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

[charlierat]

What does the new motion Dr. Phil's lawyers have filed mean? TIA

They have filed an objection to the Plaintiffs' Motion to have the case status changed from "standard" to "complex." I didn't think much of the Plaintiffs' motion to change case status when it was filed. I think the Defendants' objection is well plead and the Plaintiffs' Motion is probably due to be denied.

[Trixie]

They have filed an objection to the Plaintiffs' Motion to have the case status changed from "standard" to "complex." I didn't think much of the Plaintiffs' motion to change case status when it was filed. I think the Defendants' objection is well plead and the Plaintiffs' Motion is probably due to be denied.

If I repeat that back in non-lawyer speak does it sound like this:

The Kalpoe's attorneys wanted the case status to be declared "complex" and now Dr. Phil's attorneys have filed a motion as to why it should be "standard" and not "complex"? You read it and you think Dr. Phil's attorneys will when with "standard" not "complex"?

What's the difference between "standard" and "complex"? Is it the amount of time something has to finally come to trial?

Thanks!

[charlierat]

If I repeat that back in non-lawyer speak does it sound like this:

The Kalpoe's attorneys wanted the case status to be declared "complex" and now Dr. Phil's attorneys have filed a motion as to why it should be "standard" and not "complex"? You read it and you think Dr. Phil's attorneys will when with "standard" not "complex"?

What's the difference between "standard" and "complex"? Is it the amount of time something has to finally come to trial?

Thanks!

You got it. The case was designated "standard" when it was first filed. The Kalpoes recently filed a motion to have it changed to "complex." Dr'ed Phil has just filed an objection to the Kalpoes' Motion.

Here's my explanation of the different track assignments, which I posted about a month ago.

Los Angeles County adopted a three tier case management system for civil matters (which, coincidentally, was adopted by Jefferson County, Alabama circa 1990). The three tiers are: (1) fast track, (2) standard tier, and (3) complex.

Fast track cases would be things like collections on debts and small claims court appeals, in other words, matters that only require minimal discovery and would take less than a day to try. On the fast track, total discovery requests are limited and the case is set for trial within just a few months after filing and answering.

Complex litigation is what it sounds like. Matters like products liability cases with multiple defendants and/or shareholder derivative actions fall into this category. Discovery is virtually unlimited and the Court schedules things way out in time to give all parties all the time they need to prepare for trial. Trials are expected to last for several days or even weeks.

Everything else gets assigned to the standard track. These are your garden variety, bread and butter lawsuits (like personal injury cases and most consumer fraud and breach of contract cases). They have broad but not unlimited discovery and trials are expected to last less than a week and are scheduled like 18 months or two years (or something like that) after filing and answering. Kalpoe v. Dr.'ed Phil has been assigned to the standard track.

All of the above is just from my memory from practicing law in Jefferson County, Alabama for over 18 years. Courts are generally lenient in granting motions to enlarge or modify scheduling orders so things don't always go as originally anticipated. Motions to change track assignment are not unusual but I wouldn't place any bets on this one. It probably should have been filed long ago, if it is really meritorious (but I haven't read the Motion so I don't know what they aver as the grounds for a change in assignment).

I'm sure there is a wiki that will give more specific details on things like allowable discovery and scheduling orders but I didn't bother looking for it.

[resigned]

[Trixie]

......they entered into a conspiracy with Joran Van der Sloot to confuse and frustrate the police investigation of the disappearance of an American citizen, Natalee Holloway, from the island of Aruba over 5 years ago in order to cover up their role in the mystery of what happened to the teenager.


Have they ever admitted that before in any of the documents that have been released?

