Rule 3.724 DUTY TO MEET AND CONFER – Linda Ayres vs. STATE FARM et al – CIV SB 2106284
(1) Resolving any discovery disputes and setting a discovery schedule;
(2) Identifying and, if possible, informally resolving any anticipated motions;
(3) Identifying the facts and issues in the case that are uncontested and may be the subject of stipulation;
(4) Identifying the facts and issues in the case that are in dispute;
(5) Determining whether the issues in the case can be narrowed by eliminating any claims or defenses by means of a motion or otherwise;
(6) Determining whether settlement is possible;
[Maybe not, after that response! Figuring out what’s next from here… I AM OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS!!
Sheeeeezh! Dealing with attorneys in litigation is not supposed to be like walking on eggs shells in a bad relationship, is it?!
Sure feels like disability discrimination and elder abuse, ALL OVER AGAIN!! DARN IT! ]
(7) Identifying the dates on which all parties and their attorneys are available or not available for trial, including the reasons for unavailability;
(8) Any issues relating to the discovery of electronically stored information, including:
(A) Issues relating to the preservation of discoverable electronically stored information;
(B) The form or forms in which information will be produced;
(C) The time within which the information will be produced;
(D) The scope of discovery of the information;
(E) The method for asserting or preserving claims of privilege or attorney work product, including whether such claims may be asserted after production;
(F) The method for asserting or preserving the confidentiality, privacy, trade secrets, or proprietary status of information relating to a party or person not a party to the civil proceedings;
(G) How the cost of production of electronically stored information is to be allocated among the parties;
(H) Any other issues relating to the discovery of electronically stored information, including developing a proposed plan relating to the discovery of the information; and
(9) Other relevant matters.
Rule 3.724 amended effective August 14, 2009; adopted effective January 1, 2007.
“Re scheduling, our responsive pleading is due in 30 days so the meet-and-confer should occur before that.
We can satisfy that meet-and-confer either by email, telephone or Zoom call as you proposed.
We will not agree to recording.
I don’t know what any of the other counsel are doing and I need to focus on my own defense.
The pleading issues would need to be resolved at the outset before evidentiary issues or mediation or trial.
Ideally you will locate an attorney to handle the case for you.
Thank you again.”
I DO NOT KNOW WHAT THIS MEANS:
“Your motion date is ____10/26/21________ at _09:00______am in department __S22______.
Parties are required to file their civil motion and submit the filing fees within five (5) court days from the date of receipt of the confirmation email.”
Is that referencing your Answer/Pleadings, that is supposed to come after Meet and Confer, not before?
By copy to all known defense firms and defendants who have not, as yet, provided contact information for defense counsel, I am suggesting that all parties respectfully respect that I am an American with Disabilities, and further discrimination and abuse that cost me my home and health will not be tolerated.
*Rule 3.727. Subjects to be considered at the case management conference
In any case management conference or review conducted under this chapter, the parties must address, if applicable, and the court may take appropriate action with respect to, the following:
(1) Whether there are any related cases;
(2) Whether all parties named in the complaint or cross-complaint have been served, have appeared, or have been dismissed;
(3) Whether any additional parties may be added or the pleadings may be amended;
(4) Whether, if the case is a limited civil case, the economic litigation procedures under Code of Civil Procedure section 90 et seq. will apply to it or the party intends to bring a motion to exempt the case from these procedures;
(5) Whether any other matters (e.g., the bankruptcy of a party) may affect the court’s jurisdiction or processing of the case;
(6) Whether the parties have stipulated to, or the case should be referred to, judicial arbitration in courts having a judicial arbitration program or to any other form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process and, if so, the date by which the judicial arbitration or other ADR process must be completed;
(7) Whether an early settlement conference should be scheduled and, if so, on what date;
(8) Whether discovery has been completed and, if not, the date by which it will be completed;
(9) What discovery issues are anticipated;
(10) Whether the case should be bifurcated or a hearing should be set for a motion to bifurcate under Code of Civil Procedure section 598;
(11) Whether there are any cross-complaints that are not ready to be set for trial and, if so, whether they should be severed;
(12) Whether the case is entitled to any statutory preference and, if so, the statute granting the preference;
(13) Whether a jury trial is demanded, and, if so, the identity of each party requesting a jury trial;
(14) If the trial date has not been previously set, the date by which the case will be ready for trial and the available trial dates;
(15) The estimated length of trial;
(16) The nature of the injuries;
(17) The amount of damages, including any special or punitive damages;
(18) Any additional relief sought;
(19) Whether there are any insurance coverage issues that may affect the resolution of the case; and
(20) Any other matters that should be considered by the court or addressed in its case management order.
