How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask CalAttorney2 Your Own Question
CalAttorney2, Attorney
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 10244
Experience:  Civil litigation attorney for individuals and businesses.
Type Your Legal Question Here...
CalAttorney2 is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

During discovery the Defendant asks Plaintiff a credit card

Customer Question

During discovery the Defendant asks Plaintiff a credit card collections case to declare any witnesses it wishes to testify.

The Plaintiff responds that it does not have any witnesses.

Then the Plaintiff files a motion for continuance citing that "Witness no available" and that "Scheduled witness unable to attend" the hearing.

Can the Plaintiff just chooses to bring a witness to the hearing?

Can the Plaintiff use the excuse that a witness is not available as a reason for continuance two days before the hearing when it had 6 months to prepare for the hearing?
Submitted: 4 years ago.
Category: Legal
Expert:  CalAttorney2 replied 4 years ago.

William B. Esq. :

Dear Customer, thank you for choosing Just Answer. I would like to assist you with your legal question today. While it is always possible for a Court to "exercise its discretion" and allow a party to extend a hearing due to its own dilatory behavior, generally the rules of court and rules of civil procedure do not allow a continuance on that basis.

Please give me a few minutes to review the Connecticut rules to see if I can find anything more concrete than these general principles, but the answer should be that the Court should tell the plaintiff it must go forward with or without its witnesses as disclosed on the scheduled trial date.

William B. Esq. :

Dear Customer, after a short review I was unable to find additional case law on this subject. Keep in mind that I am working with law from all 50 states and federal laws so I am unable to do case law research for your specific issue. My original analysis however, is a common principle to courts, and the exercise of discretion requires the court to balance the equities of allowing the plaintiff to continue the trial when it was the plaintiff's own fault that it did not present its witnesses as required. I cannot guarantee any result, but many courts do not approve of corporate parties that appear to be "playing games" with the court. The operative language to cite in opposition to these kinds of issues is that the Plaintiff appears to be "wasting party and judicial resources" through their conduct.

William B. Esq. :

I hope that my answer was of assistance to you. My goal is to provide you with excellent service – if you feel you have gotten anything less, please reply back, I am happy to address follow-up questions. Please remember to rate my service once you have all the information you need. Thank you for your business!

CalAttorney2 and other Legal Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
I am accepting the answer so that you get paid. I will ask follow up questions later.
Expert:  CalAttorney2 replied 4 years ago.
Thank you for the positive rating. I look forward to assisting you further.