COURT RULES REQUIRE FILING CROSS COMPLAINTS WITH REPLIES
Either "Oversight, inadvertance, neglect, mistake or other cause" triggers need for filing of
"Motion for Leave to File Cross Complaint"
Notably absent, but I wouldn't rule it out, "incompetence" could be another word for "other cause" in the case of a recent filing by DeckTech's attorneys in the Smith vs DeckTech Inc case currently pending in SLO Superior Court.
If you are being sued and you are blaming someone else for the events that led to your being sued, you will want to cross file and sue the guy who done it so to speak.
 |
| Decktech Inc's attorneys have filed a 62 page pleading to cross file against others in the suit against DeckTech. |
Court rules require filing cross-complaints to be filed with answers to a plaintiff's complaint at the same time. That wasn't done at the time DeckTech's attorneys, Von Ryan Reyes & Felicia Jafferies, of Ericksen Arbuthnot of San Jose filed their clients answer with the Court. This appears to be a big screw up, as they did try to file their cross-complaint the day after filing their answer, but Court rules require they be filed at the same time. A third year law clerk would probably think to check the filing requirements...don't know what happened here or what the thought process was, wouldn't you just file all your documents at once?
Shouldn't the attorneys know the Court's rules at a minimum? Now they have to beg the Judge to allow this cross complaint in so they can sue DeckTech's subs (Roes 1-10) and anyone else they feel was responsible or caused a problem. Part of their original reply to the complaint was alteration of their product and misuse so it's likely they may try to sue others as well.
As to suing "others" who performed work or altered products etc., the result might be more than what the defendant bargained for or envisioned when the thought rolled through their little head. Discovery has an evil way working both ways and leading to questions being asked a witness/defendant that some other person doesn't want asked and that leads to people who don't want to be depositioned being served to give a deposition and provide paperwork...and of course that all becomes part of open court records. Could prove to be very embarrassing and disastrous.
Then of course you have to aksk-How much does Decktech's attorney bill an hour? I'd hate to get a bill for this work in rectifying what could and should have been done one day later...In fact, I'd tell my lawyer to pay for that work out of his pocket, wouldn't you?
So the attorneys filed a request to come grovel before the Judge and 'splain why they should be allowed to get their cross complaint in...which basically boils down to we wanna sue the subs and get money from them. There's probably some responsibility from the subs, but the only one I really see having a problem is the tile installer.
Here are the links to download and view the most recent pleadings
Here DeckTech's lawyers are seeking to blame others for DeckTech's work they subbed out. The tile installer has the biggest problem from what we see. He installed it wrong and laid it out improperly.
Here Attorney Reyes basically admits in legalese to making some mistake, oversight or inadvertance when it came to filing the cross complaint on a timely basis...
Here Attorney Reyes makes his argument for being allowed to file a cross complaint. One result if it's denied is DeckTech would be paying the whole bill if found against in the suit. The companies "Private Capital Investors" probably wouldn't like that much.
DeckTech also faces legal trouble with the State of California Attorney General's office where CSLB has referred them to be charged with multiple Business Code violations. We are following up on that side as well.
We are waiting and checking to see if new documents in the case are filed on a weekly basis-check back for further updates.
Leave us a comment if you'd like.
No comments:
Post a Comment