[gwen]

Future Hearings

09/28/2010 at 08:32 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Motion (to Strike Case Management Order;Motion to Designate Case "Complex"c/f 8-27-10)

01/27/2011 at 08:30 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Final Status Conference (T/D 2-7-2011)

02/07/2011 at 08:32 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Jury Trial (-Final Status Conference-OSC RE: Re Sanctions for Failureof Plntf/Deft Counsel to Appear @FSC)

http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/civilCas ... Type=Civil

[Eliza]

......they entered into a conspiracy with Joran Van der Sloot to confuse and frustrate the police investigation of the disappearance of an American citizen, Natalee Holloway, from the island of Aruba over 5 years ago in order to cover up their role in the mystery of what happened to the teenager.


Have they ever admitted that before in any of the documents that have been released?

Are you new to the case?

Of course, they changed their process verbals, to ALE early on, a practice that is encouraged by the Aruba justice system.

The Kalpoe were never charged with a crime. No charges, no trial.

Not that it matters in a California civil action against McGraw. The lawsuit is about what McGraw and Skeeters did. The Kalpoe, aren't defendants.

[resigned]

I don't think any court is going to award them $800 million in defamation damages after they willfully admit that the entered into a conspiracy to obstruct justice in a missing persons case.


I guess Aruba has no obstruction of justice laws - they just 'update' their PV's.

And this time is the 'trufe', I swear...unless you find out I'm lying then I'll give another version of the 'trufe'.

[gwen]

I don't think any court is going to award them $800 million in defamation damages after they willfully admit that the entered into a conspiracy to obstruct justice in a missing persons case.


I guess Aruba has no obstruction of justice laws - they just 'update' their PV's.

And this time is the 'trufe', I swear...unless you find out I'm lying then I'll give another version of the 'trufe'.

Where's the rest of the pages from that one you just posted?

[resigned]

Where's the rest of the pages from that one you just posted?

I have them.

[Eliza]

I don't think any court is going to award them $800 million in defamation damages after they willfully admit that the entered into a conspiracy to obstruct justice in a missing persons case.


I guess Aruba has no obstruction of justice laws - they just 'update' their PV's.

And this time is the 'trufe', I swear...unless you find out I'm lying then I'll give another version of the 'trufe'.

No evidence of any crime that the plaintiffs participated in. In Aruba or California.

[hopeless1]

Two brothers allege defamation in a 'Dr. Phil' episode
(CNS) Posted Wednesday October 6, 2010 - 12:35pm

Two brothers who allege they were defamed in a "Dr. Phil' episode about Natalee Holloway's disappearance in Aruba cannot have their case transferred to a courtroom dealing with legally complex cases, a Los Angeles judge tentatively ruled today.

Superior Court Judge Ramona See said lawyers for Deepak and Satish Kalpoe did not persuade her that the case requires exceptional judicial management usually reserved for large class-action suits tried in a courthouse west of downtown.

"Plaintiffs may be Aruban citizens, but without more, that does not prove this matter is complex,' See wrote in her tentative decision.

See is scheduled to hear any further arguments on Thursday before issuing a final ruling.

The brothers' attorneys argued the case is complex because of its international connections, including the need to question witnesses who live in Aruba.

They also cited the large number of documents filed.

However, the judge said there are only 2,000 pages of documents and that the trial is scheduled for Feb. 11.

The Kalpoes filed their $800 million lawsuit in December 2006 against Phil McGraw and CBS, maintaining their reputations were damaged in a Sept. 15, 2005, "Dr. Phil' show that alleged they drugged the 18-year-old Alabama college student and raped her.

The brothers contend the "Dr. Phil' episode implied they helped kill Holloway and dispose of her body. They also sued on allegations of invasion of privacy, emotional distress, fraud, deceit and civil conspiracy.

Holloway, of Mountain Brook, Ala., was vacationing with friends on the Caribbean island resort when she vanished the night of May 30, 2005.

Aruban authorities in 2008 cleared the Kalpoes of any involvement in her disappearance.


LINK
edited by Fashionista

[resigned]

Aruban authorities in 2008 cleared the Kalpoes of any involvement in her disappearance.

Really?

Where's the OM statement which said that?

