Looking anyone that had dealt with something similar and can direct me.
I am looking for something to use in appeal case to point out to the justices that the lower court was complicit in a deadline not being met.
In this case, the court gave 60 days and then nothing happened and the court never did anything. No scheduling a new date, no reminder, no order to show cause. Nada, nil, nothing. Then grants the defendants\\\' motion to dismiss citing failure to comply with 60 day deadline. Here\\\'s something I found but not sure how to use it to show the justices that the lower court judges are mandated to supervise and follow through.
68607. In accordance with this article and consistent with statute, judges shall have the responsibility to eliminate delay in the progress and ultimate resolution of litigation, to assume and maintain control over the pace of litigation, to actively manage the processing of litigation from commencement to disposition, and to compel attorneys and litigants to prepare and resolve all litigation without delay, from the filing of the first document invoking court jurisdiction to final disposition of the action.
The judges of the program shall, consistent with the policies of this article:
(a) Actively monitor, supervise and control the movement of all cases assigned to the program from the time of filing of the first document invoking court jurisdiction through final disposition.
(b) Seek to meet the standards for timely disposition adopted
pursuant to Section 68603.
(c) Establish procedures for early identification of cases within the program which may be protracted and for giving those cases special administrative and judicial attention as appropriate, including special assignment.
(d) Establish procedures for early identification and timely and appropriate handling of cases within the program which may be
amenable to settlement or other alternative disposition techniques.
(e) Adopt a trial setting policy which, to the maximum extent
possible, schedules a trial date within the time standards adopted pursuant to Section 68603 and which schedules a sufficient number of cases to ensure efficient use of judicial time while minimizing resetting caused by overscheduling.
(f) Commence trials on the date scheduled.
(g) Adopt and utilize a firm, consistent policy against
continuances, to the maximum extent possible and reasonable, in all stages of the litigation.