3 ms·
In slam dunk cases, either because you're being sued frivolously or suing someone for a well-documented violation of a clear-cut law, then the legal work can be
by OkayPhysicist 4y ago
In slam dunk cases, either because you're being sued frivolously or suing someone for a well-documented violation of a clear-cut law, then the legal work can be cut down dramatically by filing a motion for summary judgment. If you're not relying on disputed material facts for your argument, i.e., "I'm being sued by my former employer for violating my non-compete clause. This is the non-compete clause. It is not enforceable because it violates California labor law", it' definitely the way to go.
- whatshisface 4y ago>If you're not relying on disputed material facts for your argument Vis a vi the original question, "I never said that. Do you have a recording?"
- ncallaway 4y agoI feel like the jury is more likely to believe the unwilling subpoenaed witness from HR from the company that turned you down who says: “we turned the candidate down, because when we checked their references, Bob at XYZ corp said that the candidate never worked at XYZ corp” over Bob (who has every motive and reason to lie). Especially when you get the follow up questions, and find out HR left contemporaneous notes in their HRIS tool, which corroborate the story. Remember that the standard for a civil suit is not “beyond a reasonable doubt”, but “more likely than not”. I really don’t think you’d need a recording to win that case.
- whatshisface 4y agoSure, but now that you're talking about a jury you're in court and you don't have a summary judgement.
- ncallaway 4y agoAh, yes, of course. I missed the point about handling the case on summary judgement.