If Mr. Wacko doesn’t respond to anything (attorney letter and/or complaint) and continues with the status quo (likely) he is still entitled, by law, to an evidentiary hearing. That means Russ will have to argue his case before the court (whether or not Mr. Wacko even shows up) in order to obtain his default judgment. The problem he has in pro per is that he cannot put himself on the stand and examine himself and vice versa with Mr Wacko. However, they can cross examine each other and/or each other’s witnesses. If Mr. Wacko decides to get an attorney prior to the evidentiary hearing and shows up with one, I feel it could be hard on Russ to be in pro per. This is because introducing evidence (witnesses and/or exhibits) can be “tricky.” Especially exhibits. I feel some of the skirmishes the OP described here may very well be inadmissible if his opponent is able to successfully object to them.
I wouldn’t count on being able to settle this type of dispute by summary judgment. To do that, you would likely need the explicit (procedural) cooperation by your opponent whom you say currently doesn’t have an attorney.
I would advise Russ NOT to draft his own complaint for a Quiet Title action using a Nolo book as a guide. It would be far preferable in his case to get an attorney to draft it (and his lis pendens) so as to leave it open for him to obtain an early preliminary injunction while the case is pending … which could take awhile, IMO. Even if he only has a Limited Scope Representation agreement with him/her . . . for now.
