The Lawyer Thread Where We Stop Ruining Other Threads (1 Viewer)

[NCCommish]

You know when you lose your motion for partial summary judgment, argue with the judge, and she reverses on the spot? Good day.

Congrats

Thanks. I was either going to win or end up in jail for contempt. Woohoo!

To quote the philosopher Warren Zevon " go down gambling you may never have to go". Words I live by.

 

[njherdfan]

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.

Congrats! My housing recommendation would depend on how much money you're making, and how important it is to you to live in Manhattan vs. one of the other boroughs. I worked in NYC after my 1L year and commuted from my house in northern NJ, and it was no fun.

 

[El Floppo]

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.

Congrats! My housing recommendation would depend on how much money you're making, and how important it is to you to live in Manhattan vs. one of the other boroughs. I worked in NYC after my 1L year and commuted from my house in northern NJ, and it was no fun.

Stuy Town is as affordable as you're going to get and has turned into a giant dorm over the last 5 years. It's also a straight shot uptown to Grand Central- even walkable or citibikable. also right ablve the east village and short hop to Union Square. Could probably find a summer share or room-mate needed situation with so many students living there.

 

[njherdfan]

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.

Congrats! My housing recommendation would depend on how much money you're making, and how important it is to you to live in Manhattan vs. one of the other boroughs. I worked in NYC after my 1L year and commuted from my house in northern NJ, and it was no fun.

Stuy Town is as affordable as you're going to get and has turned into a giant dorm over the last 5 years. It's also a straight shot uptown to Grand Central- even walkable or citibikable. also right ablve the east village and short hop to Union Square. Could probably find a summer share or room-mate needed situation with so many students living there.

Good point. Also, Instinctive, there are often law students who are looking to sublet their apartments for the summer because they will be elsewhere. TLS has a thread about it, and I'm sure other places do too.

 

[Instinctive]

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.

Congrats! My housing recommendation would depend on how much money you're making, and how important it is to you to live in Manhattan vs. one of the other boroughs. I worked in NYC after my 1L year and commuted from my house in northern NJ, and it was no fun.

Stuy Town is as affordable as you're going to get and has turned into a giant dorm over the last 5 years. It's also a straight shot uptown to Grand Central- even walkable or citibikable. also right ablve the east village and short hop to Union Square. Could probably find a summer share or room-mate needed situation with so many students living there.

Good point. Also, Instinctive, there are often law students who are looking to sublet their apartments for the summer because they will be elsewhere. TLS has a thread about it, and I'm sure other places do too.

I should have expected some cross-pollination between this thread and TLS I'm an obvious user over there.

Thanks for advice yall! I believe I have found a place, it's right on the 6 so I don't have to make any transfers to get to the office and right near Central Park which ought to be cool.

 

[IC FBGCav]

http://www.kirkkirklaw.com/legal-resources/what-is-a-pjc-and-when-should-i-use-it

Do I need an attorney to request a PJC? I got a speeding ticked 84 in 70. I have to go to court and I was going to request one. I have not had a speeding ticket since 2009 and that was in WV and don't believe I have ever had one in NC.

Edit: Never mind I found this.

oday’s Durham Speeding Ticket and Greensboro Speeding Ticket blog post discusses how to ask for a Prayer for Judgment Continued on a North Carolina Speeding Ticket. If you have received a Durham Speeding Ticket, Greensboro Speeding Ticket or Guilford Speeding Ticket, feel free to contact one of our Durham Speeding Ticket Attorneys, Greensboro Speeding Ticket Attorneys or Guilford County Speeding Ticket Attorneys free of charge to discuss your case.

We are often asked how do you request a Prayer for Judgment Continued on a North Carolina Speeding Ticket. First, let me tell you that requesting a Prayer for Judgment Continued should be one of the last options you use on your speeding ticket. For insurance points purposes you and the members of your household are only allowed to use 1 Prayer for Judgment Continued every 3 years. As a result, if there is any other outcome of your case, such as a reduction to an improper equipment or to speeding < 10mph over the speed limit, then you should strongly consider taking the alternate outcome and preserving your Prayer for Judgment Continued for a future case.

