Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Zow

Members
  • Content Count

    33,728
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Zow

  1. @timschochet I'd prefer to not play these guys kthxbai. ETA: And that includes you.
  2. Was it @kutta that won this last year? If so, that guy is really good...
  3. never really thought about this but now I can't be convinced of anything else.
  4. Unfortunately, at least in my experience, for people who suffer from this sort of mental health issue them not grasping the gravity of the consequences of their acts ("what do you mean I'm looking at 15 years in prison... can't I just apologize and maybe do some community service? Or perhaps I'll go meet with the prosecutor myself and explain it....") this sort of thing is not that shocking. I thought the show did a nice job of displaying the realities of the illness.
  5. If things keep going the way they are for the next month or so I may need to. But, for now, just try not to snipe me in the greatest sports draft...
  6. Or, at the very least, not give out "breaks" like she may have in the past where business wasn't an issue.
  7. Did you check your fee agreement? I ask that because sometimes the agreements may have a minimum amount per task portion (for example, in my fee agreements there's a minimum .5 for any hearing, a minimum 1 hr. for preparation of a pleading, etc.). Or, it's also quite possible that there was more to the task than you realize. Also, while the bold isn't how I would do it, maybe what she is doing is not charging you for a number of emails then hitting them all with one .5 email charge? As a family law practitioner billing for emails is tough. I prefer emails to phone calls so I don't want to discourage them. But, I have a few clients that will just blow up my email. And since my most precious resource is my time, and even if the easier email is likely to take about six minutes (I have to read it, probably check something in the file, respond, then document the email) I'm likely billing .1 per email (unless it's a flurry then I'll try to cut the client a break and do total time or if it truly is a super quick email calling for a super brief response I won't bill it). Nonetheless, the numerous .1 for emails (which is ~$30/per) seems to upset clients when they get their bills more than most other biling issues. I haven't really figured out a fair solution to it because, again, a lot of my time is spent reviewing and responding to emails and I cannot not financially account for that time.
  8. Yes. Lawyers, clients/parties, and the judge all calling from separate locations (we agreed to waive a formal court reporter and just use the court's audio system for creating the record). Much of pre-hearing preparation with the client was simply to go over and explain the exhibit markings and list with correspondence numbers and to practice how I needed my client to reference his corresponding copies of the exhibits. Thankfully, the judge was pretty lenient and opposing counsel, much to her credit, was very reasonable (we called each other beforehand to see what we could stipulate to) and did not hold each other to strict foundational standards during the hearing. We decided to proceed forward because the focus of the hearing was pretty limited, the issue was time-sensitive, and the judge had heard testimony fromthe parties before so I wasn't as concerned about the credibility issue. But, it's that latter issue that I'm going to start having a problem with if we start making these sort of hearings commonplace. I can adjust my prep and deal with it in the likely event I come across a more unreasonable opposing counsel, but there's just no substitute for a person sitting a few feet away from the finder of fact while being subjected to cross-examination for determining one's credibility.
  9. I did an evidentiary hearing this past Fridayby phone. Went surprisingly better than I expected.
  10. Do you have any evidence to support this?
  11. I geuinely don't understand the whole "the polls were wrong and can't be trusted" claims I continue to see here. Trump was statistically unlikely to win. A poker player holding QQ is statistically unlikely to win heads up against a player holding AA but it doesn't mean if a Q pops up that the math was wrong or that the AA guy made a play he shouldn't make again. Trump basically hit a two-outer. It was unlikely, but it happened. It doesn't invalidate the math.
  12. He could save one of my kids from drowning between now and the election and, while I'd thank him profusely, I still wouldn't vote for him.
  13. 20.9 MLB Infielder - Nap Lajoie How good was Nap? When he played for Cleveland they changed the name to be the "Cleveland Naps." Generally regarded as the best second baseman of all-time, he's top-25 all-time in WAR for any position. His career spanned over twenty years (including a stint as player-manager) and retired with a career BA of .338. In 1901 he hit .426 and in that year as well as 1904 he basically led the league in all statistical categories. Infielder is so far the most exhausted position so I maybe could have waited a few more rounds, but I just saw too much value here with Nap to pass up.
  14. Didn't Tim comment within the past week that he'd consider voting for Trump in 2020?
  15. Well, clearly my suggestion/preference isn’t the situation here so when in Rome...
  16. It’s weird that these rounds seem like more snipes than the early rounds.