Curiosity Never Kills the Cat: Legal Questions for VERIFIED LAWYERS- ~No Discussion~

[bourne]

Hi AZLawyer! Do you know why Dina hasn't filed a motion for summary judgment instead of jumping through hoops in demurrers instead? Is there a benefit to NOT filing summary judgment when she claimed she had "ironclad alibi" that proves she couldn't have been at Spreckels mansion committing murder?

 

[LuckyLucy2]

Hi AZLawyer,

Isn't it proper court protocol to file a Demurrer and before a Motion for Summary Judgement is filed?

Thanks!

 

[AZlawyer]

Hi AZ Lawyer,

If the WDS is thrown out of court when Adam and Dina's Demurrers are heard on 2/19, will they still be able to ask for a Summary Judgement as well?

And will Mary Zahau still have to answer the deposition questions she refused to answer that Judge Bacall ruled she must answer, or is everything over?

Thanks so much!

If the case is dismissed, then no one will be able to take depositions or file motions because the case will be over.

Hi AZLawyer! Do you know why Dina hasn't filed a motion for summary judgment instead of jumping through hoops in demurrers instead? Is there a benefit to NOT filing summary judgment when she claimed she had "ironclad alibi" that proves she couldn't have been at Spreckels mansion committing murder?

Has the deadline to file an MSJ passed? Some lawyers just always wait til the last minute to (1) make sure they have the strongest case possible to present and (2) bill more to the client but they'll deny that one of course. This deadline would normally be included in the court's main scheduling order.

If she was really on video at the time at the hospital, it would be insane not to file an MSJ.

Hi AZLawyer,

Isn't it proper court protocol to file a Demurrer and before a Motion for Summary Judgement is filed?

Thanks!

A demurrer addresses different issues than an MSJ. If your defense depends upon facts outside the pleadings (like "I was at the hospital at the time"), you would not be able to file a demurrer on that defense. So certainly there is no protocol to file a demurrer before you file an MSJ on the same issue.

That said, most judges will set the deadlines for demurrers very early in the case (because you can't bring up outside facts anyway, so you should know early on whether you have any argument for demurrer), and set deadlines for MSJs very late in the case (because you need to take depos, etc. first to gather your facts). So most demurrers are, due to the scheduling orders, filed earlier than most MSJs.

 

[K_Z]

Hi AZlawyer. There are 2 new memorandums in opposition to the defendant's demurrers, in prep for the 2/19 hearing.

One issue caught my attention, and I'd appreciate your insight.

If I understand the demurrer issue correctly, this hearing is on the merit of the details in the pleadings, and does not take any of the actual discovery into account. I think that's why Dina's attorney "split out" each item and basically said "even if we concede that this one thing is true, that doesn't mean DS is responsible for Rebecca's death, and the case should be thrown out."

Greer is saying that is not the way the law requires the pleadings to be looked at, not in piecemeal fashion-- the whole picture presented in the pleadings must be evaluated. I'm interested to see how the judge rules on that.

Do you have any thoughts on that, related to the demurrer? Thanks in advance!

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face...Demurrer_to_2nd_Amended_Com_1454701204627.pdf

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face...ant_Adam_Shacknais_Demurrer_1454701203440.pdf

 

[AZlawyer]

Hi AZlawyer. There are 2 new memorandums in opposition to the defendant's demurrers, in prep for the 2/19 hearing.

One issue caught my attention, and I'd appreciate your insight.

If I understand the demurrer issue correctly, this hearing is on the merit of the details in the pleadings, and does not take any of the actual discovery into account. I think that's why Dina's attorney "split out" each item and basically said "even if we concede that this one thing is true, that doesn't mean DS is responsible for Rebecca's death, and the case should be thrown out."

Greer is saying that is not the way the law requires the pleadings to be looked at, not in piecemeal fashion-- the whole picture presented in the pleadings must be evaluated. I'm interested to see how the judge rules on that.

Do you have any thoughts on that, related to the demurrer? Thanks in advance!

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face...Demurrer_to_2nd_Amended_Com_1454701204627.pdf

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face...ant_Adam_Shacknais_Demurrer_1454701203440.pdf

Oh yes, absolutely the judge will take into account the facts alleged as a whole.

ETA: The question will be, if every fact the Zs allege is true, is that enough circumstantial evidence to justify the conclusion that the defendants killed RZ?

 

[K_Z]

Neil Nalepa (RZ's ex-husband) filed a "Motion for Protective Order, and to quash subpoena of a third party witness". This is #270 on the ROA, on 2/2/2016, and an amendment, #274, on 2/10/2016. That hearing was scheduled for 2/19, but was recently moved back to 11/4/2016.

- Why would a hearing for a protective order and to quash deposition subpoena be pushed back 9 months, when discovery is projected by both sides on their case management documents to end in the next 6-9 months?

- Is NN "waivered" from complying with a deposition subpoena from now until the hearing in November, since he filed the motion? As in, he will not have to comply with the deposition subpoena and submit to a deposition, until that is ruled on?