On to using your Prayer for Judgment Continued. The short explanation is that to request a Prayer for Judgment Continued you need to first plead guilty/responsible and then immediately/at the same time make a request to the Judge that your Judgment be Continued. The District Attorney does not have the authority to grant you a Prayer for Judgment Continued. You are praying to the Judge that he or she Continue your Judgment.

Anytime you have a speeding ticket pending in a North Carolina court, we recommend that you obtain a certified copy of your North Carolina driving record. Bring your certified copy of your North Carolina driving record with you to court, along with a copy of your citation. When it is your turn to speak to the District Attorney, show the District Attorney your certified driving record and citation (the District Attorney will have his or her own copy of your citation) and ask what is the best reduction in your case. If you are not happy with the outcome, ask the District Attorney if he or she will oppose your request for a Prayer for Judgment Continued. If the District Attorney says that he or she will not oppose your request for a PJC, then ask the District Attorney to call your case for a plea. When the District Attorney calls your case and asks you how you plead, simply say something like: Your Honor, I plead guilty. I request Judgment be Continued. The District Attorney is not opposing my request. Also, I have my certified driving record here for your review.

If for some reason the Judge denies your request, immediately ask the Judge if you can withdraw your guilty plea and consult with an attorney. If your request for a Prayer for Judgment Continued is denied, that means that you just pleaded guilty to the original speeding charge which is a terrible result as most speeding charges are reduced prior to a guilty plea. Also, if the District Attorney indicates that he or she is going to oppose your request for a Prayer for Judgment Continued, then just ask for your case to be continued so that you can consult with an attorney.

For assistance with your Durham Speeding Ticket, Greensboro Speeding Ticket, Guilford County Speeding Ticket or North Carolina Speeding Ticket, you can call one of our Traffic Ticket Attorneys by email at info@kregerthacker.com, phone at (888) 820-5885 or by completing the contact for on this page.

 

[Zow]

So my client walked in to court today with the very real possibility it'd be the less breath of free air he'd ever take.

After the jury's verdict he walked out, took a deep breath, and smiled.*

*Technically he's not out of the woods yet. He was found not guilty of the first count, but the jury hung 6-6 on the second count. That far from a conviction, I suspect the prosecutor will dismiss but he has about a month to decide whether to do that.

Update: On Friday I sent a long letter detailing why I thought the last remaining charge should be dismissed, essentially arguing that 403 keeps out any mention of the conduct giving rise to the three now dismissed with prejudice charges and therefore the state could not ethically proceed forward on the charge the jury hung on. Today, Motion to Dismiss filed by the State.

 

[El Floppo]

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.

Congrats! My housing recommendation would depend on how much money you're making, and how important it is to you to live in Manhattan vs. one of the other boroughs. I worked in NYC after my 1L year and commuted from my house in northern NJ, and it was no fun.

Stuy Town is as affordable as you're going to get and has turned into a giant dorm over the last 5 years. It's also a straight shot uptown to Grand Central- even walkable or citibikable. also right ablve the east village and short hop to Union Square. Could probably find a summer share or room-mate needed situation with so many students living there.

Good point. Also, Instinctive, there are often law students who are looking to sublet their apartments for the summer because they will be elsewhere. TLS has a thread about it, and I'm sure other places do too.

I should have expected some cross-pollination between this thread and TLS I'm an obvious user over there.

Thanks for advice yall! I believe I have found a place, it's right on the 6 so I don't have to make any transfers to get to the office and right near Central Park which ought to be cool.

ah... upper east side. "cool".

congrats though! better idea to be in the city than outside, even if your commute to going out might be a little longer now.

