Traverse Hearing update and insight sharing.
In the decision made by the judge, the petitioner law firm (for landlord)and the specific lawyer, were not listed in the written decision at all. This made me wonder why. As a result, upon further research by me, I noticed that the judge had worked for the landlord's law firm before.
Second of all, the GPS record presented by process server during trial was not admitted to evidence as it was not from qualified third party. I recall that Tenantnet posted a case in which GPS record was not admitted as evidence and the judge in that case listed this point in his decision still. However, the judge in my case left out the GPS issue completely from his written decision as if GPS issue was not an issue at all. This also made me wonder why the judge in my case did not consider the unqualified GPS record in the written decision.
Third, at the end of written decision, it makes no mention of the process to pick up the exhibits and evidence. In my case, the missing affidavit of service of process server (which then reappeared and then disappeared again) was the crux of the matter. To leave out the process to pick up the exhibits in the decision seem rather strange (at least to me).