Author Topic: A letter in question.  (Read 804 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

cipherbsae

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 36
A letter in question.
« on: March 31, 2012 11:04:04 PM »
Hello.

      Currently I have two cases set for a pretrial on April 23.

       The letter below was sent to me by a  lawyer working with Cavalry Spv 1.


Dear Mr. xxxxxxx:

     The court has schedueled a trial setting conference in this case for April 23, 2012, as per the copy of its order, enclosed. The court's order requires us to formulate a discovery plan and to set a proposed date for trial.

     I propose the following plan: we accept the court's standard pretrial deadlines per the sample order, copy enclosed, and that we schedule trial in this matter for October 2012 or after.  If a settlement conference becomes desirable we will request the court to schedule one, but will not request that one to be scheduled at htis point.

     Please contact me to discuss the proposed plan, and to discuss the possibility of settling this matter before eithe side incurs more unnecessary litigation expense.  If I do not hear from you prior to the scheduled trial setting conference, I will share the contents of this letter with the court and request that my proposaed plan be accepted.

     Finally, please be aware that we reserve the right to seek to resolve the case through motion practice prior to trial.

Sincerely yours,

xxxxx xxxxxxx



      The above letter and being slapped with discovery by other firm has me scratching my head.

      I am hoping that someone here can provide me with some tips of how to respond.

      Thanks.

     

     

     


   

CleaningUp

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 8529
Re: A letter in question.
« Reply #1 on: March 31, 2012 11:30:36 PM »
They are trying to set up a schedule for completion of pre-trial motions and discovery.  This is normal.

It is best to work with them to come up with something that is mutually agreeable.

cipherbsae

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 36
Re: A letter in question.
« Reply #2 on: March 31, 2012 11:58:47 PM »
Thanks CleaningUp.


So should I discuss the possibility of settlement at this point?


Thanks.

Fighting Irish

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 1988
Re: A letter in question.
« Reply #3 on: April 01, 2012 12:21:12 AM »
My preference is to follow the "She who speaks first, loses" philosophy.

They mentioned settlement, they spoke first.

You could ask them what they propose, as they brought up the notion of settlement.

After you stop rolling on the floor, come up with your absolute best case settlement, like, for instance, case is dismissed with prejudice, they pay you $1000 per employee who has contacted you in relation to the case for FDCPA violations, no 1099-C and TL deletion.
Dang it, Jim! I'm a nurse, not an attorney!

(The rest of you, keep that in mind, too.)

cipherbsae

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 36
Re: A letter in question.
« Reply #4 on: April 01, 2012 12:41:43 AM »
I like your approach Fighting Irish.

Thanks.

 

credit