United Online (Netzero) suit update: court used INCORRECT old rules
NetZero had filed a motion for summary judgment (more on that in the next posting) and we previously had the trial hearing scheduled for 12/3, next Monday. Since I haven’t received anything from the Kingman justice court about vacating that hearing, I called them yesterday.
They told me that the hearing would be held. When I asked what the purpose of the hearing would be since I have until AFTER the hearing to respond to the msj, she told me that I had only 20 days to respond to the motion (15 days + 5 days for mailing) and that my response had to be filed today as she would give the file to the judge for ruling on Friday morning.
I had researched the Arizona state rules and read that I had 30 days, plus 5 days for mailing. I was transferred to Samantha who knows more about rules and she asked me what exactly I was reading. Had to call her back to pull up the page online, Rule 56(c)1. Samantha was reading the same rule to me, identical words, but in her version I had only 15 days instead of 30 as WestLaw had online.
Samantha told me that they were going by THEIR book and that I could find it at the law library.
I thought there must be some local rules that I hadn’t found yet and I called the library. After several calls of the librarian to the court and researching and calling me back, it became obvious that the librarian was looking at the 2007 rules with 30 days (same as what I got online) and the justice court used the 2006 rules.
Samantha later left a message for me, advising that the judge decided to give me the 30 days I’m entitled to and that the hearing was vacated.
Chances are that my response would still be due today and that my case would have been dismissed on Monday (if not tomorrow) if I hadn’t appealed judge Taylor’s dismissal of my case against First Magnus (now out of business) last year and I PREVAILED on appeal.
I wasted an entire afternoon, but at least I didn’t have to waste more time on filing something today, making my 150 mile round trip to the court today and on Monday and then having to file the appeal, pay the fees, etc.
The million dollar questions:
Are the new rules not provided to the courts?
How many people got screwed in 2007 because they didn’t get enough time to respond to motions for summary judgment? My case # is 2339, filed 7/9/07. Chances are, motions of summary judgment were filed. NOBODY pointed out to the court that they have to get the new rules?
After Samantha had insisted that my response was due today, I called United Online attorney Keith Knochel to request an extension.
He wasn’t available and I left a message for him. When he hadn’t called back after a couple hours and despite the librarian’s effort it looked like the deadline was today, I called his office again. I was put on hold and then told “he said no.” I asked whether they wanted to attend the Monday hearing and she enthusiastically announced that they’d be there.
I was set up to be railroaded in Kangaroo Court again.
Of course attorney Knochel must know that I really had 30 days to respond and it’s very rare that an opposing attorney will refuse an extension. But just like the First Magnus attorney, he’s a scum sucking bottom feeding lying and extraordinary incompetent lawyer and just wants to rack up legal fees. And while he can refuse to talk to me, that doesn’t keep me from talking about him.
His filings are mind blowing, more on that in a bit.
Posted by Christine on 11/29/2007 at 11:36 AM
2007 United Online (NetZero) suit (on appeal - venue) • (0) Comments • Permalink
