I really don't think Eliza will settle this case, no way.
I didn't say Eliza will settle the case but the judge has not ruled on the motions and he can settle the case before it ever gets to a trial. No ruling has been entered in the motion for a summary judgment and that can go either way. The judge hasn't ruled on the whether the lawyer who filed motion for a summary judgment can even be involved in the case. Further motions could still be filed and nothing has even been addressed in the case yet.
As far as my knowledge reaches, a judge can't settle a case. Both parties have to agree and Eliza won't. I'm very positive about that. That means this will go to trial, since Eliza has given enough evidence and the defence didn't, they can only delay this further.
Both parties do not have to agree. The motion for summary judgment is asking the Judge (court) to decide the case before it ever gets to trial. There has been no ruling on that motion, unless it hasn't been entered on that website.
The judge can rule in favour of the the lawyer who filed it and dismiss the case and then Eliza will have to appeal that decision. The judge can rule in favour of Eliza and she wins the case but it may be able to be appealed by the lawyer. That is what I meant by the judge settling it, coming to a decision on the motion for summary judgment. The judge can also just dismiss the motion for a summary judgment and continue the case.
There has been no ruling on the motion filed by Eliza' s lawyer which is addressing whether or not that Lawyer (who filed the motion for a summary judgment) should even be involved in the case either unless that also hasn't been included on the website.
In that case the case will be dismissed, not settled.
To decide to dismiss a case, is to settle it.
Settlement
a conclusive resolution of a matter and disposition of it; resolve
Disposition
disposal: the act or means of getting rid of something
Dismiss
cease to consider
Resolving Your Case Before Trial: Court Motions
Pretrial motions can resolve many important questions about your lawsuit. A motion is a request your lawyer files with the court asking for a ruling on a particular matter. If the ruling on the motion could terminate the litigation and end the dispute before trial, it is called a dispositive motion. If the ruling is on some incidental question that arises during the litigation, it is a nondispositive motion. The information below is intended to give you a basic idea of dispositive motions that might end your case before trial, and how those motions work.
Summary Judgment Motion
In some cases, the key facts are not disputed and require that judgment be entered for one of the parties. This is known as a summary judgment, in that it summarily ends the case before trial. The purpose of a trial is to have somebody -- the judge or the jury -- decide what the facts are. If the facts are not in dispute, there is no need for a trial. Instead the party who believes that the undisputed facts compel a ruling in his or her favor will file a motion for summary judgment. The motion asks the court to consider the undisputed facts and apply the law to them, and argues that the law requires a judgment for the party bringing the motion.
Summary judgment is described as "a blunt instrument" that can abruptly terminate the litigation. To avoid a summary judgment, the other party must provide the court with evidence that would be permitted at trial that indicates that the key facts are disputable. If the court agrees with the party opposing the motion and finds that the key facts are in dispute, the court cannot enter judgment and must instead send the case to trial. http://injury.findlaw.com/personal-injury/personal-injury-stages/personal-injury-stages-pretrial-court.html
Summary Judgment A party moving (applying) for summary judgment is attempting to eliminate its risk of losing at trial, and possibly avoid having to go through discovery, by demonstrating to the judge, by sworn statements and documentary evidence, that there are no material issues of fact remaining to be tried. If there's nothing for the jury to decide, then, the moving party asks rhetorically, why have a trial? The moving party will also attempt to persuade the court that the undisputed material facts require judgment to be entered in favor of the moving party. In many jurisdictions, a party moving for summary judgment takes the risk that, although the judge may agree there are no material issues of fact remaining for trial, the judge may also find that it is the non-moving party who is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment
In civil lawsuits, settlement is an alternative to pursuing litigation through trial. Typically, it occurs when the defendant agrees to some or all of the plaintiff's claims and decides not to fight the matter in court. Usually, a settlement requires the defendant to pay the plaintiff some monetary amount. Popularly called settling out of court, a settlement agreement ends the litigation. Settlement is a popular option for several reasons, but a large number of cases are settled simply because defendants want to avoid the high cost of litigation. Settlement may occur before or during the early stages of a trial. In fact, simple settlements regularly take place before a lawsuit is even filed. In complex litigation, especially Class Action suits or cases involving multiple defendants, a settlement requires court approval.
