Common Contracts

IN THE

May 16th, 2002

• Filed
  May 16th, 2002

The timeliness of a notice for hearing appears, at first blush, to be of minor significance. But here the Treasurer faced a hearing on a dispositive motion asserting the unconstitutionality of one of her statutorily- assigned duties. The matters properly before the trial court, while significant in terms of this matter, were not of such a magnitude. In such circumstances it seems particularly appropriate to enforce the rules concerning the receipt of adequate notice. The failure to impose that requirement on the receiver, in response to a proper objection, L.F. 261, suggests an inexplicable rush to judgment. The failure to sustain the objection prejudiced the Treasurer’s ability to respond to both the late-filed dispositive motion and to prepare for argument on those matters properly noticed for hearing.