in a law suit that i filed pro se om 2-27-12 against a metra conductor and against metra, defendant's lawyer in response filed a motion to dismiss based on, among others things that i cited no statute, law or authority under which defendant's alledged conduct is prohibited. defendant insulted plaintiff while plaintiff was a passenger by calling plaintiff very offensive names. defendant also states in motion that plaintiff fails to state any common law theory under which he could be allowed to recover in tort against defendant. I fail to understand any of this. My court date is 4-5-12. what can I do?
2 Answers from Attorneys
If you were represented by an attorney, the attorney would have to spend time (compensable) do legal research to determine whether the particular words spoken by this kind of defendant can be sued upon either based on some law or statute, or based upon residual common law rules. Then the attorney would have to formula a written response (compensable), which would cite relevant law, and file it with the court. The court then might order a briefing schedule and then a hearing date, beyond the next court date (compensable). Because you "fail to understand any of this" you therefore run the risk of having the case dismissed against you (do it yourself) even if a court may give you as a pro se plaintiff the benefit of the doubt and rule against the motion. So either you have to hire an attorney to take over for you, or start acting like one, but that doesn't mean you will win the motion. And if you lose your options become narrower.