The judge in the controversial lawsuit to have an autistic boy declared a "public nuisance" delivered strong remarks to a packed courtroom, but did not rule on the pending motions, including a motion to quash the third-party subpoenas for the boy's private records. Those motions are stayed, and the plaintiffs will not be entitled to the records unless the judge rules otherwise at a later time.
Instead, expressing her "dismay" at the heavily litigious way the case was proceeding, she asked the parties to be "solutions-oriented" and engage in a court-supervised settlement conference. The defendants had sought such a route months ago, but the plaintiffs would not agree. This time, they agreed.
She expressed some shock that the "bright people" who are parties to this lawsuit could not find a way to solve this neighborhood conflict. Then, she was quick to note the "bright people" did not include counsel in this case.
The judge's overall message was clear: protracted, expensive litigation is no way to resolve an issue like the one at hand.
We could not agree more.
Instead, expressing her "dismay" at the heavily litigious way the case was proceeding, she asked the parties to be "solutions-oriented" and engage in a court-supervised settlement conference. The defendants had sought such a route months ago, but the plaintiffs would not agree. This time, they agreed.
She expressed some shock that the "bright people" who are parties to this lawsuit could not find a way to solve this neighborhood conflict. Then, she was quick to note the "bright people" did not include counsel in this case.
The judge's overall message was clear: protracted, expensive litigation is no way to resolve an issue like the one at hand.
We could not agree more.
RSS Feed