- 19 -
granted this motion and on March 9, 2004, ordered petitioner to
file a response by March 18, 2004, showing cause why the matters
included within the stipulation should not be established as
fact. Petitioner did not file her response until April 6, 2004.
On April 19, 2004, the Court held a pretrial hearing on our
order to show cause. At this hearing, the Court found that
petitioner had substantially failed to stipulate as required by
Rule 91(f) and by the Court’s order of November 18, 2003. The
Court went through some of the disputed stipulations on the
record, attempting to resolve legitimately disputed issues.
Petitioner made repeated meritless objections with no legal
foundation. The hearing concluded with petitioner’s stipulating
11 out of 369 paragraphs in the stipulation. Because petitioner
had refused to stipulate, the Court moved the trial date to
April 26, 2004, and again ordered the parties to stipulate the
fullest extent possible as required by Rule 91(a).
On April 22, 2004, the parties were back before the Court
because petitioner refused to stipulate to business and public
records, particularly those prepared by Berson. At this hearing,
the Court again went through some of the stipulations with the
parties, at which time petitioner stipulated an additional 19
paragraphs of the stipulation. The parties were ordered to
continue the stipulation process in private.
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011