 

[Christo]

My former boss asked me to help him with a brief in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. The printer put my name first on the cover. He didn't see the humor in that.

 

[Zow]

My former boss asked me to help him with a brief in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. The printer put my name first on the cover. He didn't see the humor in that.

 

[Zow]

Had a client facing 180 years in a case set for trial next month move to represent himself. It was granted with me remaining on as advisory counsel. Client's first point of order is to make about 10 different motions, many of which I advised against (like waiving a jury trial and asking that a victim on one of his previous cases be permitted to testify) that took an hour of the Court's time and set it way behind on its calendar. This should be interesting to follow.

 

[randall146]

Had a client facing 180 years in a case set for trial next month move to represent himself. It was granted with me remaining on as advisory counsel. Client's first point of order is to make about 10 different motions, many of which I advised against (like waiving a jury trial and asking that a victim on one of his previous cases be permitted to testify) that took an hour of the Court's time and set it way behind on its calendar. This should be interesting to follow.

I love occasionally being standby counsel. Just seeing watching the judge and prosecutor have to deal with the crazy instead of me is a joy.

 

[Zow]

Had a client facing 180 years in a case set for trial next month move to represent himself. It was granted with me remaining on as advisory counsel. Client's first point of order is to make about 10 different motions, many of which I advised against (like waiving a jury trial and asking that a victim on one of his previous cases be permitted to testify) that took an hour of the Court's time and set it way behind on its calendar. This should be interesting to follow.

I love occasionally being standby counsel. Just seeing watching the judge and prosecutor have to deal with the crazy instead of me is a joy.

I haven't done it before. I know i'm going to struggle with the not offering help unless asked part of it. But, this is a child sex case where the victim is going to testify. Couple that with an incredibly long-winded, hyper-focused defendant (for example, there are over 1,000 correspondences in the file between defendant and previous counsels) and this should get really wacky.

Of course, like many have, the defendant may opt for counsel the day of trial and I'm stuck begging for a continuance, losing, then trudging through a trial where a ineffective claim is inevitable.

 

[Christo]

Had a client facing 180 years in a case set for trial next month move to represent himself. It was granted with me remaining on as advisory counsel. Client's first point of order is to make about 10 different motions, many of which I advised against (like waiving a jury trial and asking that a victim on one of his previous cases be permitted to testify) that took an hour of the Court's time and set it way behind on its calendar. This should be interesting to follow.

I love occasionally being standby counsel. Just seeing watching the judge and prosecutor have to deal with the crazy instead of me is a joy.

I haven't done it before. I know i'm going to struggle with the not offering help unless asked part of it. But, this is a child sex case where the victim is going to testify. Couple that with an incredibly long-winded, hyper-focused defendant (for example, there are over 1,000 correspondences in the file between defendant and previous counsels) and this should get really wacky.

Of course, like many have, the defendant may opt for counsel the day of trial and I'm stuck begging for a continuance, losing, then trudging through a trial where a ineffective claim is inevitable.

Just don't call the kid to the stand and you should be okay

 

[Zow]

Had a client facing 180 years in a case set for trial next month move to represent himself. It was granted with me remaining on as advisory counsel. Client's first point of order is to make about 10 different motions, many of which I advised against (like waiving a jury trial and asking that a victim on one of his previous cases be permitted to testify) that took an hour of the Court's time and set it way behind on its calendar. This should be interesting to follow.

I love occasionally being standby counsel. Just seeing watching the judge and prosecutor have to deal with the crazy instead of me is a joy.

I haven't done it before. I know i'm going to struggle with the not offering help unless asked part of it. But, this is a child sex case where the victim is going to testify. Couple that with an incredibly long-winded, hyper-focused defendant (for example, there are over 1,000 correspondences in the file between defendant and previous counsels) and this should get really wacky.

Of course, like many have, the defendant may opt for counsel the day of trial and I'm stuck begging for a continuance, losing, then trudging through a trial where a ineffective claim is inevitable.

Just don't call the kid to the stand and you should be okay

 

[Christo]

Had a client facing 180 years in a case set for trial next month move to represent himself. It was granted with me remaining on as advisory counsel. Client's first point of order is to make about 10 different motions, many of which I advised against (like waiving a jury trial and asking that a victim on one of his previous cases be permitted to testify) that took an hour of the Court's time and set it way behind on its calendar. This should be interesting to follow.

I love occasionally being standby counsel. Just seeing watching the judge and prosecutor have to deal with the crazy instead of me is a joy.

I haven't done it before. I know i'm going to struggle with the not offering help unless asked part of it. But, this is a child sex case where the victim is going to testify. Couple that with an incredibly long-winded, hyper-focused defendant (for example, there are over 1,000 correspondences in the file between defendant and previous counsels) and this should get really wacky. Of course, like many have, the defendant may opt for counsel the day of trial and I'm stuck begging for a continuance, losing, then trudging through a trial where a ineffective claim is inevitable.

Just don't call the kid to the stand and you should be okay

Blocked it out already?

I got torched cross-examining a seven year old today.

 

[randall146]

Had a client facing 180 years in a case set for trial next month move to represent himself. It was granted with me remaining on as advisory counsel. Client's first point of order is to make about 10 different motions, many of which I advised against (like waiving a jury trial and asking that a victim on one of his previous cases be permitted to testify) that took an hour of the Court's time and set it way behind on its calendar. This should be interesting to follow.

I love occasionally being standby counsel. Just seeing watching the judge and prosecutor have to deal with the crazy instead of me is a joy.

I haven't done it before. I know i'm going to struggle with the not offering help unless asked part of it. But, this is a child sex case where the victim is going to testify. Couple that with an incredibly long-winded, hyper-focused defendant (for example, there are over 1,000 correspondences in the file between defendant and previous counsels) and this should get really wacky.

Of course, like many have, the defendant may opt for counsel the day of trial and I'm stuck begging for a continuance, losing, then trudging through a trial where a ineffective claim is inevitable.

Yeah there's always a good chance your guy comes to his senses and bails. I had that happen with a nutty sovereign citizen tax protester guy recently. He wanted to be pro se, filed tons of meaningless documents, etc, but refused to participate at all at trial other than protest that the court had no authority, that he wasn't the fictitious person accused in the indictment, that there was no accuser taking the stand, etc.

The judge ended up making me try the case while the guy watched it on closed circuit from another room.

Another time (with another sovereign citizen tax protester) the guy was righteously indignant that he would absolutely represent himself, that I was a fraud, etc. He got literally about 3 questions into crossing the first witness before figuring out he was in way over his head and asking me to do it.

SO HAVE FUN!

 

[Zow]

Had a client facing 180 years in a case set for trial next month move to represent himself. It was granted with me remaining on as advisory counsel. Client's first point of order is to make about 10 different motions, many of which I advised against (like waiving a jury trial and asking that a victim on one of his previous cases be permitted to testify) that took an hour of the Court's time and set it way behind on its calendar. This should be interesting to follow.

I love occasionally being standby counsel. Just seeing watching the judge and prosecutor have to deal with the crazy instead of me is a joy.

I haven't done it before. I know i'm going to struggle with the not offering help unless asked part of it. But, this is a child sex case where the victim is going to testify. Couple that with an incredibly long-winded, hyper-focused defendant (for example, there are over 1,000 correspondences in the file between defendant and previous counsels) and this should get really wacky.

Of course, like many have, the defendant may opt for counsel the day of trial and I'm stuck begging for a continuance, losing, then trudging through a trial where a ineffective claim is inevitable.

Yeah there's always a good chance your guy comes to his senses and bails. I had that happen with a nutty sovereign citizen tax protester guy recently. He wanted to be pro se, filed tons of meaningless documents, etc, but refused to participate at all at trial other than protest that the court had no authority, that he wasn't the fictitious person accused in the indictment, that there was no accuser taking the stand, etc.

