I was all set for a morning with no court hearings to attend to last October 19, 2010. Then all of the sudden, a walk-in client needed our services since we came highly recommended by one of our old clients. I had to set down the morning's paper and my mug of coffee to see what the problem was. It appears that she was served with a paper denominated as one Urgent Motion to Hold in Abeyance Writ of Possession. Considering that we were recommended by one of our old and highly esteemed clients, we couldn't refuse. My father - who is the managing partner in our firm - asked me to review the document. As it turned out, the Urgent Motion was filed on Oct. 18, 2010 at 3:30pm and set for hearing on Oct. 19, 2010 and served on the walk-in client at 4:20 the day before.
Seriously, I did not bother reading the rather loquacious Urgent Motion, I went directly to the notice of hearing and checked if it complied with Secs. 4, 5, and 6 of Rule 15. For obvious reasons, it did not comply with said Rule. It was just my luck that the case was lodged with a court that usually started its day at 9:30, I just have enough time to brush up on the Rules and the pertient jurisprudence regarding Rule 15.
Since I had very little time to read the Motion, I mainly focused on the irregularity of the Motion. Basically I argued that the word Urgent is not a magic formula that would do away with the procedural requirements as expressly set forth in Rule 15. Said motion is nothing but a mere scrap of paper and should be disregarded by the Court. After a short verbal tussle with opposing counsel, the Court asked me to put my comments in writing and submit the same in 15 days.
The question now is, will my Comment be as loquacious as the Urgent Motion? We'll see. And I was so excited to sleep in that day due to the cool and stormy weather, I guess I shall make it as loquacious as I deem fit.