Very tough question. Conservatively, it's always worth getting a lawyer. However, if it's a straightforward case and he's just looking to get the best deal, has he tried to get court appointed counsel? Generally, offers on this charge are usually pretty standard and a public defender will know what's good and what isn't. If he cannot get court appointed counsel, I'd give my conservative advice. My less conservative advice would be to have him show up to his first court appearance on his own and see what kind of offer they give him. If it's something he can live with, then that's fine. But please understand that plea offers vary wildly by jurisdiction and even specific prosecutor. What is a "good deal" in jurisdiction "A" may be crap in jurisdiction "B". Only a local attorney who practices in that specific court would know what is attainable, what is crap, etc.Oh great lawyer thread, a little advice please.
My college attending son got cited for underage consumption by city police; misdemeanor citation/summons.
Wife wants to get lawyer. Is it worth it for misdemeanor charge? He has three scholarships, kick butt GPA, a part time job, a leadership position in the band, and a leadership position in honor society.
We have received two different rep agreements and are shopping. The rep agreements are for $1500 and $2000 plus court costs, of course.
Is it worth it?
Thanks for your input. We aren't going to hire a lawyer. Son will plead no contest, pay the fine and court costs. The municipal court (of city hosting university) isn't big on diversion programs. However...Very tough question. Conservatively, it's always worth getting a lawyer. However, if it's a straightforward case and he's just looking to get the best deal, has he tried to get court appointed counsel? Generally, offers on this charge are usually pretty standard and a public defender will know what's good and what isn't. If he cannot get court appointed counsel, I'd give my conservative advice. My less conservative advice would be to have him show up to his first court appearance on his own and see what kind of offer they give him. If it's something he can live with, then that's fine. But please understand that plea offers vary wildly by jurisdiction and even specific prosecutor. What is a "good deal" in jurisdiction "A" may be crap in jurisdiction "B". Only a local attorney who practices in that specific court would know what is attainable, what is crap, etc.Oh great lawyer thread, a little advice please.
My college attending son got cited for underage consumption by city police; misdemeanor citation/summons.
Wife wants to get lawyer. Is it worth it for misdemeanor charge? He has three scholarships, kick butt GPA, a part time job, a leadership position in the band, and a leadership position in honor society.
We have received two different rep agreements and are shopping. The rep agreements are for $1500 and $2000 plus court costs, of course.
Is it worth it?
Got a jurisdiction at least?
This is a good idea. I did some work with the record-sealing service in DC, and while it could deal with more serious stuff than what your son was charged with, getting the misdemeanor removed can't hurt.Thanks for your input. We aren't going to hire a lawyer. Son will plead no contest, pay the fine and court costs. The municipal court (of city hosting university) isn't big on diversion programs. However...Very tough question. Conservatively, it's always worth getting a lawyer. However, if it's a straightforward case and he's just looking to get the best deal, has he tried to get court appointed counsel? Generally, offers on this charge are usually pretty standard and a public defender will know what's good and what isn't. If he cannot get court appointed counsel, I'd give my conservative advice. My less conservative advice would be to have him show up to his first court appearance on his own and see what kind of offer they give him. If it's something he can live with, then that's fine. But please understand that plea offers vary wildly by jurisdiction and even specific prosecutor. What is a "good deal" in jurisdiction "A" may be crap in jurisdiction "B". Only a local attorney who practices in that specific court would know what is attainable, what is crap, etc.Oh great lawyer thread, a little advice please.
My college attending son got cited for underage consumption by city police; misdemeanor citation/summons.
Wife wants to get lawyer. Is it worth it for misdemeanor charge? He has three scholarships, kick butt GPA, a part time job, a leadership position in the band, and a leadership position in honor society.
We have received two different rep agreements and are shopping. The rep agreements are for $1500 and $2000 plus court costs, of course.
Is it worth it?
Got a jurisdiction at least?
Student Legal Services on campus and a friend of the family that practices law in the area both recommended that he attend an alcohol awareness program sponsored by the university, volunteer through the university's outreach center, and keep his nose clean. When his birthday approaches next year (turns 21), SLS will help him petition the court to have the misdemeanor remove from his record.
