Saturday, April 12, 2014

Repeat of Yesterday's Blog Post on Joyce v. Jack Locker Constr. (Trial Continuance Request) WITH CORRECTED LINK TO OPINION

Lackawanna County Courthouse (Right)
Scranton Electric Building (Left)

In his recent decision in the case of Joyce v. Jack Locker Const., Inc., 2013 WL 6437917 (C.P. Lacka. Co. Dec. 2, 2013 Nealon, J.), Judge Terrence R. Nealon denied a defendant's request for a continuance of a trial on the basis of the unavailability of a defense expert.

In so ruling, the court noted that the notice for the original status conference cautioned counsel to secure the availability of the parties and any expert witnesses for trial as once a trial is set in Lackawanna County "no continuances will be granted due to the unavailability of counsel or a party or expert witness."  Judge Nealon otherwise noted that, under Pa.R.C.P. 216 a trial continuance could be secured for other reasons not applicable to this matter such as, for example illness of an attorney or material witness or where circumstances beyond a party's control make it impossible or fundamentally unfair to proceed to trial.

In this matter, the motion for continuance was filed one week before trial and 2 1/2 months after the trial date was set.  Here the court noted that there had been ample time to complete the videotaped trial testimony of the expert if necessary.

Based on the above the motion for a trial continuance was denied.

Anyone wishing to review a copy of this Opinion by Judge Nealon may click this LINK

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.