Rule 3.727 adopted effective January 1, 2007.
|Larry Thomas||President of Contractor Connection|
|Lance Malcolm||Vice President of Contractor Connection|
|Tim Egnman||Issue Resolution Department|
|Don Riley||Issue Resolution Department|
|Danielle M. Lisenbey||Global President, TPA Solutions:|
|Kieran Rigby||Global President, Crawford Claims Solutions|
|Joseph O. Blanco||President|
|Michelle Montgomeryhell||CRAWFORD – VP Marketing & Communications|
|Jack Schafer||SVP & Chief Client Officer, Los Adjusting Services, US|
|PAUL DAVIS RESTORATION|
|Shawn Clark||CIO/Chief Information Officer|
|Edward Waller||CBO/ Chief Brand Officer|
|Brad Cowen||Senior VP of Business Development|
|Stephanie Rosenstone||EA to President & CEO, Rich Wilson|
|AL Whitaker||VP Marketing|
|Heather Bradley||National Account Manager|
|Restoration & Remediation Magazine|
|Rhonda Sanderson||Sanderson PR|
|SERVPRO||Servpro Industries, LLC|
|Rick Isaacson||Chief Executive Officer|
|John Sooker||COO, Executive VP|
|Jeff Fields||Chief Information Officer|
|Matt Preston||Chief Legal Officer, VP|
|Kim Brooks||Corporate Communications Coordinator|
|Multiple Adjusters & Managers at Phoenix AZ Claims office & Atlanta Processing Center|
Attached is a link to the 2021 California Rules of Court – Rule 3.724 Duty to meet and confer. For those parties not willing to have a recorded discussion of the items in the Rule, kindly respond in correspondence, with hard copy mailed to me at my PO Box 835 Yucca Valley CA 92286and a courtesy email copy to me at email@example.com
6 thoughts on “DUTY TO MEET AND CONFER? What the heck does THAT entail?”
I was wondering how things were going. The courts seem to be backed up. These clowns are too annoying.
LikeLiked by 2 people
WOW! WHO KNEW THIS ABOUT THAT?!! #GoshDarnCrooks! #CAHOOTS #RICO
“Plaintiffs’ complaint alleges seven subsidiary association-in-fact racketeering enterprises exist within at least three companies owned by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company including State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, State Farm Lloyds, and State Farm Lloyds, Inc. The complaint shows multiple association-in-fact racketeering enterprises controlled by the Individual Defendants engaged in extortion, robbery and fraud in the claims processes conducted by the association-in-fact racketeering enterprises embedded in State Farm Fire and Casualty Company and State Farm Lloyds. The complaint shockingly alleges and supports the Defendants’ usage of monies derived from illegal activities to establish, operate and manage racketeering enterprises purposefully to protect the State Farm Group’s fraudulent sales schemes…”
Learn more about #ThoseRacketeers! #InsurerWars
GOOGLE IT: LINDA AYRES VS STATE FARM
also google: STATE FARM RICO
#GodBlessAmerica and #DeliverUsFromTheUnACCOUNTABLE
READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE. DRAW YOUR OWN CONCLUSIONS.
REMEMBER REMEMBER —
WE ARE THE MEDIA NOW
I would love it if you took a moment to check out my #GoFundMe campaign:
Your support would mean a lot to me.
Thank you so much!
– Linda Ayres
“Mold Medical Damages
Establishing mold medical damages is an important factor when entering mold litigation. Health damages from mold exposure are often connected to the highest settlement figures once long-term health effects, or irreversible health conditions have been proven from mold exposure. Other environmental pathogens like endotoxins and bacteria from water damaged structures may also be a strong contributing factor to your medical damages. We have provided some insight into our process for:
Establishing damages as a result of mold exposure
Identifying early indicators connected to environmental toxins
Pinpointing long-term health effects as a result of mold and bacteria exposure
Picking the correct medical testing for a true medical and environmental connection”