Thanks again.
Read more carefully, it was about a horse.[yankeecribnotes] people suck.
I got torched cross-examining a seven year old today. I'd trade you.If there was ever a day I could just quit today would have been that day.
I haven't just led this particular horse to the water. I got the water cooled to the perfect temperature got the right background noise of animals the perfect amount of sunlight and cool breeze. I walked it to the water like a loving mother helps her baby learn to walk covered the ground in rose petals and congratulated the thing after every Step.
I made every other animal in the area say clear of the water so it was perfect in every way and told any passer by that he is the best horse on the planet and deserves to be treated so well. And when we finally get to the water and place pillows at his feet made of the finest hay with baskets of apples to devour after the drink ..... the Damn thing still won't take an effing sip.
![]()
Like you didn't know that was going to happenI got torched cross-examining a seven year old today. I'd trade you.If there was ever a day I could just quit today would have been that day.
I haven't just led this particular horse to the water. I got the water cooled to the perfect temperature got the right background noise of animals the perfect amount of sunlight and cool breeze. I walked it to the water like a loving mother helps her baby learn to walk covered the ground in rose petals and congratulated the thing after every Step.
I made every other animal in the area say clear of the water so it was perfect in every way and told any passer by that he is the best horse on the planet and deserves to be treated so well. And when we finally get to the water and place pillows at his feet made of the finest hay with baskets of apples to devour after the drink ..... the Damn thing still won't take an effing sip.
![]()
It's tough when you're cross-examining an intellectual superior.

ldschool:Congrats on the win. Good to see you following in Woz's footsteps.Won my first jury trial as a solo. It's been a good month![]()
my almost exact scenario. i really want to punch everyone. Twice.[vent]
I'm working on an acquisition that has become the biggest PITA ever in the history of acquisitions, and every week we are having multi-hour negotiation calls and just spinning our damn wheels. This acquisition is tiny (<$10 million) and does not warrant the amount of time, effort and angst it has generated for all of us for over 11 months and counting.
Anyway, I think everyone on our end is so worn down by this process that they're not even trying anymore, so for tomorrow's scheduled 3-1/2 call, there has been no prep, no discussion, no strategy. I'm just going in blind and don't even know if I'm supposed to be "getting to yes" or badass, and since we are all located remotely from one another I can't read body language or pick up on facial expressions, or even have a damn side conversation except by quickly-typed email.
I miss the days where negotiations consisted of everyone being put in a room and not being fed until you got it done.ldschool:
[/vent]
Every since my marriage started to go south (sadly, ten years now), I've been a HUGE proponent of what I call "asexual same-sex marriage."Did someone post this? If so sorry.
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/justice-roberts-revives-an-old-argument-that-could-117640176486.html
“Counsel, I’m not sure it’s necessary to get into sexual orientation to resolve the case,” Roberts said. “I mean, if Sue loves Joe and Tom loves Joe, Sue can marry him and Tom can’t. And the difference is based upon their different sex. Why isn’t that a straightforward question of sexual discrimination?”
Bursch responded that he believed the government can legally draw lines based on sex if it’s related to biology, such as the ability to procreate. But Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg disagreed with his interpretation, interrupting his rebuttal.
The argument quickly moved on to other questions, but the point Roberts raised hung in the air, suggesting a way for the chief justice to strike down state bans on gay marriage on relatively narrow grounds, without finding a fundamental right to marriage for LGBT people.
What are people's thoughts? This seems to me to be a very solid line of logic, but it seems to have been rejected and/or abandoned for the most part.
Every since my marriage started to go south (sadly, ten years now), I've been a HUGE proponent of what I call "asexual same-sex marriage."Did someone post this? If so sorry.
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/justice-roberts-revives-an-old-argument-that-could-117640176486.html
“Counsel, I’m not sure it’s necessary to get into sexual orientation to resolve the case,” Roberts said. “I mean, if Sue loves Joe and Tom loves Joe, Sue can marry him and Tom can’t. And the difference is based upon their different sex. Why isn’t that a straightforward question of sexual discrimination?”
