Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Henry Ford

The Lawyer Thread Where We Stop Ruining Other Threads

Recommended Posts

It is a violation of the rules of professional conduct to accept an unearned fee. If it took you an hour to help convince the prosecutor not to prosecute, charge an hour at your usual hourly rate and refund the rest.

Its not unearned if its a fixed fee. I think Woz could also say to the client, "Hey, I'm in a good mood today, so I'll write off the other half you owe me."

I've testified at disciplinary hearings on these facts. It doesn't end well for the attorney.

So Woz gets all the downside of a fixed fee (if the matter dragged on to trial, reducing his effective hourly rate), but none of the upside of a quick resolution?

this is all state-dependent and will vary on whether you call it a retainer, deposit, flat rate/fixed fee, etc.

with this little work done, having a minimum charge for setting up and closing the file would solve the problem.

Agreed and agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a violation of the rules of professional conduct to accept an unearned fee. If it took you an hour to help convince the prosecutor not to prosecute, charge an hour at your usual hourly rate and refund the rest.

Its not unearned if its a fixed fee. I think Woz could also say to the client, "Hey, I'm in a good mood today, so I'll write off the other half you owe me."

I've testified at disciplinary hearings on these facts. It doesn't end well for the attorney.

So Woz gets all the downside of a fixed fee (if the matter dragged on to trial, reducing his effective hourly rate), but none of the upside of a quick resolution?

Some of the upside - but not half the potential fee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypothetical:

Potential client comes into your office without an appointment one day when you are pretty busy. Says he just got released from jail and needs a lawyer immediately. You meet with him regardless of your schedule and discuss his case. After providing the standard "no guarantees," "can't make any real guesses as to potential outcomes without viewing disclosure," etc., you acknowledge that if what your client is telling you is accurate he may have some legitimate defenses to his charges. You quote client X and accept 1/2 X as a down payment.

Next, knowing that some prosecutors can be very reasonable if a resolution can struck quickly saving that prosecutor from some work, you make a quick call over to the office to see if it's been assigned and is someone you can work quickly with. Sure enough it is. You speak to that prosecutor, who is a very reasonable guy, and he indicates he's actually considering "non filing" (dismissing without prejudice to gather more evidence) the case. You give him your take and some additional facts and evidence. This pushes him to decide to dismiss and not re-file unless the officers get more evidence (something you think is unlikely). You call your client with the good news. Client is very happy and exclaims that it's even better because he can come down and get his money back. You look at the guy and realize that you only spent about 60 minutes on his case from him coming through the door to you telling him you got it dismissed.

Your move?

start putting a non-refundable charge for opening and closing a file into your fee agreements.

Good idea :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and in the future call him the next day.

His release conditions were such that he was required to go check in with a pre-trial release agency. Unfortunately it was in his best interests to get this info quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and in the future call him the next day.

His release conditions were such that he was required to go check in with a pre-trial release agency. Unfortunately it was in his best interests to get this info quickly.
The world has conspired against you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and in the future call him the next day.

His release conditions were such that he was required to go check in with a pre-trial release agency. Unfortunately it was in his best interests to get this info quickly.
The world has conspired against you.

That's how it felt.

Also, FWIW, I refunded the money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypothetical:

Potential client comes into your office without an appointment one day when you are pretty busy. Says he just got released from jail and needs a lawyer immediately. You meet with him regardless of your schedule and discuss his case. After providing the standard "no guarantees," "can't make any real guesses as to potential outcomes without viewing disclosure," etc., you acknowledge that if what your client is telling you is accurate he may have some legitimate defenses to his charges. You quote client X and accept 1/2 X as a down payment.

