company,355 U. S. 220.

"As the Forum State, California has a strong interest in providing remedies for residents when their debtors fail to properly pay. (Paraphrased to illustrate the analogy) They should not be required to litigate their claims in a distant state."

If you are interested in learning more, say so.

 

[Taxing Matters]

DO NOT I repeat DO NOT make the mistake of filing you lawsuit in mom's bailiwick. If you do, her Idaho lawyer(s) will beat you senseless with pretrial motions, discovery requests, depositions, pre trial hearings, pretrial orders, personal court appearances, and cascades of paperwork of which you won't know from up or down! And no helpful lawyer is going to be sitting in the wings awaiting your beckon call!

While there are certainly some benefits to filing in CA the mother could hire attorneys in CA and they could do exactly the same things you describe above. Going pro se she runs into that problem regardless of the jurisdiction.

 

[Zigner]

to

And I speak not from as an "advisor" whatever that is supposed to mean, but from decades as a private practitioner in this business largely devoted to trial work - recently retired.

You are "advising" the OP, therefor, you are an "advisor". It's plain English.

And no helpful lawyer is going to be sitting in the wings awaiting your beckon call!

The phrase is actually "beck and call".

 

[Zigner]

While there are certainly some benefits to filing in CA the mother could hire attorneys in CA and they could do exactly the same things you describe above. Going pro se she runs into that problem regardless of the jurisdiction.

Since the original case against daughter and mom (which the OP had dismissed against mom without prejudice) was filed in CA, it's a safe bet that mom will hire another (perhaps the same) "fancy lawyer" in CA.

 

[quincy]

I personally think it smarter to file suit in mom’s state of Idaho. It eliminates one possible (costly) fight over jurisdiction. But I don’t think Molly should attempt to sue the mom without guidance from an attorney in Idaho.

 

[mollym.sequoia@]

yes,

Since the original case against daughter and mom (which the OP had dismissed against mom without prejudice) was filed in CA, it's a safe bet that mom will hire another (perhaps the same) "fancy lawyer" in CA.

yes- "fancy lawyer" from santa cruz. The same lawyer they use for their fancy berry business. He would file things then send them to me certified so it would arrive the day before my response was due- giving me no time to educate myself on the issue, prepare, and file the response in a timely manner. It was rough.

 

[mollym.sequoia@]

Since the original case against daughter and mom (which the OP had dismissed against mom without prejudice) was filed in CA, it's a safe bet that mom will hire another (perhaps the same) "fancy lawyer" in CA.

I was thinking Idaho because the trust is in Idaho and the statute of limitations for breach of contract is longer. Im not sure where I would measure from, but im pushing the statute of limitations according the CA rules. Its longer in Idaho.

 

[mollym.sequoia@]

PLEASE Mollie! Let me explain something to you. And I speak not from as an "advisor" whatever that is supposed to mean, but from decades as a private practitioner in this business largely devoted to trial work - recently retired.

DO NOT I repeat DO NOT make the mistake of filing you lawsuit in mom's bailiwick. If you do, her Idaho lawyer(s) will beat you senseless with pretrial motions, discovery requests, depositions, pre trial hearings, pretrial orders, personal court appearances, and cascades of paperwork of which you won't know from up or down! And no helpful lawyer is going to be sitting in the wings awaiting your beckon call!

INSTEAD file your action in California invoking California's very liberal and broadly encompassing LONG ARM STATUTE (Cal. CCP Sec. 410.10), which states:

"A court of this state may exercise jurisdiction on any basis not inconsistent with the Constitution of this state or of the United States."

I realize that its about as clear as mud, but what it means is that a California court can exercise personal jurisdiction over a non resident defendant when, for example the defendant has engaged in an activity "in which California jurisdiction was reasonably foreseeable".

A prominent example is this language from the U. S. Supreme Court the case of McGee vs. International Life Insurance Company,355 U. S. 220.

"As the Forum State, California has a strong interest in providing remedies for residents when their debtors fail to properly pay. (Paraphrased to illustrate the analogy) They should not be required to litigate their claims in a distant state."

If you are interested in learning more, say so.

Im always interested in learning more. Im worried about the stuate of limitations here in CA for breach of contract. Idaho is longer. Also, its a small county in Idaho. Here in CA its a very busy, slow, county. Takes months to get on the calendar. Plus, her lawyer from CA was brutal. I don't think a lawyer from Idaho could be as tough as the one she had from CA.