Bursch responded that he believed the government can legally draw lines based on sex if it’s related to biology, such as the ability to procreate. But Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg disagreed with his interpretation, interrupting his rebuttal.
The argument quickly moved on to other questions, but the point Roberts raised hung in the air, suggesting a way for the chief justice to strike down state bans on gay marriage on relatively narrow grounds, without finding a fundamental right to marriage for LGBT people.
What are people's thoughts? This seems to me to be a very solid line of logic, but it seems to have been rejected and/or abandoned for the most part.
The way it works is this: I could marry my best friend, a guy I've known since college. We would have all the commitments of marriage: lifelong partnership, commitment, duty, care, etc. We'd nurse eachother back to health when we are sick, be there for them when lonely, wipe eachother's rear when we are old and incontinent. In short: every single commitment I'd give to my wife and she'd give to me. Someone to grow old with, raise kids with, etc.
Every single commitment, that is, EXCEPT sexual intercourse. We would be free to date and screw any women we want to our hearts' desire. We'd screw young, lithe flight attendants while we are still attractive, and screw old fatties when we are old and fat. And everything in between. And neither of us would be jealous that we are out screwing around.
Anyway, it sounds like Justice Roberts is FINALLY catching up to Sweet J's Genius. I like to think that I must have been running my mouth in a bar sometime recently about my "asexual same-sex marriage" revolution, and one of Robert's clerks much have overheard it and STOLE my idea!! I want credit, dammit.
To the idea, not your marriage in general. I know it's the wrong thread but what's going on there?I owe an update in another thread, that's really a year and a half late. I've been waiting to update until . . . well, I don't know yet. Until something significant changed. Anyway, when I do, I'll send a bat-signal.Every since my marriage started to go south (sadly, ten years now), I've been a HUGE proponent of what I call "asexual same-sex marriage."Did someone post this? If so sorry.
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/justice-roberts-revives-an-old-argument-that-could-117640176486.html
“Counsel, I’m not sure it’s necessary to get into sexual orientation to resolve the case,” Roberts said. “I mean, if Sue loves Joe and Tom loves Joe, Sue can marry him and Tom can’t. And the difference is based upon their different sex. Why isn’t that a straightforward question of sexual discrimination?”
Bursch responded that he believed the government can legally draw lines based on sex if it’s related to biology, such as the ability to procreate. But Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg disagreed with his interpretation, interrupting his rebuttal.
The argument quickly moved on to other questions, but the point Roberts raised hung in the air, suggesting a way for the chief justice to strike down state bans on gay marriage on relatively narrow grounds, without finding a fundamental right to marriage for LGBT people.
What are people's thoughts? This seems to me to be a very solid line of logic, but it seems to have been rejected and/or abandoned for the most part.
The way it works is this: I could marry my best friend, a guy I've known since college. We would have all the commitments of marriage: lifelong partnership, commitment, duty, care, etc. We'd nurse eachother back to health when we are sick, be there for them when lonely, wipe eachother's rear when we are old and incontinent. In short: every single commitment I'd give to my wife and she'd give to me. Someone to grow old with, raise kids with, etc.
Every single commitment, that is, EXCEPT sexual intercourse. We would be free to date and screw any women we want to our hearts' desire. We'd screw young, lithe flight attendants while we are still attractive, and screw old fatties when we are old and fat. And everything in between. And neither of us would be jealous that we are out screwing around.
Anyway, it sounds like Justice Roberts is FINALLY catching up to Sweet J's Genius. I like to think that I must have been running my mouth in a bar sometime recently about my "asexual same-sex marriage" revolution, and one of Robert's clerks much have overheard it and STOLE my idea!! I want credit, dammit.To the idea, not your marriage in general. I know it's the wrong thread but what's going on there?
you should live in the city just to experience living here, especially since you'll likely be working long hours.Building off of Sweet J's tangent, I'll be in NYC all summer. I know Otis is local/suburbia out there, but wondered:
I'm working right by Grand Central. Where would you choose to live (keeping in mind that I am not at a firm making big money, but hope to simply cover rent and not lose money on the summer)?