[Eliza]

Soon after Natalee vanished, police arrested three young men who'd been seen giving her a ride: van der Sloot and the Kalpoe brothers Deepak and Satish. The three were charged with murder in 2005 but later released. In 2007 all three were arrested for manslaughter and released a second time. The Kalpoes have since cleared their names.

[resigned]

Natalee case closed: 'we can't prove trio did it'

December 19, 2007 -


Prosecutors closed their investigation into the disappearance of American teenager Natalee Holloway, saying they still believe three young men were involved in her death but can't prove it after 932 days of searching failed to turn up a body.

The three main suspects in the case were re-arrested last month after prosecutors in Aruba discovered online chat sessions they hoped would break the case open.

But none of the men talked in custody, and without the 18-year-old's body, prosecutors said they had no recourse but to close the most notorious missing persons case in the Caribbean.

If the three suspects were put on trial, the lack of evidence "would lead to an acquittal," the Public Prosecutor's Office said in a statement.

Moving Holloway into the cold-case files "is a tough burden to bear" for her parents, they acknowledged, but the prosecutors said they had little choice.

"The public prosecutor's office and the police have gone the extra mile and have exhausted all their powers and techniques in order to solve the mystery of the disappearance of the girl," the statement read.


--------



Cleared their names.....

[resigned]

Hans Mos, the Aruban prosecutor, told ABC News today, "We did everything we could, but unfortunately we have had to accept that this did not have the desired result, namely a clarification of the case."

Prosecutors said they still believed the three men were involved in Holloway's death and they could reopen the case "if new serious evidence were to be found." The statute of limitations is six years for involuntary manslaughter and 12 years for homicide.

[gwen]

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

Future Hearings

10/07/2010 at 08:30 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Motion Hearing (TO STRIKE CMO;TO DESIGNATE CASE COMPLEX;)

01/27/2011 at 08:30 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Final Status Conference (T/D 2-7-2011)

02/07/2011 at 08:32 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Jury Trial (-Final Status Conference-OSC RE: Re Sanctions for Failureof Plntf/Deft Counsel to Appear @FSC)

[resigned]

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

Future Hearings

10/07/2010 at 08:30 am in department 69 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Motion Hearing (TO STRIKE CMO;TO DESIGNATE CASE COMPLEX;)
<snipped>

Two brothers allege defamation in a 'Dr. Phil' episode
(CNS) Posted Wednesday October 6, 2010

Two brothers who allege they were defamed in a "Dr. Phil' episode about Natalee Holloway's disappearance in Aruba cannot have their case transferred to a courtroom dealing with legally complex cases, a Los Angeles judge tentatively ruled today.



See is scheduled to hear any further arguments on Thursday before issuing a final ruling.

-----

The attorneys got a heads up for tomorrow - wonder if they are busy tonight or just figure ...eh...

[charlierat]

Two brothers who allege they were defamed in a "Dr. Phil' episode about Natalee Holloway's disappearance in Aruba cannot have their case transferred to a courtroom dealing with legally complex cases, a Los Angeles judge tentatively ruled today.

As I predicted weeks ago.

[hopeless1]

Plaintiff's motion to Strike = DENIED
Plaintiff's motion to rule Complex = DENIED

[Fashionista]

TESTING

[Noor]

TESTING

What you're testing?

lol, this is funny.

[Fashionista]

What you're testing?

lol, this is funny.

the thread was "invisble" till I made a post

Couldn't find it in the Natalee Holloway forum, Archives and/or in any of the Staff "only" forums

that was odd...finally found it by doing several diff. searches but still couldn't "see" it in a forum till I made my "testing" post

.

[billybob]

the thread was "invisble" till I made a post

Couldn't find it in the Natalee Holloway forum, Archives and/or in any of the Staff "only" forums

that was odd...finally found it by doing several diff. searches but still couldn't "see" it in a forum till I made my "testing" post

.

this was a conspiracy on another forum as to why it had disappeared, like someone here at RU had hidden secret information. Pretty funny Fash!!