Civil lawsuits originate when a claimant decides that another party has caused him or her injury and files suit. The plaintiff seeks to recover damages from the defendant. The defendant's attorney will evaluate the plaintiff's claim. If the plaintiff has a strong case and the attorney believes defendant is likely to lose, the attorney may recommend that the defendant settle the case. By settling, the defendant avoids the financial cost of litigating the case. Trials are often extremely expensive because of the amount of time required by attorneys, and even alternatives to trials, such as mediation and Arbitration, can be costly. In deciding whether to settle a claim, attorneys act as intermediaries. The parties to the suit must decide whether to offer, accept, or decline a settlement.
The cost of litigation is only one factor that encourages settlement. Both plaintiffs and defendants are often motivated to settle for other reasons. For one thing litigation is frequently unpleasant. The process of discovery—in which both sides solicit information from each other—can cause embarrassment because considerable personal and financial information must be released. Litigation can also have a harmful impact on the public reputation of the parties. Employers, for example, sometimes settle Sexual Harassment claims in order to avoid unwanted media exposure or damage to employee morale.
Like litigation itself, settlement is a process. Generally, the easiest time to settle a dispute is before litigation begins, but many opportunities for settlement present themselves. As litigation advances toward trial, attorneys for both sides communicate with each other and with the court and gauge the relative strength of their cases. If either of the parties believes he is unlikely to prevail, he is likely to offer a settlement to the other party.
Litigation ends when a settlement is reached. The plaintiff typically agrees to forgo any future litigation against the defendant, and the defendant agrees to pay the plaintiff some monetary amount. Additionally, settlements can require the defendant to change a policy or stop some form of behavior.
Often, the exact terms of settlements are not disclosed publicly, particularly in high-profile cases where the defendant is seeking to protect a public reputation. In high-profile cases, settlements are often followed by a public statement by the defendant. It is not unusual for a large company to settle with a plaintiff for an undisclosed amount and then to issue a statement saying that the company did nothing wrong.
In some forms of litigation, settlement is more complex. In class actions, for example, attorneys represent a large group of plaintiffs, known as the class, who typically seek damages from a company or organization. Courts review the terms of a class action settlement for fairness. Complexities also arise in cases involving multiple defendants. In particular, when only some of the defendants agree to settle, the court must determine the share of liability that accrues to those defendants who choose to pursue litigation.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
In civil lawsuits, settlement is an alternative to pursuing litigation through trial. Typically, it occurs when the defendant agrees to some or all of the plaintiff's claims and decides not to fight the matter in court. Usually, a settlement requires the defendant to pay the plaintiff some monetary amount. Popularly called settling out of court, a settlement agreement ends the litigation. Settlement is a popular option for several reasons, but a large number of cases are settled simply because defendants want to avoid the high cost of litigation. Settlement may occur before or during the early stages of a trial. In fact, simple settlements regularly take place before a lawsuit is even filed. In complex litigation, especially Class Action suits or cases involving multiple defendants, a settlement requires court approval.
Civil lawsuits originate when a claimant decides that another party has caused him or her injury and files suit. The plaintiff seeks to recover damages from the defendant. The defendant's attorney will evaluate the plaintiff's claim. If the plaintiff has a strong case and the attorney believes defendant is likely to lose, the attorney may recommend that the defendant settle the case. By settling, the defendant avoids the financial cost of litigating the case. Trials are often extremely expensive because of the amount of time required by attorneys, and even alternatives to trials, such as mediation and Arbitration, can be costly. In deciding whether to settle a claim, attorneys act as intermediaries. The parties to the suit must decide whether to offer, accept, or decline a settlement.
