Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
The following blog entry is written to illustrate a common motion filed during civil litigation. Reviewing this kind of filing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.
(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this car accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)
Plaintiff Anna Brown’s Objection and Opposition to Defendant XYZ Tire, Inc.’s Motion for a Protective Order Limiting the Number of Plaintiffs’ Experts
PRELIMINARY OBJECTION
Defendant XYZ Tire, Inc., failed to give adequate notice, or to file its motion, according to the deadlines provided in California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1005(b). C.C.P. §1005(b) requires that the defendant’s motion and supporting papers be filed and served at least 16 court days before the hearing. The hearing is scheduled for April 23, but the moving papers were filed on April 2, only fourteen (14) court days before the hearing. The moving papers, delivered by express mail, should have been served no later than March 28. Instead they were served on Friday, April 2, and delivered on Monday, April 5, more than a week after plaintiffs’ counsel should have received them.
On March 26, XYZ brought an ex parte application to schedule the hearing on this motion for a date between April 16 and April 23, 2010. XYZ ‘s counsel did not request an order shortening time. To the contrary, defense counsel Allison Greene observed that the motion could be served with “normal notice.”
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
In her declaration in support of the ex parte application (filed on March 25), defense counsel Allison Greene declared that a true and correct copy of the proposed motion was attached as Exhibit A. Yet on March 26, when her Honor asked Ms. Greene (who appeared by Court Call) whether the motion was ready to file and serve, defense counsel stated that the papers were “not quite ready” (contrary to defense counsel’s declaration). (See Part 2 of 5.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.