This is curious.

 

[AZlawyer]

Neil Nalepa (RZ's ex-husband) filed a "Motion for Protective Order, and to quash subpoena of a third party witness". This is #270 on the ROA, on 2/2/2016, and an amendment, #274, on 2/10/2016. That hearing was scheduled for 2/19, but was recently moved back to 11/4/2016.

- Why would a hearing for a protective order and to quash deposition subpoena be pushed back 9 months, when discovery is projected by both sides on their case management documents to end in the next 6-9 months?

- Is NN "waivered" from complying with a deposition subpoena from now until the hearing in November, since he filed the motion? As in, he will not have to comply with the deposition subpoena and submit to a deposition, until that is ruled on?

This is curious.

That seems completely insane to me. I can't think of any reason for the delay.

He shouldn't have to comply until the motion is ruled upon.

 

[K_Z]

The Zahau wrongful death case now has it's first trial date (which I expect will be changed a kajillion times!)

01/27/2017 10:30 AM C-69 Trial Readiness Conference (Civil)
03/10/2017 08:40 AM C-69 Civil Jury Trial

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaseSearch.xhtml
Case Number: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL

In some jurisdictions in the U.S., civil juries are composed of only 6 jurors, not 12. I can't find anything about the use of 6 vs 12 for San Diego county. Do you know if SD typically uses 12 jurors for a civil trial, as well as a criminal trial? Are there provisions in state procedures for using 6 jurors? Is it up to the judge if they use 6? Do the parties to the suit have any input?

A lot of places use 6 jurors for civil trials due to the volume of cases, cost, number of available jurors, etc. Interested to know what San Diego does.

Thank you for your time!

 

[AZlawyer]

The Zahau wrongful death case now has it's first trial date (which I expect will be changed a kajillion times!)



https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaseSearch.xhtml
Case Number: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL

In some jurisdictions in the U.S., civil juries are composed of only 6 jurors, not 12. I can't find anything about the use of 6 vs 12 for San Diego county. Do you know if SD typically uses 12 jurors for a civil trial, as well as a criminal trial? Are there provisions in state procedures for using 6 jurors? Is it up to the judge if they use 6? Do the parties to the suit have any input?

A lot of places use 6 jurors for civil trials due to the volume of cases, cost, number of available jurors, etc. Interested to know what San Diego does.

Thank you for your time!

Thanks to Lash for alerting me to this question. I've been in a jury trial (I won! ) so not checking WS much.

If you scroll down to section 220 here http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=ccp&group=00001-01000&file=190-237 it seems that the default is 12 jurors unless everyone agrees otherwise.

In AZ we have 8 jurors for civil for the reasons you mentioned.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

Congrats on winning your case, AZLawyer! :winner:

And thank you for giving us a definative answer on the number of jurors in a California Civil case. :tyou:

 

[bourne]

Hi AZlawyer,

Can you help decipher these documents? https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces...3194202200.pdf

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces...3194200059.pdf

 

[CricketFern]

FYI Server error for both documents.

 

[bourne]

FYI Server error for both documents.

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/userdocs/9f9f646a1443dd6fd45851be93c6/37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL_ROA-416_09-07-16_Statement_of_Defendant_Adam_Shacknai_re_Discovery__1473878361192.pdf


https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/userdocs/9f9f646a1443dd6fd45851be93c6/37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL_ROA-415_09-08-16_Minute_Order_1473878361129.pdf

 

[justice be served]

Bourne, thank you for the document reference. Is there a better link?

 

[bourne]

Hi Justice be served, are you able to open any of the links? Cricket fern says she can open the second. I am able to open both by copying and pasting these:

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/userdocs/9f9f646a1443dd6fd45851be93c6/37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL_ROA-416_09-07-16_Statement_of_Defendant_Adam_Shacknai_re_Discove ry__1473878361192.pdf


https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/userdocs/9f9f646a1443dd6fd45851be93c6/37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL_ROA-415_09-08-16_Minute_Order_1473878361129.pdf

 

[*Lash*]

Nice job Bourne! Copy and paste works for me as well.

:yourock:

ETA- There are several new documents on the ROA with a lot of new info. Hopefully the mods will consider reopening the thread?

ETA - The first link ROA 416 has an error in spacing in the word 'discovery'. Remove the space and it works fine.

 

[AZlawyer]

Looks like Plaintiffs' counsel tried (without following all the rules) to get Adam's doctor and employer to turn over records that are very protected under California law and would be mostly irrelevant to the issue of Adam's use of Ambien. The judge discussed the situation with the parties but hasn't issued a ruling yet. The judge also suggested a potentially more-relevant avenue of discovery (handwriting sample from Adam).

 

[CricketFern]

[/COLOR]

Yes, PLEASE!!!!! The discussion needs to continue. A supreme injustice has been done and attention needs to remain on this case.

 

[screecher]

I think I love you bourne💚

 

[screecher]

anyone know why the court documents links thread was locked???