The judge ended up making me try the case while the guy watched it on closed circuit from another room.

Another time (with another sovereign citizen tax protester) the guy was righteously indignant that he would absolutely represent himself, that I was a fraud, etc. He got literally about 3 questions into crossing the first witness before figuring out he was in way over his head and asking me to do it.

SO HAVE FUN!

I had a couple of those guys before on stupid Driving on Suspended License cases or DUIs. I'd tell them to either let me do my thing or fire me if they wanted to make a motion pursuant admiralty law since the flag in the court had gold trim or assert the UCC applied to criminal cases or some ####. I knew the judge pretty well on one of the cases I remained on and my client, while he had some kooky theories, was actually very easy to get along with, so I actually did assert some zany Flag Act motion during trial on the position that I didn't know it to be a frivolous motion. Judge was cool enough to overrule but let issue stand. Guy filed his own appeal and, while his arguments obviously had no merit, the pleadings he filed were actually pretty good.

I have found though that when these constitutionalists get charged with a felony where prison is in play they usually let their crazy theories take a backseat and will listen to an actual lawyer and be represented at trial. Had your scenario occur above with a co-worker where the guy got halfway through his opening statement, choked, then asked for a lawyer (co-worker remained on as advisory counsel so she could step right in).

 

[Sweet J]

I need a call here. Figured this thread was as good as any.

If, hypothetically, a person was at his son's 8th-grade end-of-year band concert. And he was bored. And started to daydream. Hypothetically. Would it be wrong to look at the students in the band and try to guess who which ones would be hot at age 25? That's over the line, right? But *way* over the line, or just a teeny bit?

 

[Zow]

I need a call here. Figured this thread was as good as any.

If, hypothetically, a person was at his son's 8th-grade end-of-year band concert. And he was bored. And started to daydream. Hypothetically. Would it be wrong to look at the students in the band and try to guess who which ones would be hot at age 25? That's over the line, right? But *way* over the line, or just a teeny bit?

No actus reus, therefore no crime. You're good.

 

[Zow]

Had a client facing 180 years in a case set for trial next month move to represent himself. It was granted with me remaining on as advisory counsel. Client's first point of order is to make about 10 different motions, many of which I advised against (like waiving a jury trial and asking that a victim on one of his previous cases be permitted to testify) that took an hour of the Court's time and set it way behind on its calendar. This should be interesting to follow.

I love occasionally being standby counsel. Just seeing watching the judge and prosecutor have to deal with the crazy instead of me is a joy.

I haven't done it before. I know i'm going to struggle with the not offering help unless asked part of it. But, this is a child sex case where the victim is going to testify. Couple that with an incredibly long-winded, hyper-focused defendant (for example, there are over 1,000 correspondences in the file between defendant and previous counsels) and this should get really wacky. Of course, like many have, the defendant may opt for counsel the day of trial and I'm stuck begging for a continuance, losing, then trudging through a trial where a ineffective claim is inevitable.

Just don't call the kid to the stand and you should be okay

Blocked it out already?

I got torched cross-examining a seven year old today.

Note the bolded. I didn't call her nor would I in the future for similar cases. The state has to call the victim to prove its case.

 

[randall146]

I need a call here. Figured this thread was as good as any.

If, hypothetically, a person was at his son's 8th-grade end-of-year band concert. And he was bored. And started to daydream. Hypothetically. Would it be wrong to look at the students in the band and try to guess who which ones would be hot at age 25? That's over the line, right? But *way* over the line, or just a teeny bit?

You came to the right place. I had this hypo on one of my law school exams and IIRC you are solidly straddling the line of propriety.

 

[Gawain]

Is Woz admitted in Nebraska as well?