Next, knowing that some prosecutors can be very reasonable if a resolution can struck quickly saving that prosecutor from some work, you make a quick call over to the office to see if it's been assigned and is someone you can work quickly with. Sure enough it is. You speak to that prosecutor, who is a very reasonable guy, and he indicates he's actually considering "non filing" (dismissing without prejudice to gather more evidence) the case. You give him your take and some additional facts and evidence. This pushes him to decide to dismiss and not re-file unless the officers get more evidence (something you think is unlikely). You call your client with the good news. Client is very happy and exclaims that it's even better because he can come down and get his money back. You look at the guy and realize that you only spent about 60 minutes on his case from him coming through the door to you telling him you got it dismissed.

Your move?

start putting a non-refundable charge for opening and closing a file into your fee agreements.

Good idea :thumbup:

It seems odd that one could transform an unearned fee and ethical violation into a legit fee just by calling it a "non-refundable file opening and file closing fee." Does it quack like a duck or not? In this case, who is to say the prosecutor would have dropped the matter had Woz not called him? The fee was most likely very well-earned indeed. What prosecutor wants to take on the Woz?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypothetical:

Potential client comes into your office without an appointment one day when you are pretty busy. Says he just got released from jail and needs a lawyer immediately. You meet with him regardless of your schedule and discuss his case. After providing the standard "no guarantees," "can't make any real guesses as to potential outcomes without viewing disclosure," etc., you acknowledge that if what your client is telling you is accurate he may have some legitimate defenses to his charges. You quote client X and accept 1/2 X as a down payment.

Next, knowing that some prosecutors can be very reasonable if a resolution can struck quickly saving that prosecutor from some work, you make a quick call over to the office to see if it's been assigned and is someone you can work quickly with. Sure enough it is. You speak to that prosecutor, who is a very reasonable guy, and he indicates he's actually considering "non filing" (dismissing without prejudice to gather more evidence) the case. You give him your take and some additional facts and evidence. This pushes him to decide to dismiss and not re-file unless the officers get more evidence (something you think is unlikely). You call your client with the good news. Client is very happy and exclaims that it's even better because he can come down and get his money back. You look at the guy and realize that you only spent about 60 minutes on his case from him coming through the door to you telling him you got it dismissed.

Your move?

start putting a non-refundable charge for opening and closing a file into your fee agreements.

Good idea :thumbup:

It seems odd that one could transform an unearned fee and ethical violation into a legit fee just by calling it a "non-refundable file opening and file closing fee." Does it quack like a duck or not? In this case, who is to say the prosecutor would have dropped the matter had Woz not called him? The fee was most likely very well-earned indeed. What prosecutor wants to take on the Woz?

Well, I think the point there is to value the file opening fee at something reasonable. Probably our normal hourly consult rate of something well within the ethical standards for an hourly rate.

You definitely hit the nail on the head though as to why it was so frustrating. When the potential client walked in that day, realistically speaking the end result could not have been better. And that was due to an extent on my phone call (it's certainly possible the prosecutor would have made the same decision though without my call as he was on the fence), and my reputation/workability with that particular prosecutor which has taken a substantial amount of time and good work to develop. So, arguably, a results-oriented view would consider the fee well-earned. However, as Henry pointed out, if the bar looks at it from a timing view there's no way keeping the fee (even just the half down that was paid) would be ethical. And the potential headache with the bar led to the refund.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many years ago I took a referral from a friend to do a collection for a company located a few states away. It was a couple hundred thousand dollars. The in-house guy I spoke with said he thought the company might be out of business, didn't know why they didn't pay, had no correspondence. I drove past the business and saw the lights were on and the doors open. I urged him to do a split fee arrangement with a reduced hourly rate + reduced contingent fee with a kicker if we had to sue and another if we went to trial. He wanted to wash his hands completely, didn't want any fee hitting his dept. budget, so we drew it up at 30%. My demand letter was delivered the next day and we quickly worked out a payment agreement where the full amount was due within a couple months. Of course the client objected that my fee was outrageous given the fact that I only wrote one letter and took one phone call. We ended up cutting him a break too, but I was pissed off about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many years ago I took a referral from a friend to do a collection for a company located a few states away. It was a couple hundred thousand dollars. The in-house guy I spoke with said he thought the company might be out of business, didn't know why they didn't pay, had no correspondence. I drove past the business and saw the lights were on and the doors open. I urged him to do a split fee arrangement with a reduced hourly rate + reduced contingent fee with a kicker if we had to sue and another if we went to trial. He wanted to wash his hands completely, didn't want any fee hitting his dept. budget, so we drew it up at 30%. My demand letter was delivered the next day and we quickly worked out a payment agreement where the full amount was due within a couple months. Of course the client objected that my fee was outrageous given the fact that I only wrote one letter and took one phone call. We ended up cutting him a break too, but I was pissed off about it.