The cost of litigation is only one factor that encourages settlement. Both plaintiffs and defendants are often motivated to settle for other reasons. For one thing litigation is frequently unpleasant. The process of discovery—in which both sides solicit information from each other—can cause embarrassment because considerable personal and financial information must be released. Litigation can also have a harmful impact on the public reputation of the parties. Employers, for example, sometimes settle Sexual Harassment claims in order to avoid unwanted media exposure or damage to employee morale.
Like litigation itself, settlement is a process. Generally, the easiest time to settle a dispute is before litigation begins, but many opportunities for settlement present themselves. As litigation advances toward trial, attorneys for both sides communicate with each other and with the court and gauge the relative strength of their cases. If either of the parties believes he is unlikely to prevail, he is likely to offer a settlement to the other party.
Litigation ends when a settlement is reached. The plaintiff typically agrees to forgo any future litigation against the defendant, and the defendant agrees to pay the plaintiff some monetary amount. Additionally, settlements can require the defendant to change a policy or stop some form of behavior.
Often, the exact terms of settlements are not disclosed publicly, particularly in high-profile cases where the defendant is seeking to protect a public reputation. In high-profile cases, settlements are often followed by a public statement by the defendant. It is not unusual for a large company to settle with a plaintiff for an undisclosed amount and then to issue a statement saying that the company did nothing wrong.
In some forms of litigation, settlement is more complex. In class actions, for example, attorneys represent a large group of plaintiffs, known as the class, who typically seek damages from a company or organization. Courts review the terms of a class action settlement for fairness. Complexities also arise in cases involving multiple defendants. In particular, when only some of the defendants agree to settle, the court must determine the share of liability that accrues to those defendants who choose to pursue litigation.
I posted the dictionary definition of the word settlement and I was using it in regards to the judge having the ability to decide the case before it ever gets to trial because we haven't had any information on a ruling in regards to the motion for a summary judgment. I could have used a synonym of settle and it would have meant the same thing; to decide the case.
Settlement of a court case is a decision made on that case whether it be a dismissal, a conviction, a monetary award or some other decision; the case is settled, a ruling is given, a decision is made (though any decision on a case can try to be appealed).
I am not quite understanding the issue you seem to be having with the words I have used in my posts.
SD, you said the judge could settle the case. I am talking legal terms and a settlement is not done by a judge on it's own. I don't understand why you are offended, I am simply saying that a settlement is something else and that I think there is no way Eliza will settle. Peace out and get a KitKat...
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
SD, you said the judge could settle the case. I am talking legal terms and a settlement is not done by a judge on it's own. I don't understand why you are offended, I am simply saying that a settlement is something else and that I think there is no way Eliza will settle. Peace out and get a KitKat...
I never said I was offended and I never said Eliza was going to voluntarily settle anything. What I did say is that a judge can settle (decide, resolve) the case before it ever gets to the actual trial phase because there is a motion for a summary judgment sitting there that as far as we know hasn't been ruled on.
SD, you said the judge could settle the case. I am talking legal terms and a settlement is not done by a judge on it's own. I don't understand why you are offended, I am simply saying that a settlement is something else and that I think there is no way Eliza will settle. Peace out and get a KitKat...
I never said I was offended and I never said Eliza was going to voluntarily settle anything. What I did say is that a judge can settle (decide, resolve) the case before it ever gets to the actual trial phase because there is a motion for a summary judgment sitting there that as far as we know hasn't been ruled on.
And I just said that 'settle' is not the word since we are talking in legal terms here.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
SD, you said the judge could settle the case. I am talking legal terms and a settlement is not done by a judge on it's own. I don't understand why you are offended, I am simply saying that a settlement is something else and that I think there is no way Eliza will settle. Peace out and get a KitKat...
I never said I was offended and I never said Eliza was going to voluntarily settle anything. What I did say is that a judge can settle (decide, resolve) the case before it ever gets to the actual trial phase because there is a motion for a summary judgment sitting there that as far as we know hasn't been ruled on.
And I just said that 'settle' is not the word since we are talking in legal terms here.
I totally get what you mean and that's how I took it..."settle" as in settling a case in court. Yes, the dictionary has other meanings for that word, but when we're talking about court, "settle" usually only means one thing to people.
