Arizona Court Skeptical Of 'Medical Excuse' From Prenda Lawyers
from the another-day,-another-excuse dept
Prenda's new favorite lawyer, Steven Goodhue, apparently sought to either delay or get out of another hearing in a Prenda case in Arizona by pleading "medical emergency." A skeptical court, helmed by Judge G. Murray Snow, followed this up by asking for proof:
On May 17, 2013, the Court set the original OSC hearing in this matter on May
31, 2013. (Doc. 51.) On May 21, Plaintiff filed a motion to continue, based on the
personal request of Mr. Goodhue. (Doc. 52.) The next day, the Court granted the motion
and set the OSC for June 7, 2013. (Doc. 55.) On June 5, after Plaintiff's counsel had been
aware of the pending hearing for some time, the Court received a telephone call from the
office of a local lawyer indicating that he had been requested to enter an appearance at
the hearing, but had a conflict that prevented him from doing so. He informally inquired
on whether the Court would continue the hearing in order to allow another attorney to
enter an appearance on Monday. In light of the fact that the Court had previously granted
AF Holdings one continuance, AF Holdings had been aware of the new pending OSC
date, and AF Holdings already had Arizona counsel in the action, the Court did not
reschedule the hearing. The next day, the Court's judicial assistant received notice from
Mr. Goodhue in the afternoon that he missed his scheduled flight from Denver to attend
the OSC hearing the next day due to a medical emergency. He informed the Court that he
would not be attending the hearing the next day. Mr. Goodhue thereafter filed a motion to
continue, supplemented by a medical record reflecting a visit to Swedish Medical Center
apparently signed by a physician's assistant who consulted with Plaintiff's counsel.
(Doc. 64.) It is in this context that the Court requested the medical records from Mr.
Goodhue that supported his version of events in failing to appear before the Court.
Further, in conjunction with the Doc. 74, which the Court authorizes to be filed
under seal, the Court notes that the contents of the document are at best partially
responsive to the Court's request. Mr. Goodhue has provided one medical record with
Doc. 74 that appears to be inconsistent with the version of events he sets forth in Doc. 74.
Further, Mr. Goodhue's version of events would have generated additional documents
that he has yet to provide. Mr. Goodhue is required to continue to supplement the record
with all the medical records and documentation indicated in Doc. 71.
Judge Snow hints pretty strongly that he simply doesn't believe Goodhue, and suggests that he's stalling, which would be par for the course in a variety of Prenda-related cases.