It's like being punished for being too damn good at the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the "quote" a fixed fee or an estimate?

If it's grossly disproportionate to the amount of work involved, it doesn't really matter.

Who are you to say how much woz's effort played into the charges being dismissed? People don't just pay for our time. They pay for our knowledge and game-playing ability. He earned his money just like Cletius earned his 30%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the "quote" a fixed fee or an estimate?

If it's grossly disproportionate to the amount of work involved, it doesn't really matter.

Who are you to say how much woz's effort played into the charges being dismissed? People don't just pay for our time. They pay for our knowledge and game-playing ability. He earned his money just like Cletius earned his 30%
He just explained how much effort he put into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the "quote" a fixed fee or an estimate?

If it's grossly disproportionate to the amount of work involved, it doesn't really matter.
Who are you to say how much woz's effort played into the charges being dismissed? People don't just pay for our time. They pay for our knowledge and game-playing ability. He earned his money just like Cletius earned his 30%
He just explained how much effort he put into it.

Re-read my post, counselor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the "quote" a fixed fee or an estimate?

If it's grossly disproportionate to the amount of work involved, it doesn't really matter.
Who are you to say how much woz's effort played into the charges being dismissed? People don't just pay for our time. They pay for our knowledge and game-playing ability. He earned his money just like Cletius earned his 30%
He just explained how much effort he put into it.

Re-read my post, counselor.
I read it. Does it do any new tricks the third or fourth time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Woz,

Is this person the repeat customer sort?

Hypothetically yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting piece in the Dealbook yesterday - Law School Is Buyers’ Market, With Top Students in Demand

This is long-expected I suppose, but something I wasn't aware was happening.

Strikes me as a positive development.

Yep. Little bounce back from the saturation in the late 2000's. Probably means there are more jobs available coming out of college so law school isn't the fallback/default option it was a decade ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to drag the Brown case into this thread but I'm not gonna try to ask honest questions in that other trainwreck of a thread (although I'm enjoying YF23, HF, even Todd Andrews in there).

So according to some sources it's well over 99% of grand juries return verdicts of probable cause. Prosecutor doesn't have to present all evidence, controls the narrative etc. It seems (and correct me if I'm wrong) that a grand jury proceeding is simply meant to rubberstamp what the prosecutor already intends to do.

Yet it also seems like a prosecutor can bring charges against a suspect and there can be a criminal trial without a grand jury. Is this the case? I understand why they convened a grand jury for the Brown case in this context, but if the prosecutor has the power to indict a suspect and bring them to trial then why would they ever use a grand jury?

Tangentially, was this grand jury process extraordinary in its scope, length, and level of detail of evidence presentation?

Im a lawyer so you can enjoy me here too. win-win

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting piece in the Dealbook yesterday - Law School Is Buyers’ Market, With Top Students in Demand

This is long-expected I suppose, but something I wasn't aware was happening.

Northwestern and a bunch of TTT.

When Cooley, the King of predatory law schools is cited as an example of change, the change can only be for the good.

It's a great idea to go to law school with a 3.95/175 and play schools against each other. It's still a terrible idea for the chick going to Roger Williams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the "quote" a fixed fee or an estimate?

