I am a pro per plaintiff in a civil trial. After being in court for 4+ years, two days before the trial, the judge went somewhere else to a different court. Several things have happened during this trial including me being sick, the defense changing council etc. the judge has made statements to me in the beginning of the trial that it is the general consensus of the superior court, that most judges don't like pro per counsel or cases.

I only found out by accident that the judge was not going to be my trial judge a couple of days before trial. While this I feel is completely unfair, I understand there is no basis to fight this. I tried, because of ill health to dismiss the case before, but the defendants who are crazy, felt they wanted to continue in they might have a malicious prosecution case should they proceed. The judge advised them this was completely unwise and as they had no cross complaint, they should dismiss the case. But they refused even though I am the plaintiff.

My question is if I dismiss the case I am surely to be right back in court with a return lawsuit for attorneys fees from opposing counsel. Is there any way to limit this? And is there any way to call a mistrial before trial based on the fact that the new judge assigned to the case has not even had time to read my case but wants to proceed, or do you have any suggestions on how I can dismiss this case? Lastly I was thinking about going to New York to get away for two years. What happens if they file a lawsuit and I am in New York, is there a time limit on receiving service of this lawsuit?

No, the new judge is the only one to decide if he can take over a case, and they will have their clerks review the case and brief them.

If they can not "find" you to serve you, they will do service by publication most likely and then they will go to court without you there to defend and they will just win the case.

I will be blunt I think you are finding why the judges don't like people who don't use attorneys.

Sounds like you need to go on and win the case

i only found out by accident that the judge was not going to be my trial judge a couple of days before trial. while this i feel is completely unfair, i understand there is no basis to fight this. Hello b:

I don't know why you think it's unfair... In fact, I think it's the opposite. A judge doesn't need to read the file and become acquainted with the participants BEFORE he rules on the case... As a matter of fact, it's BETTER that a judge starts a trial not knowing ANY of the participants or their backgrounds, or what transpired before.

After all these years, I'd NEVER stop pursuing the case. I can't believe you want to quit, unless of course, your suit IS frivolous, and you know it.

excon

I wil be blunt I think you are finding why the judges don't like people who don't use attorneys.


Absolutely - I was in Court 2 weeks ago and the Judge told the Plaintiff that Court is NOT law school and to figure it out or drop the case.