Also, if anyone out there wants to get together, I think I ought to buy a round or two for the help yall have given me over the past year or two.
Oops, it was a 4-1/2 call, from which I've just emerged. I need lunch and some booze, not in that order. OFFICIAL REQUEST: Could we please get a smiley on here that indicates blowing one's brains out? Thanks.[vent]
I'm working on an acquisition that has become the biggest PITA ever in the history of acquisitions, and every week we are having multi-hour negotiation calls and just spinning our damn wheels. This acquisition is tiny (<$10 million) and does not warrant the amount of time, effort and angst it has generated for all of us for over 11 months and counting.
Anyway, I think everyone on our end is so worn down by this process that they're not even trying anymore, so for tomorrow's scheduled 3-1/2 call, there has been no prep, no discussion, no strategy. I'm just going in blind and don't even know if I'm supposed to be "getting to yes" or badass, and since we are all located remotely from one another I can't read body language or pick up on facial expressions, or even have a damn side conversation except by quickly-typed email.
I miss the days where negotiations consisted of everyone being put in a room and not being fed until you got it done.ldschool:
[/vent]
Oops, it was a 4-1/2 call, from which I've just emerged. I need lunch and some booze, not in that order. OFFICIAL REQUEST: Could we please get a smiley on here that indicates blowing one's brains out? Thanks.[vent]
I'm working on an acquisition that has become the biggest PITA ever in the history of acquisitions, and every week we are having multi-hour negotiation calls and just spinning our damn wheels. This acquisition is tiny (<$10 million) and does not warrant the amount of time, effort and angst it has generated for all of us for over 11 months and counting.
Anyway, I think everyone on our end is so worn down by this process that they're not even trying anymore, so for tomorrow's scheduled 3-1/2 call, there has been no prep, no discussion, no strategy. I'm just going in blind and don't even know if I'm supposed to be "getting to yes" or badass, and since we are all located remotely from one another I can't read body language or pick up on facial expressions, or even have a damn side conversation except by quickly-typed email.
I miss the days where negotiations consisted of everyone being put in a room and not being fed until you got it done.ldschool:
[/vent]
not sure why I keep reading your guys' thread...Waiting for a jury to deliberate and come back with news that your client either can remain free or go to prison for the rest of his life is perhaps the most helpless feeling in the world.
Huh. So I subpoenaed the document storage company as part of this motion. Turns out the reason the defendant didn't disclose over 500 boxes of relevant documents is that...wait for it...they put in an order for the storage company to destroy them four months after being served with the complaint, but their controller quit after issuing the destruction order but before signing the 30 day notice that the storage company requires before destroying documents, so the storage company never destroyed them.Guys that showed up at mediation with no authority just got caught not disclosing 500 boxes of potentially relevant documents for a year, even after I got a motion to compel and then an order sanctioning them for not complying.
Could be a rare case where discovery abuses are so bad that the court strikes their answer and I get a default judgment.
I can't even imagine. I know you realize this, but take solace in whatever the outcome that he had solid representation and that you did everything a lawyer could do.Waiting for a jury to deliberate and come back with news that your client either can remain free or go to prison for the rest of his life is perhaps the most helpless feeling in the world.
or just go drink.I can't even imagine. I know you realize this, but take solace in whatever the outcome that he had solid representation and that you did everything a lawyer could do.Waiting for a jury to deliberate and come back with news that your client either can remain free or go to prison for the rest of his life is perhaps the most helpless feeling in the world.
2.5 days on a stolen car case. The trial itself didn't even take that long. Eventually they found my client guilty.What's the longest you guys have had to wait for a jury to deliberate? In a previous life, I waited with our trial team for 6 days before the jury returned. Which would have been cool at home or near home or anywhere else in the world other than Billings, Montana.
Never had to wait more than a day.What's the longest you guys have had to wait for a jury to deliberate? In a previous life, I waited with our trial team for 6 days before the jury returned. Which would have been cool at home or near home or anywhere else in the world other than Billings, Montana.
