I am the defendant in a civil case in which the plaintiff is alleging fraud. The plaintiff filed the case on a personal vendetta and vowed to "take me out" for personal reasons. They file at least 1 lawsuit a year against someone whom they feel has "wronged" them. They cannot prove their case.
I retained an attorney 1.5 years ago when the complaint was filed. I filed a cross complaint. We are sure we can win in trial. We can prove our side. However, with the down turn in the economy neither I nor the plaintiffs have any money. So there's really no point in moving forward with this case. But I'm stuck because the plaintiff will not settle for less than hundreds of thousands of dollars.
It appears that the plaintiff assumed I would settle and we would never go to trial. Their attorney is green and is only the "attorney of record." It's apparent that the plaintiff, who is a paralegal, is doing all of the work on the case. Their attorney is relying solely upon what the plaintiff is telling him, which is laughable. Clearly he has not verified anything his client has told him and is not familiar with the fundamental workings of the core issue.
At this point my attorney wants to "sub" out of the case since I cannot afford a trial. I can appreciate his position. However, I still have to deal with this matter in trial. He does not believe we have a compelling reason to obtain a continuance which is what I need to come up with more money. If he subs out of the case I can appear at a settlement conference in a few weeks in pro per. I can ask for a continuance on the basis that I have to retain new counsel, however, if the plaintiff objects the judge will deny the continuance.
I could file bankruptcy, but due to the allegations involving fraud the plaintiff will still have the right to argue in BK court. However, they will have to hire a specialist and it will not be a jury trial.
So I'm stuck and I don't know what to do. Any suggestions?