Corrinet v. Bardy

by
In February 2013, plaintiff, an attorney acting in pro per, filed suit, claiming breach of fiduciary duty and conversion. In May 2013, attorney Mencher filed a general denial answer on behalf of the defendants, asserting 29 affirmative defenses. In July, at the first case management conference, both sides stated they were agreeable to mediation and that the case was too complex to be ready for trial within 12 months. At a November 2013 conference, it was reported that plaintiff had been ill since July. The years that followed involved extensive discovery, three judges, continuing health problems, attempts at mediation, and complications involving the related cases. On July 15, 2016, trial was set for June 26, 2017. In March 2017, plaintiff paid jury fees. The following month, he moved by stipulation to change the trial date based on health problems. The court re-set the trial date to January 22, 2018. The case was dismissed in December 2017 for failure to prosecute. (Code Civ. Proc., 583.410–583.430.). The court of appeal reversed, finding the dismissal constituted an abuse of discretion. Plaintiff served discovery and responded to defendants’ discovery and was actively involved in the related cases. Plaintiff paid jury fees, disclosed his expert witnesses, retained lawyers to assist him and filed a declaration of counsel attesting that he was ready to try this case. The defendants acknowledged repeatedly that plaintiff was ill during the discovery phase and discovery was ongoing. View "Corrinet v. Bardy" on Justia Law