McGraw et al ANSWER filed 1/26/07 FULL DOCUMENT

[resigned]

Defendants want to know whether Skeeters' estate will be substituted as a party ... that's the only way to keep him in the suit. K2 don't want to designate the estate as a party yet, and they dont want to dismiss him either. They are delaying basically. The motion is filed by attorneys representing Skeeters' interest, in essence his estaste.

Thank you for the summation. That does help me to understand what is going on better....some of it anyway. I guess some of it is legal "strategy".

You're welcome. There's certainly some strategy or posturing going on .. K2 lawyers say they won't submit Deepak for depositions until all parties are named. Then they intentionally delay naming Skeeters' estate as a party. There's really no reason to delay .. they can always dismiss him later if they want to. They say they are evaluating whether to name him and collect from his insurance company, but again there's no reason not to name him other than delaying/avoiding depositions.

Will the Judge hear this motion on the 30th?

If so, do you think he'll rule from the bench or more waiting?

---------

Do you know what the Hearing scheduled/conference in Sept. (I think) re: Beth & Dave and The Kalpoe's suit is concerning? I thought that the wrongful death suit was dismissed flat out for lack of jurisdiction in CA.

[doc]

I think he heard the motion on the 30th and I believe Skeeters was dismissied from the suit. Still trying to confirm whether there was a ruling on the Motion to Compel.

[resigned]

I think he heard the motion on the 30th and I believe Skeeters was dismissied from the suit. Still trying to confirm whether there was a ruling on the Motion to Compel.

Thank You, doc. I would appreciate it if you could post any confirmation when you find out. Also, if you know anything about the Dec. 5th date regarding the wrongful death case-management conference:

Future Hearings
12/05/2007 at 08:30 am in department 33 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Conference-Case Management

Is this a date that was scheduled prior to dismissal of the suit and just hasn't been removed, or something else? TIA

[doc]

Dont hold me to this but I believe the Dec 5 date was mentioned in the minute order when the court ruled there was no personal jurisdiction over K2. To be honest, I dont know what it is and I dont know why there are still live pleadings or issues if the case was dismissed. I'm not sure the whole case was dismissed - there was the ruling that there is no personal jurisdiction over K2 but perhaps there's still an issue about whether the wrongful death and defamation cases are related enough to give rise to some kind of ancillary jurisdiction. That's just speculation - I cant imagine what else there is to decide unless it's an issue of awarding attorney's fees.

[resigned]

Dont hold me to this but I believe the Dec 5 date was mentioned in the minute order when the court ruled there was no personal jurisdiction over K2. To be honest, I dont know what it is and I dont know why there are still live pleadings or issues if the case was dismissed. I'm not sure the whole case was dismissed - there was the ruling that there is no personal jurisdiction over K2 but perhaps there's still an issue about whether the wrongful death and defamation cases are related enough to give rise to some kind of ancillary jurisdiction. That's just speculation - I cant imagine what else there is to decide unless it's an issue of awarding attorney's fees.

I'm not going to pretend that I know all of what you just said, but I'll look into it to the best of my ability. Interesting.

Thank You.

[doc]

Dont hold me to this but I believe the Dec 5 date was mentioned in the minute order when the court ruled there was no personal jurisdiction over K2. To be honest, I dont know what it is and I dont know why there are still live pleadings or issues if the case was dismissed. I'm not sure the whole case was dismissed - there was the ruling that there is no personal jurisdiction over K2 but perhaps there's still an issue about whether the wrongful death and defamation cases are related enough to give rise to some kind of ancillary jurisdiction. That's just speculation - I cant imagine what else there is to decide unless it's an issue of awarding attorney's fees.

I'm not going to pretend that I know all of what you just said, but I'll look into it to the best of my ability. Interesting.

Thank You.

Short answer -- I dont know.

[doc]

Looks like the Motion to Compel and the Motion to Dismiss were both heard on the 30th and have been submitted for consideration but no ruling yet:

http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.d ... eorder.pdf

[resigned]

Looks like the Motion to Compel and the Motion to Dismiss were both heard on the 30th and have been submitted for consideration but no ruling yet:

http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.d ... eorder.pdf

Thanks. Just out of curiosity, in the last sentence of the pdf.

"CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE is called for hearing and trails ruling on the submitted motions"

Is the word trails a legal term? Or is that a misspelling of trials?

[doc]

No clue. Wondered that myself. "Trails" is no legal term of art that I'm aware of.

Happy Trials!

[gwen]

Motion to Dismiss denied; Motion to Compel Granted

Entered 09-07-2007


http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.d ... _order.pdf

[JamiJo]

So will the latest in Aruba have any play on this?

[sandraK]

No clue. Wondered that myself. "Trails" is no legal term of art that I'm aware of.

Happy Trials!

Indeed

[resigned]

Notice of Ruling Re: Plaintiff Failure to Appear Filed 12-11-7

http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.d ... ruling.pdf


Declaration of Siegfert in Response to Motion for Sanctions for Failure to Appear Filed 12-12-07

http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.d ... graw/3.pdf


Defendant's Second Supplement to Motion to Dismiss for Discovery Abuse Filed 12-26-07

http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.d ... uppdef.pdf


Continuance of Hearings on Stay and Sanctions until 2-5-08 Entered 1-3-08

http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.d ... minute.pdf

[resigned]

Declaration of Satish Kalpoe re:Discovery Documents 2/08/08

http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.d ... covery.pdf

Declaration of Deepak Kalpoe re:Discovery Documents02/08/08

http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.d ... covery.pdf

Declaration of William Cremer, Esq, re: Discovery Documents/Fee-Privileged 02/08/08

http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.d ... ration.pdf

[resigned]

Latest from McGraw/Kalpoe posted 02/22/08

http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.d ... ismiss.pdf


http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.d ... elResp.pdf


http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.d ... elResp.pdf

[dugo]

links died

[sarge]

Case Number: BC363201
DEEPAK KALPOE VS PHILLIP C MCGRAW
Filing Date: 12/13/2006
Case Type: Defamation (Slander/Libel) (General Jurisdiction)
Status: Pending

Future Hearings
10/15/2008 at 08:30 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Motion to Strike (Complaint Pursuant to CCP 425.162) Second Motion to Dismiss andRequest for Terminating Sanctions3) Case Management Conference)

12/04/2008 at 08:30 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Motion to Compel ((4))

SEPTEMBER ACTIVITY

09/11/2008 Proof of Service (RE MOTION TO COMPEL, ETC. )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

09/10/2008 Miscellaneous-Other (UNOPPOSED APPLICATION FOR COMMISSION TO TAKE ORAL DEPOSITION OF A NON-PARTY IN FLORIA )Filed by Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

09/10/2008 Motion to Compel (DEFT TO PROVIDE FURTHER INTERROGATORY RESPONSES, ETC. SET: 12-4-08)
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

09/10/2008 Motion to Compel (DEFT. TO PROVIDE FURTHER INTERROGATORY RESPONSES, ETC. SET: 12-4-08)
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

09/10/2008 Motion to Compel (DEFT TO PROVIDE FURTHER FURTHER INTERROGATORY RESPONSES, ETC. SET: 12-4-08)
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

09/10/2008 Motion to Compel (DEFT. McGRAW TO PROVIDE FURTHER INTERROGATORY RESPONSES, ETC. SET: 12-4-08)
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

[resigned]

12/03/2008 Order (ORDER RE STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES TO CONTINUE THE RULING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT, DEFENDANTS' SECOND MOTION TO DISMISS, PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL THE PRO HAC VICE)
Filed by Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

12/03/2008 Stipulation (STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES TO CONTINUE THE RULING ON DEFENDANTS' SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT DEFENDANTS' SECOND MOTION TO DISMISS, PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL THE PRO HAC VICE APPLICATIN)
Filed by Attorney for Defendant/Respondent


