This was the schedued Settlement Conference but the respondent had suuccessfully applied for an Ex Parte Expedited Hearing which pulled the Continuance Hearing scheduled for June 24, 2013, the day of the Trial, back to June 14, 2013 so the repsondent would have the opportunity to argue for a continuance to get time to get money for an attorney. The hearing got side-tracked as Judge Jacobson singularly argued the petitioner's counsel wasn't sure he had been properly served - even though the petitioner's counsel never brought up the issue of being properly served. The proof of service referred to by the Judge in these transcripts are posted and available - they are done correctly. The Judge also argues he is confused in regard to the representation of the respondent.
This was the schedued Settlement Conference but the respondent had suuccessfully applied for an Ex Parte Expedited Hearing which pulled the Continuance Hearing scheduled for June 24, 2013, the day of the Trial, back to June 14, 2013 so the repsondent would have the opportunity to argue for a continuance to get time to get money for an attorney. The hearing got side-tracked as Judge Jacobson singularly argued the petitioner's counsel wasn't sure he had been properly served - even though the petitioner's counsel never brought up the issue of being properly served. The proof of service referred to by the Judge in these transcripts are posted and available - they are done correctly. The Judge also argues he is confused in regard to the representation of the respondent.
This was the schedued Settlement Conference but the respondent had suuccessfully applied for an Ex Parte Expedited Hearing which pulled the Continuance Hearing scheduled for June 24, 2013, the day of the Trial, back to June 14, 2013 so the repsondent would have the opportunity to argue for a continuance to get time to get money for an attorney. The hearing got side-tracked as Judge Jacobson singularly argued the petitioner's counsel wasn't sure he had been properly served - even though the petitioner's counsel never brought up the issue of being properly served. The proof of service referred to by the Judge in these transcripts are posted and available - they are done correctly. The Judge also argues he is confused in regard to the representation of the respondent.