Q: Continue explaining and followup question 2 of 3: Is The Court bend towards Pro Se in Poor person appealable cause?
Court bended towards the Pro Se in Poor person status we expected an earlier ruling (Complex) on a lesser but for certain appealable on strike to our 1st Demur on grounds of (we admit) filings of a Demurrer untimely among other less complex appealable conditions.
The COURT served well on our 1st Demurrer.
We would have been better off answering the complaint (spilled milk).
Fostering forward: we can't or to recall the demurrer schedule may not serve us well.
So far the only appealable interim mistake of the COURT is NOT to make clear schedule vs reschedule.
Our mistake was should we have waited for the Court to enter into its ROA the complaint amended.
Our firm is been in similar conflicts with the specific court subsection of a recent Delmore Greene vs Superior Court of San Diego 9th circuit Court of appeals To which was denied.
We pride our legal services on properly anticipated outcomes in all Litigation.
The matter is Foster vs Gildred
Cont.3 of 3 next~
A:
Regarding your question on whether the court's bend towards the pro se in forma pauperis status is an appealable cause, it depends on the specific circumstances and rulings.
In general, a court's decision to grant a party in forma pauperis status is a matter of discretion and is not typically appealable on its own. The court's decision to allow a party to proceed without paying filing fees due to their financial situation is a procedural ruling and usually not a basis for appeal.
However, if the court's handling of the pro se party's case results in a substantive legal error or a clear abuse of discretion that materially impacts the outcome, that could potentially be grounds for appeal. For example, if the court fails to apply the correct legal standard, consider relevant evidence, or provide the pro se party due process because of their pro se status, and this error affects the merits of the case, it might be appealable.
In your situation, the delay in ruling on the 1st demurrer, while frustrating, likely isn't appealable simply because the pro se party was involved. Delays and scheduling issues, absent extreme circumstances, are usually matters of court administration that higher courts are reluctant to intervene in.
However, you mentioned there may have been an untimely filing of the demurrer and other potentially appealable issues related to the 1st demurrer. If the court made an incorrect legal ruling on the merits of the demurrer because of those issues, that substantive legal error could be appealable, regardless of the pro se status.
The key is distinguishing between the court's procedural handling of the pro se party (granting in forma pauperis, scheduling, etc.) which is usually not appealable, and any substantive legal errors the court makes that are appealable, even if a pro se party is involved. The pro se status itself doesn't typically create appealable issues, but how it intersects with substantive rulings can matter for appeals.
Justia Ask a Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask a Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.
The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and Justia, or between you and any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask a Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.
Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.