Future Hearings
12/04/2008 at 08:30 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Motion to Compel (Further Interrogatory Responsesand Production of Documents (4);2) Second Motion to Dismiss andRequest for Terminating Sanctions3) Case Management Conference)

[resigned]

Case Number: BC363201
DEEPAK KALPOE VS PHILLIP C MCGRAW

Filing Date: 12/13/2006
Case Type: Defamation (Slander/Libel) (General Jurisdiction)
Status: Pending

Future Hearings

03/26/2009 at 08:30 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Motion to Compel (Further Interrogatory Responsesand Production of Documents (4);2) Second Motion to Dismiss andRequest for Terminating Sanctions3) Case Management Conference)

--------------------
other filings:

01/20/2009 Reply/Response (RE THEIR CAUSE OF ACTION FOR MISAPPROPRIATION OF LIKENESS/ INVASION OF PRIVACY )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

01/20/2009 Proof of Service (RE REPLY, ETC. )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

01/16/2009 Miscellaneous-Other (FOURTH JOINT SEPARATE STATEMENT RE DEFTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS, ETC. )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

[RuEVILorGOOD]

What has recently happened with regards to this U.S.-based case?

Case Number: BC363201
DEEPAK KALPOE VS PHILLIP C MCGRAW

Filing Date: 12/13/2006
Case Type: Defamation (Slander/Libel) (General Jurisdiction)
Status: Pending

Future Hearings

03/26/2009 at 08:30 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Motion to Compel (Further Interrogatory Responsesand Production of Documents (4);2) Second Motion to Dismiss andRequest for Terminating Sanctions3) Case Management Conference)

--------------------
other filings:

01/20/2009 Reply/Response (RE THEIR CAUSE OF ACTION FOR MISAPPROPRIATION OF LIKENESS/ INVASION OF PRIVACY )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

01/20/2009 Proof of Service (RE REPLY, ETC. )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

01/16/2009 Miscellaneous-Other (FOURTH JOINT SEPARATE STATEMENT RE DEFTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS, ETC. )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

[dugo]

What has recently happened with regards to this U.S.-based case?

afaik a bunch of motions back and forth..

[resigned]

What has recently happened with regards to this U.S.-based case?

Future Hearings

04/29/2009 at 08:30 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Conference-Case Management

04/06/2009 Objection Document (TO THE DECLS. OF JESSICA L. LESNIEWSKI, DEEPAK KALPOE AND SATISH KALPOE, ETC. )
Filed by Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

04/01/2009 Declaration (OF JESSICA L. LESNIEWSKI, ETC. )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

04/01/2009 Proof of Service
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

03/26/2009 Order (on Application of Jessica L. Lesniewski to Appear as Counsel Pro Hac Vice for Plaintiffs )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

[jolari]

What has recently happened with regards to this U.S.-based case?

Future Hearings

04/29/2009 at 08:30 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Conference-Case Management

04/06/2009 Objection Document (TO THE DECLS. OF JESSICA L. LESNIEWSKI, DEEPAK KALPOE AND SATISH KALPOE, ETC. )
Filed by Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

04/01/2009 Declaration (OF JESSICA L. LESNIEWSKI, ETC. )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

04/01/2009 Proof of Service
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

03/26/2009 Order (on Application of Jessica L. Lesniewski to Appear as Counsel Pro Hac Vice for Plaintiffs )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

DEEPAK KALPOE VS PHILLIP C MCGRAW
Filing Date: 12/13/2006
Case Type: Defamation (Slander/Libel) (General Jurisdiction)
Status: Pending

"Future Hearings
05/06/2010 at 08:30 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Final Status Conference

05/17/2010 at 09:30 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Jury Trial"

[petals]

I saw a ruling in this case posted at scared monkeys this afternoon. Someone else can copy it over here if they want to. It looks like the Judge has granted the motion to dismiss Skeeter's estate. I showed it to my husband, the attorney, and he thinks it is a bad, bad ruling for Dr. Phil. It really leaves Dr. Phil hanging out to dry.

[petals]

Here's a link to the pertinent page of the Judge's Order:

http://i44.tinypic.com/96eywx.jpg