Attorney-at-Law

STIPULATE, THEN ABSQUATULATE

In Uncategorized on 10/02/2017 at 12:56

Judge Carolyn P. Chiechi is far too cultured and well-bred to use such a boisterous, “yeehaw” word as “absquatulate.” After all, Judge Chiechi was first in her undergraduate class, and stood ninth in her law school class, at Georgetown.

But this blogger is nowise so constrained. I, much less gifted, did well enough (although unranked) as an undergraduate at a local City school, but barely evaded the cellar On The Hill Far Above.

Howbeit, the title of this opuscule accurately describes the proper procedure when stipulating and seeking a continuance (what we State courtiers call an “adjournment”).

Here’s You De Li & Biyan Liang, Docket No. 19748-16, filed 10/2/17, to tell you all about it.

“…respondent filed a motion for continuance (respondent’s motion). In that motion, respondent represents that the parties will be filing soon a stipulation of settled issues relating to certain issues in this case. The Court will not act on respondent’s motion until that stipulation of settled issues is filed.” Order, at p. 1.

So if you mean to stipulate as the thirty-day cut-off per Rule 133 is bearing down on you, stipulate first, and send in the stip with your motion for a continuance.

Or maybe, if you’re particularly adventurous, you can try for a continuance without talking about stipulations. But I don’t recommend this. Judges get very testy with those who are parsimonious with the truth.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: