Kyron Horman's mom's civil suit against Terri Horman

Status
Not open for further replies.
She was served June 4th. I looked it up in the court database. The proof of service by the Sheriff was filed on June 12th. She should have filed an answer by now, but her attorneys probably got an informal ok from DY's attorney for an extension. Now we just wait...
 
Thanks Gwen! I wish we could see if they were given an extension and how long. Grrr!
 
Civil lawsuits take time, and we will eventually hear if the lawsuit is allowed to go forward or not. That is the next important information.

After that, I would like to know to whom and for what Rosenthal issues subpoenas, but he might not care for me to know. LOL

Desiree and Rosenthal want a trial for their lawsuit, and it is the trial itself that will give us information. The DA will probably receive any pertinent information he might use immediately, and the trial will provide him with more information.
 
Civil lawsuits take time, and we will eventually hear if the lawsuit is allowed to go forward or not. That is the next important information.

After that, I would like to know to whom and for what Rosenthal issues subpoenas, but he might not care for me to know. LOL

Desiree and Rosenthal want a trial for their lawsuit, and it is the trial itself that will give us information. The DA will probably receive any pertinent information he might use immediately, and the trial will provide him with more information.

I'm not sure what you mean by the bolded portion above. The suit will go forward, and nothing can stop it at this point. It is not like there is someone checking complaints and deciding whether or not they have merit before the defendant even shows up.

Next, we should expect an Answer, or at the very least a notice of appearance. Possibly, defendant will then ask for a dismissal, but I can't see any reason why that would be granted, so I doubt they would even try. After that, there will be the discovery phase with subpoenas and requests for production both ways. Then there will be depositions. At that point, either side can file a motion for summary judgment. The judge can grant or deny it in part or in full. If summary judgment is not granted, and no settlement is reached, then it will go to court. Multnomah County Circuit Court likes to see cases reach trial within one year, but a big case like this might take longer. I hope this helps.
 
Thanks, Gwenabob!

I meant that it would get past a request for dismissal and go forward. After that, the wait won't be so bad because we will know that something is going on with obtaining information, evidence, and witnesses that will focus on what happened to Kyron that day.

Hopefully Rosenthal will unearth information the DA can use.
 
She was served June 4th. I looked it up in the court database. The proof of service by the Sheriff was filed on June 12th. She should have filed an answer by now, but her attorneys probably got an informal ok from DY's attorney for an extension. Now we just wait...

Gwenabob,

I found this in the database today:

Young Desiree/Horman Terri Multnomah 10/13/12 12:00 ICMC INIT CASE MGMT CONF 120606956 Hearing Status Check

Could you possibly explain what it all means? I look forward to your response. Thank you!
 
Somehow I got to that by putting Rosenthal in the Attorney field. It's Greek to me, of course, other than the fact the lawsuit is on a calendar somewhere.

Looking forward to hearing from gwenabob.
 
Thank you for your hard work, Gwenabob and Helenstreet.
 
Thank you for your hard work, Gwenabob and Helenstreet.

Awww....thanks! I didn't really do much to find the entry. I am so hoping that Gwenabob will be able to explain it. She is really sharp when it comes to anything from a legal standpoint. I have the utmost respect for her. Her dedication to Kyron's case is amazing. Gwenabob, where are you?!
 
As far as I know, you don't have to respond at all to a civil suit. You do take your chances that there will be a court ruling, in the civil matter, against you, but you aren't bound by any law to respond in any way.

Isn't that right?
 
Gwenabob,

I found this in the database today:

Young Desiree/Horman Terri Multnomah 10/13/12 12:00 ICMC INIT CASE MGMT CONF 120606956 Hearing Status Check

Could you possibly explain what it all means? I look forward to your response. Thank you!
Great find, Helenstreet!

If you google 'ICMC INIT CASE MGMT CONF' you'll get a result that explains it. I am guessing this is the initial judicial meeting to start the case.
First google result (from a court) "The initial meeting with the judicial officer is called an Initial Case Management Conference (ICMC)."
 
Awww....thanks! I didn't really do much to find the entry. I am so hoping that Gwenabob will be able to explain it. She is really sharp when it comes to anything from a legal standpoint. I have the utmost respect for her. Her dedication to Kyron's case is amazing. Gwenabob, where are you?!

Right here. I came across one of those just the other day at work and called the court to find out what it meant. It is simply a tickler put in at the beginning of the case to remind the clerks to check the status of a case. It means nothing to anyone but court workers.
 
As far as I know, you don't have to respond at all to a civil suit. You do take your chances that there will be a court ruling, in the civil matter, against you, but you aren't bound by any law to respond in any way.

Isn't that right?

True. Defendants do not need to answer or show up at all. But then they automatically lose, and plaintiff wins whatever they asked for in the complaint. Terri might feel it doesn't matter because she has nothing anyway. Her folks may have willed everything they have to their grandchildren, cutting TM out of it entirely. She might feel it is worth getting a million dollar judgment against her rather than testify. But she has many years left to live and will eventually have to get a job and work. She will want to buy a car. A judgment can be garnished upon for a long time. I guess she could file bankruptcy. <shrug> Who knows? Maybe that is the plan. Don't answer. Let them win. File bankruptcy. Wholly unsatisfying to those who want justice, but probably a good strategy for her.
 
