Controls and Plaintiff's action against defense of fraud.

Question

What controls, implemented in the Californian judicial system, prevent Counsel who defends hospice fraud (by a hospital and hospice company): not to artificially prolong the case, not to oppress Plaintiff. What is the procedure that describes such controls, actions that the Plaintiff can take?

James L. Arrasmith · Answer

In California, there are several controls in place to prevent counsel from unduly prolonging a hospice fraud case or oppressing the plaintiff. First, the California Rules of Court encourage timely resolution of cases, and judges actively manage the timeline of each case to prevent unnecessary delays. Attorneys are also bound by the State Bar's ethical rules, which mandate fairness and prohibit actions that purely serve to delay or harass. 
 
If you feel that the defense is artificially prolonging the case or engaging in oppressive behavior, you can bring this to the judge's attention through a motion. This motion could be for sanctions against the opposing counsel or to compel certain actions if there is unreasonable delay. Judges have the authority to impose penalties, including fines or limitations on the scope of claims that can be delayed. 
 
Additionally, you have the right to appeal to higher courts if you believe that the conduct of the defense or decisions by the judge have adversely affected your case. This includes seeking appellate review of any rulings that unfairly allow the defense to extend the litigation process. It’s important to discuss these options with your attorney to understand the best course of action in your specific situation.

Q: Controls and Plaintiff's action against defense of fraud.