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/307282/150505-lawsuit-against-all-gays.pdf

 

[Fat Nick]

Lawyerguystm , I need some insight. I'm currently dealing with a situation where I'm acting on behalf of a family member who can't follow up on numerous business deals. I have power of attorney, etc. That's not really the issue.

The general issue is this: He had numerous personal loans to various people. He loaned money out of his pocket. Everything is drawn up via legally binding contracts outlining the payment, principal, terms of default, etc. The challenge is that in some cases, there was firm collateral (i.e. backed by the deed to a house, land, etc), but in some cases, for the smaller loans, there was no implicitly outlined collateral. The default term of the loan indicated that in the event the borrower was late with a payment or payments, the lender could "recall" the note, making the full principle and any back interest, late fees, etc. due at any time.

If one of the loans is in default, and we want to initiate the "recall" provision, which means the full principle, etc. are due immediately, and the person refuses to pay, what recourse do we have with no specified collateral?

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Lawyerguystm , I need some insight. I'm currently dealing with a situation where I'm acting on behalf of a family member who can't follow up on numerous business deals. I have power of attorney, etc. That's not really the issue.

The general issue is this: He had numerous personal loans to various people. He loaned money out of his pocket. Everything is drawn up via legally binding contracts outlining the payment, principal, terms of default, etc. The challenge is that in some cases, there was firm collateral (i.e. backed by the deed to a house, land, etc), but in some cases, for the smaller loans, there was no implicitly outlined collateral. The default term of the loan indicated that in the event the borrower was late with a payment or payments, the lender could "recall" the note, making the full principle and any back interest, late fees, etc. due at any time.

If one of the loans is in default, and we want to initiate the "recall" provision, which means the full principle, etc. are due immediately, and the person refuses to pay, what recourse do we have with no specified collateral?

Sue everybody.

All states are different, this isn't legal advice, I'm not really a lawyer I just play one on the FFA, I haven't seen anything and yada yada yada yada...... having said all that it seems to me then that the smaller loans are basically promissory notes that are unsecured in which case once you call them due by whatever mechanism is allowed in the note and payment is not made then you have to file a complaint for collection of the debt and once you get judgment, if you get a judgment then it is that judgment that could be a lien against all property depending again on the rules in your state.

 

[Zow]

Is Woz admitted in Nebraska as well?

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/307282/150505-lawsuit-against-all-gays.pdf

 

[CBusAlex]

Had a client facing 180 years in a case set for trial next month move to represent himself. It was granted with me remaining on as advisory counsel. Client's first point of order is to make about 10 different motions, many of which I advised against (like waiving a jury trial and asking that a victim on one of his previous cases be permitted to testify) that took an hour of the Court's time and set it way behind on its calendar. This should be interesting to follow.

I love occasionally being standby counsel. Just seeing watching the judge and prosecutor have to deal with the crazy instead of me is a joy.

I haven't done it before. I know i'm going to struggle with the not offering help unless asked part of it. But, this is a child sex case where the victim is going to testify. Couple that with an incredibly long-winded, hyper-focused defendant (for example, there are over 1,000 correspondences in the file between defendant and previous counsels) and this should get really wacky. Of course, like many have, the defendant may opt for counsel the day of trial and I'm stuck begging for a continuance, losing, then trudging through a trial where a ineffective claim is inevitable.

Yeah there's always a good chance your guy comes to his senses and bails. I had that happen with a nutty sovereign citizen tax protester guy recently. He wanted to be pro se, filed tons of meaningless documents, etc, but refused to participate at all at trial other than protest that the court had no authority, that he wasn't the fictitious person accused in the indictment, that there was no accuser taking the stand, etc.The judge ended up making me try the case while the guy watched it on closed circuit from another room.

Another time (with another sovereign citizen tax protester) the guy was righteously indignant that he would absolutely represent himself, that I was a fraud, etc. He got literally about 3 questions into crossing the first witness before figuring out he was in way over his head and asking me to do it.

SO HAVE FUN!

