I naively hoped the mere filing of an appearance might convince him to back down, that he would see Jensen was no longer isolated and had help. No such luck. My next strategy was to try to get the complaint dismissed or at least made more certain under ORCP 21. Those of you who have defended against pro se plaintiffs (or ineffective lawyers) know this can be trickier than you think it will be. You have to both identify what the actual claim is (which is not always easy) and try to attack it, giving them every benefit of the doubt as that is what the court will likely do. But you walk a fine line, because you risk educating the litigant about the law such that the next complaint is better. Here, I got all but the conversion claims dismissed, with an order to make some portions more definite and certain. Bowman filed an amended complaint that didn’t comply with the order, so I filed another motion. He then immediately filed a slightly better complaint. It became clear the strategy of attacking his complaint was frustrating me more than it was him. Unfortunately, a worthy case with a particularly vexatious other side can result in a lot of anger and wheel-spinning, even if you know it’s ultimately irrational and unproductive. This just wasn’t the type of case I was going to be able to get dismissed. Bowman identified dozens of items Jensen supposedly stole from him, about which he could easily create a question of fact with his testimony alone. My options were to do my best to get the case to trial or convince him to relent some other way. I filed an answer with counterclaims for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress, hoping the threat of a money judgment against him would force him to back down. I also obtained an order compelling him to respond to my request for production of documents, again hoping he would see the paucity of his case. Bowman remained undeterred. After months of not producing documents despite court orders to do so and plenty of motion practice, the court finally dismissed Bowman’s case as a discovery sanction. This took a lot of time and patience to set up and execute, given how important it was to give Bowman proper notice of what I was doing and to show the court the sanction was warranted. Not ready to give up, Bowman filed three motions to set aside the judgment, none of which were successful. All that remained was Jensen’s counterclaims against him. By this time, we were a year into litigation and Jensen was ready to be done with him. I was too. Besides, it’s not like he had any money from which to collect a judgment, even if we did get one. We decided to dismiss the counterclaims without prejudice and hoped that would be the end of it. Of course, it wasn’t. My Journey Through the Courts With an Industrious Abuser continued from p. 25 “As victims’ attorneys, we understand why domestic violence can be difficult to escape, so we’re not supposed to acknowledge feelings of disappointment with our clients when they reengage with their abusers. Fear and shame often prevent people from leaving, as does love.” 26 Trial Lawyer | Fall 2024
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy Nzc3ODM=