I’ll bet the Judge’s laughter, when he read Barrett’s so-called Motion, could be heard all around the bay area… Barrett never learns, I guess. He still thinks HE makes the rules.
Delicensed MD Stephen Barrett filed a “Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s Order of July 25, 2001” (granting the Special Motion to Strike filed on behalf of Defendant Ilena Rosenthal). In his court papers Barrett had claimed that because Christopher Grell (the attorney) had dismissed HIS OWN CASE against Rosenthal, that the Judge had NO Jurisdiction to rule on Barrett, et al.
Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen
Here is what the Judge said about that on the Court’s website:
TR – Motion for Reconsideration – Denied
“This Tentative Ruling is issued by Judge James Richman. The Motion by Plaintiffs Stephen J. Barrett, M.D., et al., for Reconsideration of the Court’s Order of July 25, 2001 Granting the Special Motion to Strike filed on behalf of Defendant Ilena Rosenthal is DENIED. The proffered “new” evidence in the form of the June 4, 2001 dismissal establishes that only Plaintiff Christopher Grell voluntarily dismissed his action as against Defendant Ilena Rosenthal following the Court’s May 30, 2001 hearing on the Special Motion to Strike. Plaintiffs provide no authority to support their contention that a voluntary dismissal by one Plaintiff deprives the Court of jurisdiction to consider whether any remaining Plaintiff has met his burden to establish a probability of success on the merits of any claims that any remaining Plaintiff has against Defendant Rosenthal. Each of Plaintiffs’ alternative arguments in support of the Motion for Reconsideration is denied for failure to present any new or different facts, evidence or law to support it.”