You very well may have a claim for breach of contract. It would be important to review the agreement you signed to determine whether you have a claim, and if so, what your damages might be. (Some contracts stipulate the amount of damages you may recover.)
As to fraud, you would have to prove various things, including that the other party intentionally made a misrepresentation to you (in other words, that they lied about something, and that you relied upon the misrepresentation). That's...
Per party. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(a)1 states:
Unless otherwise stipulated or ordered by the court, a party may serve on any other party no more than 25 written interrogatories, including all discrete subparts. Leave to serve additional interrogatories may be granted to the extent consistent with Rule 26(b)<http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/Rule33.htm#Rule26_b_>(2).
Assuming you are in California state court, a party normally has 30 days to respond to interrogatories. CCP 2030.260(a). You then have 45 days to file a motion to compel. CCP 2030.300.
As to calculating time, if you served interrogatories by mail, then yes you must add 5 days to the response period (if the place of mailing is inside California). If outside California, then you must add even more extra days..
You do not count the day you mailed the interrogatories - you start with the...
Some types of oral contracts are enforceable. There also is a doctrine called "promissory estoppel" that lets you enforce oral promises even if no actual contract is actually made. The problem with both of these legal theories is that it can be difficult to prove the oral commitment -- you may have a "he said / she said" situation. So other, corroborating evidence becomes important.
Assuming you're talking about a federal lawsuit (you referenced Rule 26(a)), you don't have to talk to anyone (unless they serve you with a subpoena). That's as a legal matter. As a practical matter, you may want to speak with your company's counsel. Everything else being equal, it's usually wise to try to be cooperative with your employer.
Be aware that your company's lawyer probably represents the company, not you. This may mean that what you tell the lawyer is privileged, so long as...
Quite likely, but it's hard to tell from the limited facts presented. Was there any writing governing the investments? If so, the terms of the writing would control and probably specify what should happen. If there was no writing, it is possible the investors have a claim under what's called a "promissory estoppel" theory -- the business owner promised to do something with their money, but didn't, and now should return it.
Respectfully, your summary of your attorney's statement does not make much sense.
The U.S. Supreme Court is a federal court. It is the <<Supreme>> federal court.
Usually, federal cases are decided first by a federal (district) court. Then if there is an appeal, it is usually heard by a federal circuit (appeals) court. Then, there may be an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
If you are at the stage of an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court (most likely from a circuit court decision), in...
A deposition is a vehicle to discovery information -- everything that might be relevant to a case. By the time a case gets to trial, it is whittled down to its essentials. So only the essential pieces of information will be put into evidence. Long story short, if you are a trial witness, you are unlikely to be asked everything in your deposition. Probably you will be asked only a small subset of those questions.
If there is a federal question involved, there may be an appeal to the United States Supreme Court. SCOTUS, however, takes very, very few cases out of the thousands presented to it for possible review.