So, who is the living hair of Vernon? <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> Elvis?
Elvis and LMP, but Elvis supports Eliza and LMP apparently didn't hire Bradley...
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
LMP is the granddaughter of Vernon. If LMP is the living one this implies that Elvis is dead, or?
In any case, in LMP didn´t hire a lawyer looks like Eliza finally will get her tests done?
Can Priscilla oppose?
No, they were divorced and Priscilla has no relation to Vernon, other than that she was his daughter in law.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
This case is going to be an interesting follow. Unless the company holding Elvis affairs takes over, looks like finally Eliza will at the end have her biological father legally listed.
Comments
To decide to dismiss a case, is to settle it.
Settlement
a conclusive resolution of a matter and disposition of it; resolve
Disposition
disposal: the act or means of getting rid of something
Dismiss
cease to consider
Resolving Your Case Before Trial: Court Motions
Pretrial motions can resolve many important questions about your lawsuit. A motion is a request your lawyer files with the court asking for a ruling on a particular matter. If the ruling on the motion could terminate the litigation and end the dispute before trial, it is called a dispositive motion. If the ruling is on some incidental question that arises during the litigation, it is a nondispositive motion. The information below is intended to give you a basic idea of dispositive motions that might end your case before trial, and how those motions work.
Summary Judgment Motion
In some cases, the key facts are not disputed and require that judgment be entered for one of the parties. This is known as a summary judgment, in that it summarily ends the case before trial. The purpose of a trial is to have somebody -- the judge or the jury -- decide what the facts are. If the facts are not in dispute, there is no need for a trial. Instead the party who believes that the undisputed facts compel a ruling in his or her favor will file a motion for summary judgment. The motion asks the court to consider the undisputed facts and apply the law to them, and argues that the law requires a judgment for the party bringing the motion.
Summary judgment is described as "a blunt instrument" that can abruptly terminate the litigation. To avoid a summary judgment, the other party must provide the court with evidence that would be permitted at trial that indicates that the key facts are disputable. If the court agrees with the party opposing the motion and finds that the key facts are in dispute, the court cannot enter judgment and must instead send the case to trial.
http://injury.findlaw.com/personal-injury/personal-injury-stages/personal-injury-stages-pretrial-court.html
Summary Judgment
A party moving (applying) for summary judgment is attempting to eliminate its risk of losing at trial, and possibly avoid having to go through discovery, by demonstrating to the judge, by sworn statements and documentary evidence, that there are no material issues of fact remaining to be tried. If there's nothing for the jury to decide, then, the moving party asks rhetorically, why have a trial? The moving party will also attempt to persuade the court that the undisputed material facts require judgment to be entered in favor of the moving party. In many jurisdictions, a party moving for summary judgment takes the risk that, although the judge may agree there are no material issues of fact remaining for trial, the judge may also find that it is the non-moving party who is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."<!-- s
Lol, me too.. but I wasn't going to say anything <!-- s
I posted the dictionary definition of the word settlement and I was using it in regards to the judge having the ability to decide the case before it ever gets to trial because we haven't had any information on a ruling in regards to the motion for a summary judgment. I could have used a synonym of settle and it would have meant the same thing; to decide the case.
Settlement of a court case is a decision made on that case whether it be a dismissal, a conviction, a monetary award or some other decision; the case is settled, a ruling is given, a decision is made (though any decision on a case can try to be appealed).
I am not quite understanding the issue you seem to be having with the words I have used in my posts.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."And I just said that 'settle' is not the word since we are talking in legal terms here.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."I totally get what you mean and that's how I took it..."settle" as in settling a case in court. Yes, the dictionary has other meanings for that word, but when we're talking about court, "settle" usually only means one thing to people.
Elvis and LMP, but Elvis supports Eliza and LMP apparently didn't hire Bradley...
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."In any case, in LMP didn´t hire a lawyer looks like Eliza finally will get her tests done?
Can Priscilla oppose?
No, they were divorced and Priscilla has no relation to Vernon, other than that she was his daughter in law.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."This can be a big media circus.