I would live in Brooklyn. Williamsburg maybe, Park Slope maybe.Building off of Sweet J's tangent, I'll be in NYC all summer. I know Otis is local/suburbia out there, but wondered:
I'm working right by Grand Central. Where would you choose to live (keeping in mind that I am not at a firm making big money, but hope to simply cover rent and not lose money on the summer)?
Also, if anyone out there wants to get together, I think I ought to buy a round or two for the help yall have given me over the past year or two.
About 3 weeks.TheAristocrat said:What's the longest you guys have had to wait for a jury to deliberate? In a previous life, I waited with our trial team for 6 days before the jury returned. Which would have been cool at home or near home or anywhere else in the world other than Billings, Montana.
didn't he say not lose any money on the summer?I would live in Brooklyn. Williamsburg maybe, Park Slope maybe.Building off of Sweet J's tangent, I'll be in NYC all summer. I know Otis is local/suburbia out there, but wondered:
I'm working right by Grand Central. Where would you choose to live (keeping in mind that I am not at a firm making big money, but hope to simply cover rent and not lose money on the summer)?
Also, if anyone out there wants to get together, I think I ought to buy a round or two for the help yall have given me over the past year or two.
If in Manhattan, I would love downtown, in the village or LES.
I'm involved in a case that was tried in 2009 (bench trial) and we still haven't had a ruling. Yay state courts!I had a non-jury verdict take four months once.
WTFI'm involved in a case that was tried in 2009 (bench trial) and we still haven't had a ruling. Yay state courts!I had a non-jury verdict take four months once.
It's an argument that's been mostly completely abandoned because lower court judges basically dismiss it out of hand, but I agree with the basic premise of it. If you're telling one person he/she can't do something that someone of another gender/sex can do solely because of the gender/sex, I think it should be considered per se discrimination based on gender/sex.Did someone post this? If so sorry.
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/justice-roberts-revives-an-old-argument-that-could-117640176486.html
“Counsel, I’m not sure it’s necessary to get into sexual orientation to resolve the case,” Roberts said. “I mean, if Sue loves Joe and Tom loves Joe, Sue can marry him and Tom can’t. And the difference is based upon their different sex. Why isn’t that a straightforward question of sexual discrimination?”
Bursch responded that he believed the government can legally draw lines based on sex if it’s related to biology, such as the ability to procreate. But Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg disagreed with his interpretation, interrupting his rebuttal.
The argument quickly moved on to other questions, but the point Roberts raised hung in the air, suggesting a way for the chief justice to strike down state bans on gay marriage on relatively narrow grounds, without finding a fundamental right to marriage for LGBT people.
What are people's thoughts? This seems to me to be a very solid line of logic, but it seems to have been rejected and/or abandoned for the most part.
That doesn't surprise me. I've waited 60+ days a few times and 90+ once on bench trials.I had a non-jury verdict take four months once.
I once had a motion to amend a complaint take 9 months. Beat that.WTFI'm involved in a case that was tried in 2009 (bench trial) and we still haven't had a ruling. Yay state courts!I had a non-jury verdict take four months once.
WTFI'm involved in a case that was tried in 2009 (bench trial) and we still haven't had a ruling. Yay state courts!I had a non-jury verdict take four months once.
The Judge has had a variety of personal excuses as to why he couldn't address the case (e.g., he was in poor health for a time) and opposing counsel's sole motive is basically to prolong the case as long as possible. Client didn't want to seek the equivalent of a mandamus or ask for a new judge because they didn't want to spend a few hundred thousand $ retrying the case. It's insanity.WTFI'm involved in a case that was tried in 2009 (bench trial) and we still haven't had a ruling. Yay state courts!I had a non-jury verdict take four months once.
CongratsYou know when you lose your motion for partial summary judgment, argue with the judge, and she reverses on the spot? Good day.
Thanks. I was either going to win or end up in jail for contempt. Woohoo!CongratsYou know when you lose your motion for partial summary judgment, argue with the judge, and she reverses on the spot? Good day.