If it's grossly disproportionate to the amount of work involved, it doesn't really matter.

Who are you to say how much woz's effort played into the charges being dismissed? People don't just pay for our time. They pay for our knowledge and game-playing ability. He earned his money just like Cletius earned his 30%

Yes. I do copyright infringement cases on a contingency fee basis and I take my fee for any recovery whether it takes one letter or litigation in federal court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting piece in the Dealbook yesterday - Law School Is Buyers’ Market, With Top Students in Demand

This is long-expected I suppose, but something I wasn't aware was happening.

Strikes me as a positive development.

Its funny that the top schools will never reduce tuition, but rely on increasing financial aid to create the same result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting piece in the Dealbook yesterday - Law School Is Buyers’ Market, With Top Students in Demand

This is long-expected I suppose, but something I wasn't aware was happening.

Northwestern and a bunch of TTT.

When Cooley, the King of predatory law schools is cited as an example of change, the change can only be for the good.

It's a great idea to go to law school with a 3.95/175 and play schools against each other. It's still a terrible idea for the chick going to Roger Williams.

Yeah, this article talks a lot about the so-called TTT schools, and the fact that there's a strong correlation between low LSAT scores and never passing a bar exam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting piece in the Dealbook yesterday - Law School Is Buyers’ Market, With Top Students in Demand

This is long-expected I suppose, but something I wasn't aware was happening.

Northwestern and a bunch of TTT.

When Cooley, the King of predatory law schools is cited as an example of change, the change can only be for the good.

It's a great idea to go to law school with a 3.95/175 and play schools against each other. It's still a terrible idea for the chick going to Roger Williams.

Yeah, this article talks a lot about the so-called TTT schools, and the fact that there's a strong correlation between low LSAT scores and never passing a bar exam.

Saw on ATL that Concordia never got accredited. Paying for three years and can't sit for the bar.

ETA: There's nothing so-called about a TTT school. They're cash machines, plain and simple. A few people get rich on MLM schemes too.

Edited by Gawain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting piece in the Dealbook yesterday - Law School Is Buyers’ Market, With Top Students in Demand

This is long-expected I suppose, but something I wasn't aware was happening.

Northwestern and a bunch of TTT.

When Cooley, the King of predatory law schools is cited as an example of change, the change can only be for the good.

It's a great idea to go to law school with a 3.95/175 and play schools against each other. It's still a terrible idea for the chick going to Roger Williams.

Yeah, this article talks a lot about the so-called TTT schools, and the fact that there's a strong correlation between low LSAT scores and never passing a bar exam.

Saw on ATL that Concordia never got accredited. Paying for three years and can't sit for the bar.

Ouch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am so sick of reading hospital records where all discharge paperwork was filled out and signed by the doctor a full day ahead of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a settlement conference this morning on a child porn case where the judge spent about 30 minutes ripping my state's legislature and their ludicrous sentencing guidelines on the charges (10-24 flat time on each count, mandatory consecutive sentences). Made many of the points I've made to prosecutors in essentially begging for deviations. Was pretty cathartic.

Of course, the only realistic result is that my client may now think there's an 8th amendment issue worth fighting and I'm further away from resolving a case with charges which make trial essentially impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a settlement conference this morning on a child porn case where the judge spent about 30 minutes ripping my state's legislature and their ludicrous sentencing guidelines on the charges (10-24 flat time on each count, mandatory consecutive sentences). Made many of the points I've made to prosecutors in essentially begging for deviations. Was pretty cathartic.

Of course, the only realistic result is that my client may now think there's an 8th amendment issue worth fighting and I'm further away from resolving a case with charges which make trial essentially impossible.

