0) LAWYER. Get one. Do whatever she says, including ignore this comment (except for this line).
1) Do not "meet" with the the party suing you or the lawfirm representing them on your own. Do not sign anything they extend to you to "make it go away." Send all communications from them to your LAWYER first, never respond on your own.
2) LAWYER
Now, it seems that the party suing you is not in it for your money as they know you can't pay; besides, the lawsuit itself costs money, possibly more money than any judge or jury would reasonably award. Instead they're probably looking to:
I) Hurt you
II) Sue your current, previous, future, etc... employers who might actually have money.
III) Both
If you sign something admitting guilt (even if you don't realize it), there is a chance (depending on what they've accused you of, probably not the case for breach of contract but I am not a lawyer) they might use it to start a criminal trial against you (which meets goal I). It is highly unlikely that this trial will happen or that you'll serve any jail time if it does, but it will be absolutely painful.
You've now also opened up the potential for your current employer to be sued (meeting goal II). In turn, your current employer, has the right to sue you (again, helping meet I) and in this case probably for good reason: either you're honest in having caused damage or you've given false testimony.
What the party suing you is counting on is for you to NOT get a LAWYER and to prevail against you in a system that is adversarial. I'm a big fan of the adversarial legal system: it works great for criminal cases where you're guaranteed many rights, most important presumption of evidence, and a defender. However the way it's currently practiced in civil cases is flawed: the goal is for attorney on the either side to win, rather than for both parties to work diligent towards uncovering the truth, but most people don't realize it.
On the other hand, if you do get a LAWYER and are found innocent, the other party will cover your legal fees. If you and your LAWYER settle without going to trial, the legal fees will also be much lower (and you will not have to pay damages).
If you lose, the lawyer can make the loss hurt less: e.g., lessen the damages, avoid a situation that opens you to a criminal trial, etc...
So: LAWYER.
Disclaimer: have never been sued personally, know entrepreneurs who have. Not a lawyer but curious about law. Everyone should also read every comment by grellas and rayiner. If anything said in this comment contradicts the advice of a reputable lawyer you've hired, follow her advice instead.
The OP is in the United States, likely not in Louisiana, and being sued in a federal court. I am answering to OP.
That said, if the jurisdiction is different, I am still sure that an hour of talking to a lawyer (who can explain the laws and if legal fees would be covered) would still cost less than losing.
Please notice how my comment also says that if there is difference between my advice and what a lawyer says, take the lawyer's advice.
1) Do not "meet" with the the party suing you or the lawfirm representing them on your own. Do not sign anything they extend to you to "make it go away." Send all communications from them to your LAWYER first, never respond on your own.
2) LAWYER
Now, it seems that the party suing you is not in it for your money as they know you can't pay; besides, the lawsuit itself costs money, possibly more money than any judge or jury would reasonably award. Instead they're probably looking to:
I) Hurt you
II) Sue your current, previous, future, etc... employers who might actually have money.
III) Both
If you sign something admitting guilt (even if you don't realize it), there is a chance (depending on what they've accused you of, probably not the case for breach of contract but I am not a lawyer) they might use it to start a criminal trial against you (which meets goal I). It is highly unlikely that this trial will happen or that you'll serve any jail time if it does, but it will be absolutely painful.
You've now also opened up the potential for your current employer to be sued (meeting goal II). In turn, your current employer, has the right to sue you (again, helping meet I) and in this case probably for good reason: either you're honest in having caused damage or you've given false testimony.
What the party suing you is counting on is for you to NOT get a LAWYER and to prevail against you in a system that is adversarial. I'm a big fan of the adversarial legal system: it works great for criminal cases where you're guaranteed many rights, most important presumption of evidence, and a defender. However the way it's currently practiced in civil cases is flawed: the goal is for attorney on the either side to win, rather than for both parties to work diligent towards uncovering the truth, but most people don't realize it.
On the other hand, if you do get a LAWYER and are found innocent, the other party will cover your legal fees. If you and your LAWYER settle without going to trial, the legal fees will also be much lower (and you will not have to pay damages).
If you lose, the lawyer can make the loss hurt less: e.g., lessen the damages, avoid a situation that opens you to a criminal trial, etc...
So: LAWYER.
Disclaimer: have never been sued personally, know entrepreneurs who have. Not a lawyer but curious about law. Everyone should also read every comment by grellas and rayiner. If anything said in this comment contradicts the advice of a reputable lawyer you've hired, follow her advice instead.