I had a couple of those guys before on stupid Driving on Suspended License cases or DUIs. I'd tell them to either let me do my thing or fire me if they wanted to make a motion pursuant admiralty law since the flag in the court had gold trim or assert the UCC applied to criminal cases or some ####. I knew the judge pretty well on one of the cases I remained on and my client, while he had some kooky theories, was actually very easy to get along with, so I actually did assert some zany Flag Act motion during trial on the position that I didn't know it to be a frivolous motion. Judge was cool enough to overrule but let issue stand. Guy filed his own appeal and, while his arguments obviously had no merit, the pleadings he filed were actually pretty good.

I have found though that when these constitutionalists get charged with a felony where prison is in play they usually let their crazy theories take a backseat and will listen to an actual lawyer and be represented at trial. Had your scenario occur above with a co-worker where the guy got halfway through his opening statement, choked, then asked for a lawyer (co-worker remained on as advisory counsel so she could step right in).

How often do you guys end up with these soverign-citizen type defendants? I've heard of it on the internets before, but I didn't figure there were more than like a couple dozen nutjobs out there actually willing to go to court with it.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Had a client facing 180 years in a case set for trial next month move to represent himself. It was granted with me remaining on as advisory counsel. Client's first point of order is to make about 10 different motions, many of which I advised against (like waiving a jury trial and asking that a victim on one of his previous cases be permitted to testify) that took an hour of the Court's time and set it way behind on its calendar. This should be interesting to follow.

I love occasionally being standby counsel. Just seeing watching the judge and prosecutor have to deal with the crazy instead of me is a joy.

I haven't done it before. I know i'm going to struggle with the not offering help unless asked part of it. But, this is a child sex case where the victim is going to testify. Couple that with an incredibly long-winded, hyper-focused defendant (for example, there are over 1,000 correspondences in the file between defendant and previous counsels) and this should get really wacky. Of course, like many have, the defendant may opt for counsel the day of trial and I'm stuck begging for a continuance, losing, then trudging through a trial where a ineffective claim is inevitable.

Yeah there's always a good chance your guy comes to his senses and bails. I had that happen with a nutty sovereign citizen tax protester guy recently. He wanted to be pro se, filed tons of meaningless documents, etc, but refused to participate at all at trial other than protest that the court had no authority, that he wasn't the fictitious person accused in the indictment, that there was no accuser taking the stand, etc.The judge ended up making me try the case while the guy watched it on closed circuit from another room.

Another time (with another sovereign citizen tax protester) the guy was righteously indignant that he would absolutely represent himself, that I was a fraud, etc. He got literally about 3 questions into crossing the first witness before figuring out he was in way over his head and asking me to do it.

SO HAVE FUN!

I had a couple of those guys before on stupid Driving on Suspended License cases or DUIs. I'd tell them to either let me do my thing or fire me if they wanted to make a motion pursuant admiralty law since the flag in the court had gold trim or assert the UCC applied to criminal cases or some ####. I knew the judge pretty well on one of the cases I remained on and my client, while he had some kooky theories, was actually very easy to get along with, so I actually did assert some zany Flag Act motion during trial on the position that I didn't know it to be a frivolous motion. Judge was cool enough to overrule but let issue stand. Guy filed his own appeal and, while his arguments obviously had no merit, the pleadings he filed were actually pretty good.

I have found though that when these constitutionalists get charged with a felony where prison is in play they usually let their crazy theories take a backseat and will listen to an actual lawyer and be represented at trial. Had your scenario occur above with a co-worker where the guy got halfway through his opening statement, choked, then asked for a lawyer (co-worker remained on as advisory counsel so she could step right in).

How often do you guys end up with these soverign-citizen type defendants? I've heard of it on the internets before, but I didn't figure there were more than like a couple dozen nutjobs out there actually willing to go to court with it.

I have one right now in a family court setting. It is truly a pleasure and the most riviting and thought provoking case I have ever been a part of.