You should start a thread that you're trying to get someone's charges reduced for this type of crime. I think scooby and Henry Ford's work in the Garner/Ferguson threads have raised the forum's view of attorneys to an unsustainable level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a settlement conference this morning on a child porn case where the judge spent about 30 minutes ripping my state's legislature and their ludicrous sentencing guidelines on the charges (10-24 flat time on each count, mandatory consecutive sentences). Made many of the points I've made to prosecutors in essentially begging for deviations. Was pretty cathartic.

Of course, the only realistic result is that my client may now think there's an 8th amendment issue worth fighting and I'm further away from resolving a case with charges which make trial essentially impossible.

You should start a thread that you're trying to get someone's charges reduced for this type of crime. I think scooby and Henry Ford's work in the Garner/Ferguson threads have raised the forum's view of attorneys to an unsustainable level.

Whoah, whoah - I'm making colostomy bag jokes in the Ferguson thread. I think you're thinking of RHE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a settlement conference this morning on a child porn case where the judge spent about 30 minutes ripping my state's legislature and their ludicrous sentencing guidelines on the charges (10-24 flat time on each count, mandatory consecutive sentences). Made many of the points I've made to prosecutors in essentially begging for deviations. Was pretty cathartic.

Of course, the only realistic result is that my client may now think there's an 8th amendment issue worth fighting and I'm further away from resolving a case with charges which make trial essentially impossible.

You should start a thread that you're trying to get someone's charges reduced for this type of crime. I think scooby and Henry Ford's work in the Garner/Ferguson threads have raised the forum's view of attorneys to an unsustainable level.

Whoah, whoah - I'm making colostomy bag jokes in the Ferguson thread. I think you're thinking of RHE.

RHE is scoob v2.0, is he not? You were doing good work in the chokehold thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a settlement conference this morning on a child porn case where the judge spent about 30 minutes ripping my state's legislature and their ludicrous sentencing guidelines on the charges (10-24 flat time on each count, mandatory consecutive sentences). Made many of the points I've made to prosecutors in essentially begging for deviations. Was pretty cathartic.

Of course, the only realistic result is that my client may now think there's an 8th amendment issue worth fighting and I'm further away from resolving a case with charges which make trial essentially impossible.

You should start a thread that you're trying to get someone's charges reduced for this type of crime. I think scooby and Henry Ford's work in the Garner/Ferguson threads have raised the forum's view of attorneys to an unsustainable level.

Whoah, whoah - I'm making colostomy bag jokes in the Ferguson thread. I think you're thinking of RHE.

RHE is scoob v2.0, is he not? You were doing good work in the chokehold thread.

Oh, right, someone told me that before. Well, he's much better at this than I am. I start off patient, get all amped up to argue for awhile, and then end up making snide, rude comments about colostomy bags and hubris. It's a vicious cycle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the "quote" a fixed fee or an estimate?

If it's grossly disproportionate to the amount of work involved, it doesn't really matter.
Who are you to say how much woz's effort played into the charges being dismissed? People don't just pay for our time. They pay for our knowledge and game-playing ability. He earned his money just like Cletius earned his 30%
He just explained how much effort he put into it.

Re-read my post, counselor.
I read it. Does it do any new tricks the third or fourth time?

This is exactly the type of slap-fight our forefathers imagined when they created this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a settlement conference this morning on a child porn case where the judge spent about 30 minutes ripping my state's legislature and their ludicrous sentencing guidelines on the charges (10-24 flat time on each count, mandatory consecutive sentences). Made many of the points I've made to prosecutors in essentially begging for deviations. Was pretty cathartic.

Of course, the only realistic result is that my client may now think there's an 8th amendment issue worth fighting and I'm further away from resolving a case with charges which make trial essentially impossible.

You should start a thread that you're trying to get someone's charges reduced for this type of crime. I think scooby and Henry Ford's work in the Garner/Ferguson threads have raised the forum's view of attorneys to an unsustainable level.

I could just start a girl thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a settlement conference this morning on a child porn case where the judge spent about 30 minutes ripping my state's legislature and their ludicrous sentencing guidelines on the charges (10-24 flat time on each count, mandatory consecutive sentences). Made many of the points I've made to prosecutors in essentially begging for deviations. Was pretty cathartic.

