Actually jurisdiction matters, a lot. Jurisdiction controls where you file your case, resolve your disputes, and how your claim is going to be handled.
And talk of jurisdiction leads to this fun example of lawyers not exactly being competent outside their own area.
Opposing counsel in this case is a prime example of why you shouldn't dabble outside your actual competencies.
Case 1: Lawyer sues my client for not paying rent for their store. That Landlord has not been doing repairs promised since 2019, including a leaking roof damaging my client's stuff. My client finally got fed up and said the company isn't paying rent until the place is fixed. Hilariously, aside from one nasty-gram in early 2020, which I responded to, landlord and his lawyer did nothing until October 2022. No repairs were ever made, and there are 14, count 'em 14, distinct leaks into the space. No attempts to collect the rent were ever made either. Client has been looking for replacement space, but it's difficult finding the right spot for what the client does.
Lawyer files a landlord-tenant casein District Court, but names the owner and not the company and doesn't even attach the proper lease. She insists she can because she wants to go for personal liability so she's ignoring the limited liability company and suing the owner personally.
That doesn't work well for her, I file a motion noting the lease is with the company not the owner, there's no personal guarantee, and the owner has no liability, and I get it dismissed. Case is done by the end of the second hearing.
Case 2: Lawyer tries again in District Court, this time naming the company, but re-using the old notice to quit with the owner's name on it and demanding a supplemental complaint of $144,000 in damages for unpaid rent. I again file a motion to dismiss for both these reasons.
In the first court hearing in Round 2, as Michigan's process now since Covid is that the first L-T hearing isn't really a hearing, its a compulsory meeting where the parties are to try and work things out. If they can't it goes to the second hearing. I point out that she can't do that. The District Court's jurisdictional limit is $25,000.00 and $144,000.00, last time I checked, even though math isn't my forte, is greater than $25,000 every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
She loudly insists she can do it, she's right, I'm wrong, and my client better settle.
Well, no, she's not right at all.
In the second court hearing, today, the judge starts by looking over my motion and the complaint and immediately states she does not have jurisdiction over the supplemental complaint of $144,000 in damages for unpaid rent.
Ruh Roh Shaggy.
Yes, jurisdiction matters. You need to know where and how to properly file your case.
I agree with the court that there's no jurisdiction, but state I'm certainly willing to be helpful and stipulate to keep it in the district court, so long as the maximum damages are properly restricted to a maximum of $25,000. Yes, that can happen if you mess up your jurisdictional limit like that and try for more than $25k in a court that can only award $25k.
For some strange reason, opposing counsel does not agree to that.
No idea why she's not happy staying in District Court, as she was so insisting she could do at the last hearing. Ah, well.
Case dismissed for a second time. My client has also moved out in the meantime as well and sold the business to another company.
She may get this right eventually, but not right now. Turns out, asking around, this lawyer is a family lawyer and doesn't do commercial litigation or commercial landlord-tenant litigation, and it really shows.
Consensus is she's not very agreeable, bombastic, and likes to try and intimidate other lawyers, put on a show for her clients, and throw her weight around.
Consensus is correct, but she's really the opposite of intimidating, as arrogance without the competence to back it up is just entertaining to watch.
Now she has to file in Circuit Court, we then get to answer that, counter-claim for damages and point out that her client is the first breaching party to the contract and at the end of it she can go after a company that now has zero assets even if she wins.
4 comments:
Aaron,
Jeez, even I understood that explanation. Either I'm getting smarter about the law (yeah, right!) or your opponent is, well, not too bright.
Glad things went well for you, but mostly your client.
Does she have a friendly judge at the District level but not up at the Circuit level? Is she doing this for a family member on the cheap but wants to pad her hours? Selecting the proper court is so basic there almost has to be something else going on that she is making so many errors.
Of course, there is also 'got her law degree out of a Cracker Jack Box' option.
LOL, you're getting some 'real' winners up there Aaron!!!
juvat: Well, anyone who can fly an F-15 can figure out jurisdiction so I think you're smart enough and yep she doesn't quite seem to really know waht she is doing,
Rick T: I suspect the landlord is trying to do this on the cheap and the landlord has issues. Shoe doesn't seem to have a friendly judge at the District Court as she keeps on losing there.
Old NFO: Yep, it's kinda entertaining nailing people for very basic mistakes.
Post a Comment