![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Yeah, anyone remember a while back when I was getting sued for a rather minor car accident that happened in June 2000? The case, it seems, is still ongoing.
Got a letter that was mailed on 12/12/03 by the Circuit Court in Upper Marlboro, MD. It was a "notification to parties of contemplated dismissal (lack of jurisdiction)" that basically said they were going to dismiss me as a party unless a written motion showing good cause not to was entered. If such a motion was filed, there would be a hearing on it on January 16 without further notice.
Then on December 29, 2003, a letter was sent from the defendant's attourneys to the circuit court, and cc'ed to me as required by law. It was the motion to defer dismissal, and (re?)-issue me a summons, with the good cause apparently being his ongoing workers compensation claims and the statement that he would be "unduly prejudiced" by the dismissal of the complaint while I was not "prejudiced" by the delay.
So far, all standard stuff, right? Neither of those documents really bothered me, it just meant things need to be taken care of by our insurance company. And this is where the hate of Liberty Mutual comes in:
The insurance company rep is telling us that we don't need to go to the hearing, and that it is more to do with the workers comp claim than with me, and that no summons will actually be issued for me, that's just a standard part of the language of such documents. She is basing this on CALLING THE PLAINTIFF'S LAWYER and asking them if I (the defendant) need to show up for the hearing. Umm, excuse me, but anyone see a conflict of interest there?? Couldn't it benefit their client if I didn't show up?
I swear when I move to Virginia I am getting a different insurance company.
Got a letter that was mailed on 12/12/03 by the Circuit Court in Upper Marlboro, MD. It was a "notification to parties of contemplated dismissal (lack of jurisdiction)" that basically said they were going to dismiss me as a party unless a written motion showing good cause not to was entered. If such a motion was filed, there would be a hearing on it on January 16 without further notice.
Then on December 29, 2003, a letter was sent from the defendant's attourneys to the circuit court, and cc'ed to me as required by law. It was the motion to defer dismissal, and (re?)-issue me a summons, with the good cause apparently being his ongoing workers compensation claims and the statement that he would be "unduly prejudiced" by the dismissal of the complaint while I was not "prejudiced" by the delay.
So far, all standard stuff, right? Neither of those documents really bothered me, it just meant things need to be taken care of by our insurance company. And this is where the hate of Liberty Mutual comes in:
The insurance company rep is telling us that we don't need to go to the hearing, and that it is more to do with the workers comp claim than with me, and that no summons will actually be issued for me, that's just a standard part of the language of such documents. She is basing this on CALLING THE PLAINTIFF'S LAWYER and asking them if I (the defendant) need to show up for the hearing. Umm, excuse me, but anyone see a conflict of interest there?? Couldn't it benefit their client if I didn't show up?
I swear when I move to Virginia I am getting a different insurance company.
