My husband used to be a consultant through a consulting company and recently joined his client as an employee. This has been done by many other consultants from this company, without any consequences. We got singled out and received a notice from their lawyer last Friday that there's a hearing scheduled tomorrow in Michigan (where the consulting company is based). The notice was delivered by FedEx and it was just lying on our door (no receipt signature taken). We think that it's a very short notice, and due to work, he cannot go to Michigan for the hearing.

What are the consequences of not appearing in the court? Do we need a lawyer to represent us for tomorrow?

Thanks in advance for your help.

What are they suing for? If you don't show, they win by default. You can contact the court stating you didn't recevied sufficient notice and request a later hearing date.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by and123

We got singled out and received a notice from their lawyer last Friday that there's a hearing scheduled tomorrow in Michigan (where the consulting company is based). The notice was delivered by FedEx and it was just lying on our door (no receipt signature taken). We think that it's a very short notice, and due to work, he cannot go to Michigan for the hearing.

---

Hello and:

Lawsuits do NOT start that way. Therefore, either you've been through LOTS of summons's and complaints. And lots of answers, and lots of time to prepare...

OR, this ISN'T a COURT hearing.

Please read the notice again, and tell us EXACTLY what it says, and WHO it's from.

excon

Sounds like the consulting company is trying to figure out how to be reimbursed by the client company for hiring your husband. Usually the consulting contract stipulates that a payment is due if the client hires a consultant. So I would guess that this "hearing" is really just a meeting with company HR and their lawyers. But as Excon says - let us know precisely what the notice says. Also, did your husband sign any form of employment contract with the consulting company that limits his ability to accept employment by a client company?