Of course, the only realistic result is that my client may now think there's an 8th amendment issue worth fighting and I'm further away from resolving a case with charges which make trial essentially impossible.

You should start a thread that you're trying to get someone's charges reduced for this type of crime. I think scooby and Henry Ford's work in the Garner/Ferguson threads have raised the forum's view of attorneys to an unsustainable level.

Whoah, whoah - I'm making colostomy bag jokes in the Ferguson thread. I think you're thinking of RHE.

RHE is scoob v2.0, is he not? You were doing good work in the chokehold thread.

Oh, right, someone told me that before. Well, he's much better at this than I am. I start off patient, get all amped up to argue for awhile, and then end up making snide, rude comments about colostomy bags and hubris. It's a vicious cycle.

This is pretty much the exact reason why I'm no longer Scoob. Every once in a while I decide it's either stay around here or lose all faith in humanity. So I do the right thing for a while before I backslide like Kirstie Alley if she lived next to a KFC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a settlement conference this morning on a child porn case where the judge spent about 30 minutes ripping my state's legislature and their ludicrous sentencing guidelines on the charges (10-24 flat time on each count, mandatory consecutive sentences). Made many of the points I've made to prosecutors in essentially begging for deviations. Was pretty cathartic.

Of course, the only realistic result is that my client may now think there's an 8th amendment issue worth fighting and I'm further away from resolving a case with charges which make trial essentially impossible.

You should start a thread that you're trying to get someone's charges reduced for this type of crime. I think scooby and Henry Ford's work in the Garner/Ferguson threads have raised the forum's view of attorneys to an unsustainable level.

Whoah, whoah - I'm making colostomy bag jokes in the Ferguson thread. I think you're thinking of RHE.

RHE is scoob v2.0, is he not? You were doing good work in the chokehold thread.

Oh, right, someone told me that before. Well, he's much better at this than I am. I start off patient, get all amped up to argue for awhile, and then end up making snide, rude comments about colostomy bags and hubris. It's a vicious cycle.

Yeah I gave the Trayvon Martin thread a shot and wound up just hating myself for it. Don't know how you guys have lasted so long in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the "quote" a fixed fee or an estimate?

If it's grossly disproportionate to the amount of work involved, it doesn't really matter.
Who are you to say how much woz's effort played into the charges being dismissed? People don't just pay for our time. They pay for our knowledge and game-playing ability. He earned his money just like Cletius earned his 30%
He just explained how much effort he put into it.

Re-read my post, counselor.
I read it. Does it do any new tricks the third or fourth time?

This is exactly the type of slap-fight our forefathers imagined when they created this thread.

Don't tell me about my motivations, ########.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is pretty much the exact reason why I'm no longer Scoob. Every once in a while I decide it's either stay around here or lose all faith in humanity. So I do the right thing for a while before I backslide like Kirstie Alley if she lived next to a KFC.

Kirstie Alley has a thing for black guys?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is pretty much the exact reason why I'm no longer Scoob. Every once in a while I decide it's either stay around here or lose all faith in humanity. So I do the right thing for a while before I backslide like Kirstie Alley if she lived next to a KFC.

Kirstie Alley has a thing for black guys?

Duh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My brother was on jury duty this week in the State of Washington. He was on a jury panel (but not ultimately selected) in a peer-to-peer rape (a/k/a "date rape") case.

On day 2 of voir dire, obviously because he knew her, the prosecutor asked a female juror if she knew who he was. She said, "yes", and so he asked her to explain, which she did: he plays golf (occasionally?) with her husband.

He goes on to ask, "Is there anything negative you know about me which might hurt your ability to be impartial in this case." (Oh ####, right?)

