served on the petitioner;86 who, in response, through his attorney submitted his remarks on October 16, 1996 on the answer to the complaint.87 71. The Office of Juvenile Assistance submitted a brief on October 29, 1996 indicating that since Sebastian had reached adult age at that time, it was not the responsibility of said entity to represent him.88 Once an adult, Sebastian took part in the proceedings on his own behalf, on October 28, 1996, and endorsed all actions that had been taken by his father on his behalf until then.89 72. The court ruled that the action had not lapsed under the statute of limitations, rejecting the objection filed by the General Staff of the Army (hereinafter the “EMGE” or the “Staff of the Army”) and set the petitioner’s attorney’s fees, in an order issued on November 1, 1996.90 This decision was appealed by the representative of the EMGE on November 18, 1996.91 On November 26 of the same year, the judge asked the State to provide a legal basis for its appeal; and on December 9, the EMGE asserted that it was appealing the decision based on the regulation of attorney’s fees of the opposing party.92 On December 12, 1996 the judge asked it whether it was appealing the fees because they were too high or too low.93 On March 17, 1997, the court called on the EMGE to respond within a period of two days; also on that same day Sebastian’s attorney submitted a motion asking the court to direct the EMGE to respond to the request of the judge from December 12 on the appeal of attorney’s fees,94 inasmuch as the failure to respond was prejudicial to the plaintiff.95 The EMGE responded on March 24, 1997 that it was appealing the judgment of regulation of attorney’s fees of the opposing party because they were too high.96 73. On March 17, 1997, the petitioner’s attorney asked the court, based on the merits of the subject of the suit, to set a date for a settlement hearing in order to come to an agreement 86 Case proceedings file titled “Furlan Sebastian Claus v National State for Damages,” page 52. communication from the State received on October 15, 2008. Annex to 87 Case proceedings file titled “Furlan Sebastian Claus v National State for Damages,” page 54. communication from the State received on October 15, 2008. Annex to 88 On said occasion as well, the Office of Juvenile Assistance accepted the representation of Sebastian’s brother and sister because of their condition as minors. Case proceedings file titled “Furlan Sebastian Claus v National State for Damages,” page 55. Annex to communication from the State received on October 15, 2008. 89 Case proceedings file titled “Furlan Sebastian Claus v National State for Damages,” page 56. communication from the State received on October 15, 2008. Annex to 90 Case proceedings file titled “Furlan Sebastian Claus v National State for Damages,” pages 58 and 58 back. Annex to communication from the State received on October 15, 2008. 91 Case proceedings file titled “Furlan Sebastian Claus v National State for Damages,” page 63. communication from the State received on October 15, 2008. Annex to 92 Case proceedings file titled “Furlan Sebastian Claus v National State for Damages,” page 64. communication from the State received on October 15, 2008. Annex to 93 Case proceedings file titled “Furlan Sebastian Claus v National State for Damages,” page 64 back. Annex to communication from the State received on October 15, 2008. 94 Case proceedings file titled “Furlan Sebastian Claus v National State for Damages,” page 65. communication from the State received on October 15, 2008. Annex to 95 Case proceedings file titled “Furlan Sebastian Claus v National State for Damages,” page 66. communication from the State received on October 15, 2008. Annex to 96 Case proceedings file titled “Furlan Sebastian Claus v National State for Damages,” page 68. communication from the State received on October 15, 2008. Annex to