Car (1).jpg

A.  This is the polite way I have to fight defendants who move the court to dismiss my client’s case. (Page 1 of 15).

In a chain reaction freeway collision, both defendants admittedly rear ended the vehicles in front of them.  They claim they are neither negligent nor a proximate cause of injuries to Mr. F who was smashed in between them.

            If this collision had been caught on film, the defendants would not have the temerity to bring this motion.  But due to darkness, air bags deploying, and various levels of unconsciousness, the individual participants are not always precise in the retelling of the story.  Thus giving rise to defendant’s misplaced hope that they can avoid responsibility.

            The defendants effort should fail for the following two reasons: 1) the facts as perceived by five different witnesses, are clear enough to prove negligence and causation when viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff; and 2) the expert forensic reconstruction of the collision performed by expert Larry Tompkins fully supports plaintiff’s liability case.  

B.  Here is  wishful thinking  of what I’d like to actually tell the court (Page 1 of 1):

This motion is a frivolous waste of time.  The defense filed this because they get paid by the hour and don’t care if time is wasted.  Their actions caused Mr. F’s car to get bashed to holy heck.  Their dumb motion should be thrown out of court.

C.  Here is the letter I sent to the defense counsel after I had to write the formal (polite) motion response.

Cvr Ltr re MSJ Response 9.10.12.pdf

D,  And then what happens?

Well, as of today Sept. 13th, one of the defendants has caved.  If the other one doesn’t drop it, he will be pounded to smithereens at the hearing.