Thank you very much for your reply. Adding another attorney from the same firm onto the pleadings submitted to the court, in order to make that attorney an attorney-of-record in the case, is commonly done in anticipation of trial.
That said, I wouldn't read too much into it, since such addition requires no investment of time, money, or anything else. It is simply a routine step taken when a law firm reaches a certain point in litigation and has to consider who is actually going to try the case. I wouldn't say doing this makes it any more likely they plan to try it or want to try it, it is just a standard thing to do. I hope that makes sense.
With regard to summary judgment, as you may already have gathered, such motions are incredibly complex. They are also notoriously difficult to win, especially for plaintiffs.
When you file a motion for summary judgment, you are essentially arguing that there are no triable issues of fact--that the case is so one-sided a jury could not possibly find but in your favor. If there is any basis for legitimate factual dispute
, summary judgment will be defeated.
I cannot possibly know whether summary judgment would be wise in your case, but I can tell you generally speaking that plaintiffs almost never bring such motions and when they do, they are usually denied. Factor in the time and filing fees you'd be investing, not to mention the tipping of your evidentiary hand (since you have to now lay out all your evidence and arguments), and the cons quickly outweight the pros.
Please do not hesitate
to let me know if you have any questions or concerns regarding the above and I will be more than happy to assist you further.
If you do not require any further assistance, please be so kind as to provide a positive rating of my service so that I may receive credit for assisting you. Very best wishes to you and thank you so much for coming to Just Answer.