COURT TIMELINE 2007

I finally filed a lawsuit against KittyKind for Failure to Return Money and Failure to pay for Services Rendered.

April 16: Hearing 1:
Postponement for me to gather copious Discovery for KittyKind's Attorney (7 years worth). My receipts weren't enough even though they were complete. They also wanted to see my personal vet files which were no problem since they were always in their own folder.
On or About April 23, I delivered all Discovery requested to KittyKind's Attorney's office4)

June 8 Incoming Phone call from KittyKind's attorney
makes settlement offer of $5,000

June 19 Hearing #2
Judge Wright informed KittyKind that Mediation is not binding
KittyKind and myself were sent into Mediation by court KittyKind's attorney brought up June 8 Settlement offer stating that it was now off the table
KittyKind claimed that all or most of the cats were not KittyKind cats
Stipulation signed by both parties agreeing to finish Discovery requests by 7/7/07
KittyKind agreed to give me all Discovery by 6/28/07
KittyKind claimed to have a contract signed by me and was ordered to bring it to next Hearing

August 8 Hearing 3
Judge asked to see alleged signed contract. KittyKind gave email taken out of context from Mediation with Jane Hoffman

This was the second Judge to inform KittyKind that Mediation is not binding
Judge asked if there was a limit to costs of medical care provided per catKittyKind said no
Judge asked me if I made agreement and now wanted more moneyI replied "No"

KittyKind admitted that there is no signed contractI showed Judge KittyKind's
Response to Discovery (Long document saying why this was irrelevant . . . )

Judge advised me to file Motion to Compel so that I could get the information I asked for
KittyKind said that Jane Hoffman would make an appearance in court within 20 minutes and asked if he could wait for her.

Judge asked if I wanted to go to trial at that time. I said yes, however did not have my receipts with me. A new hearing date was set.

At this hearing, Jane Hoffman, who is listed on a signed affidavit by KittyKind, as neither a volunteer or employed by KittyKind was on her way to participate in the Hearing. She was stuck in traffic and was unable to make it to court in time.

August 29 Motion to Compel Hearing
Judge Hagler changed trial date from Sept 18 to Oct 15 to give KittyKind time to send me Discovery materials and affidavits ordered by Judge within 30 days.
KittyKind stated that their defense has always been that Plaintiff was never authorized to take KK cats to her vet and again claimed that not all cats were KK cats

Oct 5 Deposition of Hilary Harris (Deposition also sent to Marlene Kess) KittyKind responded for both parties with Rejection of Deposition and no one showed up for Deposition. This happened twice.

Oct 15 Trial Date: Judge Wright attempted Mediation and set new trial date at Dec 7 leaving time to Subpoena Ms. Kess and attempt another deposition.

Oct 17 Judge Signed Order To Compel Deposition on Nov. 711)
Nov 2: I Received Affirmation from KK Attorneys Claiming that Ms Kess is not a party to this suit and that I was trying to stall

FACT: Any stalling has been due to KittyKind's claims of having a signed contract when in fact it did not exist

To KittyKind's lack of response to timely Discovery that was constantly compelled by the Court despite my cooperation in gathering copious Discovery requests by KittyKind. On or about April 23 I delivered all Discovery requested to KittyKind's attorney office Per Stipulation by Court KittyKind agreed to finish Discovery requests by 7/7/07 and to give me all Discovery by 6/28/07 as of August 8 KittyKind did not cooperate and Judge advised me to file a Motion to Compel At Motion to Compel on August 29, Judge Hagler changed trial date from Sept 18 to Oct 15 in order to give KittyKind 30 days to send Discovery materials and affidavits ordered by the Court12)

Nov 7 Hearing to Compel Deposition Case dismissed due to lack of documents by both parties.

Judge advised KittyKind's attorney that Rejection of Deposition is not part of our Justice System and that they could not make up the rules as they went along. He also advised them that in this particular case he believed that this organization had taken advantage of a softhearted person in the amount of $25,000.

KittyKind's Attorney tried in vain to convince him that KittyKind is a "wonderful, caring organization" but the Judge didn't budge in his decision about KittyKind's unethical behavior.