Great find, Helenstreet!

If you google 'ICMC INIT CASE MGMT CONF' you'll get a result that explains it. I am guessing this is the initial judicial meeting to start the case.
First google result (from a court) "The initial meeting with the judicial officer is called an Initial Case Management Conference (ICMC)."

True. For potentially big cases, the attorneys will get together with a judge and hash out deadlines, certain procedures they want to follow for discovery, etc. The date they put into the tickler system is just a target date. They usually get changed to fit attorney and judge schedules a little closer to the date. But you never know, it could end up on that day. IF TMH actually answers. Haven't seen it yet!
 
Right here. I came across one of those just the other day at work and called the court to find out what it meant. It is simply a tickler put in at the beginning of the case to remind the clerks to check the status of a case. It means nothing to anyone but court workers.

Gwenabob:

So, it isn't an initial case management conference? I thought perhaps with the date being in October that it may be significant. This is the information I came across:

"A Case management Conference (CMC) is part of the court procedure. It is a meeting between the judge and the parties (the Plaintiff and the Defendant). The lawyers representing the parties may also appear at the conference. A case management conference usually happens after a plaintiff begins a law suit, but before the trial. The meeting is not a trial and as such witnesses don't need to be present. The main purpose of the meeting is to try settling some or all of the issues in dispute before going to trial. If no settlement is achieved at the CMC, the matter will proceed to trial."
 
True. For potentially big cases, the attorneys will get together with a judge and hash out deadlines, certain procedures they want to follow for discovery, etc. The date they put into the tickler system is just a target date. They usually get changed to fit attorney and judge schedules a little closer to the date. But you never know, it could end up on that day. IF TMH actually answers. Haven't seen it yet!

So, this conference can be scheduled even without Terri responding to the initial suit against her? Of course I can't imagine Houze not at the very least responding within the 30 days that already expired or filing an extension. Any ideas as to why we haven't heard anything regarding a response for an extension? Wouldn't that be public information? Thanks!
 
Gwenabob:

So, it isn't an initial case management conference? I thought perhaps with the date being in October that it may be significant. This is the information I came across:

"A Case management Conference (CMC) is part of the court procedure. It is a meeting between the judge and the parties (the Plaintiff and the Defendant). The lawyers representing the parties may also appear at the conference. A case management conference usually happens after a plaintiff begins a law suit, but before the trial. The meeting is not a trial and as such witnesses don't need to be present. The main purpose of the meeting is to try settling some or all of the issues in dispute before going to trial. If no settlement is achieved at the CMC, the matter will proceed to trial."

Yes, it is that. The court staff sets that at the very beginning. They know that is coming up and they check to see how the case is progressing and make sure they have a date for the attorneys to come in and set their schedule and figure out deadlines for discovery and stuff. They always set it for x number of days after the commencement of a case, and it is a target date that can be moved to fit schedules. But if that day works for everyone, then that is great, too!
 
So, this conference can be scheduled even without Terri responding to the initial suit against her? Of course I can't imagine Houze not at the very least responding within the 30 days that already expired or filing an extension. Any ideas as to why we haven't heard anything regarding a response for an extension? Wouldn't that be public information? Thanks!

Right. It is automatically scheduled by staff for cases that will be big cases, usually ones that are anticipated to be deemed "complex." The court knows the circumstances, and it will undoubtedly be declared "complex" so they will definitely need a conference (and probably more than one!) Not every case has a conference set up from the get-go.

The extension to file an answer can be done informally between the attorneys as long as they are in agreement. Otherwise, the defense can petition the court formally for an extension of time for filing an answer, especially if there is a new attorney on board, but they usually only get a couple weeks to a month. I fully expect an answer to be filed--by someone--by the middle of August. I would be surprised if Houze actually takes this case. He could file an answer just to protect the record and then hand it off to someone more knowledgeable in this type of law. Houze is strictly criminal law, and top of the food chain in that field. He has no good reason to dabble in something he is not an expert at and take a chance on such a big case. He'll probably hand it off to another top notch attorney (IF TM can come up with the dough) to handle. Portland is a big city. There is enough work that attorneys can afford to specialize.
 
True. Defendants do not need to answer or show up at all. But then they automatically lose, and plaintiff wins whatever they asked for in the complaint. Terri might feel it doesn't matter because she has nothing anyway. Her folks may have willed everything they have to their grandchildren, cutting TM out of it entirely. She might feel it is worth getting a million dollar judgment against her rather than testify. But she has many years left to live and will eventually have to get a job and work. She will want to buy a car. A judgment can be garnished upon for a long time. I guess she could file bankruptcy. <shrug> Who knows? Maybe that is the plan. Don't answer. Let them win. File bankruptcy. Wholly unsatisfying to those who want justice, but probably a good strategy for her.

I sure hope this isn't what happens. :banghead:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
158
Guests online
1,006
Total visitors
1,164

Forum statistics

Threads
589,935
Messages
17,927,879
Members
228,005
Latest member
vigilandy
Back
Top