Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

jberryhill

(62,444 posts) Tue Oct 11, 2016, 06:18 PM Oct 2016

A word about scheduling hearings

In court proceedings, the parties are REQUIRED to meet and confer in advance of scheduling and status hearings.

The "meet and confer" can be by telephone or email, but the judge expects that the parties have already sorted out scheduling issues before showing up.

This notion of "collusion" is fundamentally stupid to anyone who knows how litigation works.

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A word about scheduling hearings (Original Post) jberryhill Oct 2016 OP

Sorry, but I don't understand PJMcK Oct 2016 #1

The ridiculous allegation that HRC was "colluding" with the DOJ jberryhill Oct 2016 #2

Got it, thanks! PJMcK Oct 2016 #3

PJMcK

(22,037 posts)

1. Sorry, but I don't understand

Reply to jberryhill (Original post)

Tue Oct 11, 2016, 06:40 PM

Oct 2016

Please explain what you're writing about. Thank you.

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)

2. The ridiculous allegation that HRC was "colluding" with the DOJ

Reply to PJMcK (Reply #1)

Tue Oct 11, 2016, 06:43 PM

Oct 2016

Parties are expected to coordinate on procedural matters.

PJMcK

(22,037 posts)

3. Got it, thanks!

Reply to jberryhill (Reply #2)

Tue Oct 11, 2016, 07:14 PM

Oct 2016

Additionally, thanks for your OP. It explains an important procedural component of the judicial system. Too often, people don't understand the complex structure of the courts.

Reply to this discussion