Defendant makes defamatory statement about the plaintiff in answer to discovery

[Thelitigator]

what kinds of trouble are you talking about with answering beyond what the question asks?

 

[Taxing Matters]

I believe the fraud on the court comment is relevant to answering the interrogatory.

How would that possibly be relevant to answering any question in the interrogatory?

what kinds of trouble are you talking about with answering beyond what the question asks?

You provide possible ammunition for the opposing side to use against you later. You never want to provide more information to the other side than you must. That statement made in the interrogatory can be used against you if, for example, you testify differently at the trial, the opposing side has other evidence to show the statement you made was not true, or additional evidence in the case makes what you said turn out to be bad for your case. Answer the question you are given truthfully, but do not then go on to add things that were not asked about.

 

[Thelitigator]

The opposing counsel has requested access to the client to download the amended discovery work. It's my understanding that only the attorney needs to have direct access for downloading documents. Is there a risk to not granting access to the attorney's client to download documents per his request?

 

[Zigner]

There may be risks involved, however, that is pushing up to (and likely over) the general advice that an internet forum can give. You need an attorney.

 

[Thelitigator]

There's nothing to prevent the attorney from downloading it and sending it to the client himself.

 

[Taxing Matters]

Is there a risk to not granting access to the attorney's client to download documents per his request?

You mean beyond simply annoying the attorney? Probably not, but then I don't know all the specifics of the discovery request and response. On the other hand, assuming the system you use is secure, I don't see any problem in granting the client access either. It's not like denying the client access would give you any advantage in the litigation, after all.

 

[Thelitigator]

The opposing counsel has been extremely hostile beyond annoyances towards the plaintiff. Why should the plaintiff become a secretary for the opposing counsel when acting this way?

 

[Taxing Matters]

The opposing counsel has been extremely hostile beyond annoyances towards the plaintiff. Why should the plaintiff become a secretary for the opposing counsel when acting this way?

That's up to you to decide. But simply setting the computer to allow the client access hardly strikes me as becoming a "secretary" for the opposing counsel. It's a one time thing and you're done.

 

[Thelitigator]

I have a question about mediation. If both sides come to an agreement, would the opposing counsel who threatens to file a motion on a date after mediation now not follow through with filing the motion after the agreement?

 

[quincy]

I have a question about mediation. If both sides come to an agreement, would the opposing counsel who threatens to file a motion on a date after mediation now not follow through with filing the motion after the agreement?

What would the motion be for?

 

[Thelitigator]

monetary damages

 

[quincy]

monetary damages

That would be part of any agreement reached during mediation, I would assume.

 

[Thelitigator]

would mutual waivers apply to this? This is only a tentative agreement. No formal agreements have been signed yet. I would think it's a filing in bad faith to go forward with it.

 

[Thelitigator]

I would think it's a filing in bad faith to go forward with it.

 

[Thelitigator]

The opposing counsel has expressed that is the case.