She responds, "Well, I know you throw your clubs sometimes." :lmao:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I argued a pretty high profile pro bono case today. Getting a bunch of press attention, including Otis looking the part of an out of shape middle aged lawyer in the photos. :bag:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best CLE I've ever been to. 2 days of cannibas law

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I argued a pretty high profile pro bono case today. Getting a bunch of press attention, including Otis looking the part of an out of shape middle aged lawyer in the photos. :bag:

#### that. Pudgy with thinning hair is the new gladiator armor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I argued a pretty high profile pro bono case today. Getting a bunch of press attention, including Otis looking the part of an out of shape middle aged lawyer in the photos. :bag:

#### that. Pudgy with thinning hair is the new gladiator armor.

So I ventured into a Men's Warehouse on Black Friday to buy a suit on one of their deals. 149.99 or something. Find one, get fitted, set up the tailoring, etc. Go to pay and it's like $40 more than expected. I politely ask her if the price is right. She sheepishly informs me that she had to get the suit from the "big and tall section" (note: I'm 5'10") and there is an $40 charge for the extra fabric.

At least my hair isn't thinning.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a settlement conference this morning on a child porn case where the judge spent about 30 minutes ripping my state's legislature and their ludicrous sentencing guidelines on the charges (10-24 flat time on each count, mandatory consecutive sentences). Made many of the points I've made to prosecutors in essentially begging for deviations. Was pretty cathartic.

Of course, the only realistic result is that my client may now think there's an 8th amendment issue worth fighting and I'm further away from resolving a case with charges which make trial essentially impossible.

You should start a thread that you're trying to get someone's charges reduced for this type of crime. I think scooby and Henry Ford's work in the Garner/Ferguson threads have raised the forum's view of attorneys to an unsustainable level.

Whoah, whoah - I'm making colostomy bag jokes in the Ferguson thread. I think you're thinking of RHE.

RHE is scoob v2.0, is he not? You were doing good work in the chokehold thread.

Oh, right, someone told me that before. Well, he's much better at this than I am. I start off patient, get all amped up to argue for awhile, and then end up making snide, rude comments about colostomy bags and hubris. It's a vicious cycle.

Are you sure you aren't a member of the Michigan legislature?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I argued a pretty high profile pro bono case today. Getting a bunch of press attention, including Otis looking the part of an out of shape middle aged lawyer in the photos. :bag:

#### that. Pudgy with thinning hair is the new gladiator armor.

So I ventured into a Men's Warehouse on Black Friday to buy a suit on one of their deals. 149.99 or something. Find one, get fitted, set up the tailoring, etc. Go to pay and it's like $40 more than expected. I politely ask her if the price is right. She sheepishly informs me that she had to get the suit from the "big and tall section" (note: I'm 5'10") and there is an $40 charge for the extra fabric.

At least my hair isn't thinning.

Go #### yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a settlement conference this morning on a child porn case where the judge spent about 30 minutes ripping my state's legislature and their ludicrous sentencing guidelines on the charges (10-24 flat time on each count, mandatory consecutive sentences). Made many of the points I've made to prosecutors in essentially begging for deviations. Was pretty cathartic.

Of course, the only realistic result is that my client may now think there's an 8th amendment issue worth fighting and I'm further away from resolving a case with charges which make trial essentially impossible.

You should start a thread that you're trying to get someone's charges reduced for this type of crime. I think scooby and Henry Ford's work in the Garner/Ferguson threads have raised the forum's view of attorneys to an unsustainable level.

Whoah, whoah - I'm making colostomy bag jokes in the Ferguson thread. I think you're thinking of RHE.

RHE is scoob v2.0, is he not? You were doing good work in the chokehold thread.

Oh, right, someone told me that before. Well, he's much better at this than I am. I start off patient, get all amped up to argue for awhile, and then end up making snide, rude comments about colostomy bags and hubris. It's a vicious cycle.

Are you sure you aren't a member of the Michigan legislature?

I guess I'm not sure of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.