 

[quincy]

Im always interested in learning more. Im worried about the stuate of limitations here in CA for breach of contract. Idaho is longer. Also, its a small county in Idaho. Here in CA its a very busy, slow, county. Takes months to get on the calendar. Plus, her lawyer from CA was brutal. I don't think a lawyer from Idaho could be as tough as the one she had from CA.

Money can buy “brutal” attorneys, regardless of where in the country you live. In other words, I wouldn’t count on the mom’s attorney in Idaho being any less than the best her wealth can deliver.

DO keep an eye on the calendar. You don’t want to miss a filing date.

 

[mollym.sequoia@]

Money can buy “brutal” attorneys, regardless of where in the country you live. In other words, I wouldn’t count on the mom’s attorney in Idaho being any less than the best her wealth can deliver.

DO keep an eye on the calendar. You don’t want to miss a filing date.

Will do my best. That link you gave will help immensely. You're awesome. Thank you.

 

[quincy]

Will do my best. That link you gave will help immensely. You're awesome. Thank you.

You’re welcome, Molly. We all appreciate the thanks.

 

[Litigator22]

While there are certainly some benefits to filing in CA the mother could hire attorneys in CA and they could do exactly the same things you describe above. Going pro se she runs into that problem regardless of the jurisdiction.

" . . . some benefits"? Do I note some hesitancy on your part? But since you fail to specify let me ask you:

Would any of the benefits to which you seem wiling to to confer include the indisputable fact that by calling forth its long arm statute and choosing California as the forum state Mollie could never be compelled to attend any proceedings in the state of Idaho?!

 

[Taxing Matters]

" . . . some benefits"? Do I note some hesitancy on your part?

There are a number of considerations when deciding in which forum to litigate, and litigating in your home state is not always the best choice, as I'm sure you know with your years of experience, right?

Would any of the benefits to which you seem wiling to to confer include the indisputable fact that by calling forth its long arm statute and choosing California as the forum state Mollie could never be compelled to attend any proceedings in the state of Idaho?!

Certainly saving travel costs would be one benefit.

 

[Litigator22]

Im always interested in learning more. Im worried about the stuate of limitations here in CA for breach of contract. Idaho is longer. Also, its a small county in Idaho. Here in CA its a very busy, slow, county. Takes months to get on the calendar. Plus, her lawyer from CA was brutal. I don't think a lawyer from Idaho could be as tough as the one she had from CA.

If self-confidence and a strong will to succeed were all that is required to win your lawsuit you'd probably come out on top. Unfortunately it isn't enough. You don't have the education or experience. The absence of those skills are in evidence with this shaky business of forum shopping thinking that if your cause of action should expire under California's statute of limitations, you can extend its life for an additional year by filing in Idaho.

What you don't realize and Idaho trial lawyers do (they aren't all country bumpkins, Mollie) is this:

If the Idaho court finds that California has the greater significant relationship to the transaction, it could readily rule that California law and not Idaho's apply. (See: Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws Section 188 "the most significant relationship test" which in essence tell us this:

"In the absence of an effective choice of law by the parties, the validity and effect of a contract are governed by the law of the state having the most significant relationship with the contract."

Moreover, there is ample authority across the country to the effect that statutes of limitations are substantive law and not purely procedural; which gives meaning to the phrase the validity of a contract.

And don't think for a minute that mom's lesser-feted, small town lawyer(s) won't have that issue exhaustively briefed and prepared to convincingly argue in favor of applying California law!
__________________________

What I have tried to do in this thread is to provide some insight from an experienced point of view. In no way is it to be perceived as my belief that you are capable of successfully pursing the claim on your own.

Someone suggested earlier that you pull up and study the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure; in fact conveniently provided you with a link to those rules. What you weren't told is that in law school courses on that subject are known to spawn bridge jumpers! Truly!

In addition there are rules and case law governing the admissibility and means of introducing evidence; rules on examination and cross-examination of witnesses that no layperson could get a working handle on if they struggled with them for a solid year. And the list goes on and on.

In sum, if you are dead set on proceeding on your own, then file in California before the deadline. Attempting to manage a lawsuit in Idaho as an absentee, pro se plaintiff would be insane!