And if your sarcasm meter is broken, that sentence should have broke it.

 

[Henry Ford]

I just got ruled against in a big case, just flat-out denied that the defendant had liability. Absolutely gut-shot right now. Stunned. Have no idea how this happened.

Except that we were suing a Parish in that Parish's courthouse, and the Parish President is a friend of the judge, and opposing counsel and the judge work 1 block away from one another. Oh, and this is out in the sticks in the middle of nowhere.

Other than that, I have no idea what just happened. Onward to appeal. Sigh.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

So, the deck wasn't just stacked against you, they looked at the cards first before giving you what they felt like dealing to you. Nice.

 

[Henry Ford]

So, the deck wasn't just stacked against you, they looked at the cards first before giving you what they felt like dealing to you. Nice.

Fortunately, I think the ruling is so bad it could be overturned on appeal.

Found that we hadn't proved causation. Which is ridiculous. If he found that they'd proved an act of God, maybe a touch tougher.

 

[Henry Ford]

I may post repeatedly, and angrily, in this thread later while horrifyingly drunk.

 

[El Floppo]

I may post repeatedly, and angrily, in this thread later while horrifyingly drunk.

 

[Zow]

Had a client facing 180 years in a case set for trial next month move to represent himself. It was granted with me remaining on as advisory counsel. Client's first point of order is to make about 10 different motions, many of which I advised against (like waiving a jury trial and asking that a victim on one of his previous cases be permitted to testify) that took an hour of the Court's time and set it way behind on its calendar. This should be interesting to follow.

I love occasionally being standby counsel. Just seeing watching the judge and prosecutor have to deal with the crazy instead of me is a joy.

I haven't done it before. I know i'm going to struggle with the not offering help unless asked part of it. But, this is a child sex case where the victim is going to testify. Couple that with an incredibly long-winded, hyper-focused defendant (for example, there are over 1,000 correspondences in the file between defendant and previous counsels) and this should get really wacky. Of course, like many have, the defendant may opt for counsel the day of trial and I'm stuck begging for a continuance, losing, then trudging through a trial where a ineffective claim is inevitable.

Yeah there's always a good chance your guy comes to his senses and bails. I had that happen with a nutty sovereign citizen tax protester guy recently. He wanted to be pro se, filed tons of meaningless documents, etc, but refused to participate at all at trial other than protest that the court had no authority, that he wasn't the fictitious person accused in the indictment, that there was no accuser taking the stand, etc.The judge ended up making me try the case while the guy watched it on closed circuit from another room.

Another time (with another sovereign citizen tax protester) the guy was righteously indignant that he would absolutely represent himself, that I was a fraud, etc. He got literally about 3 questions into crossing the first witness before figuring out he was in way over his head and asking me to do it.

SO HAVE FUN!

I had a couple of those guys before on stupid Driving on Suspended License cases or DUIs. I'd tell them to either let me do my thing or fire me if they wanted to make a motion pursuant admiralty law since the flag in the court had gold trim or assert the UCC applied to criminal cases or some ####. I knew the judge pretty well on one of the cases I remained on and my client, while he had some kooky theories, was actually very easy to get along with, so I actually did assert some zany Flag Act motion during trial on the position that I didn't know it to be a frivolous motion. Judge was cool enough to overrule but let issue stand. Guy filed his own appeal and, while his arguments obviously had no merit, the pleadings he filed were actually pretty good.

I have found though that when these constitutionalists get charged with a felony where prison is in play they usually let their crazy theories take a backseat and will listen to an actual lawyer and be represented at trial. Had your scenario occur above with a co-worker where the guy got halfway through his opening statement, choked, then asked for a lawyer (co-worker remained on as advisory counsel so she could step right in).

How often do you guys end up with these soverign-citizen type defendants? I've heard of it on the internets before, but I didn't figure there were more than like a couple dozen nutjobs out there actually willing to go to court with it.

I work in a pretty rural, conservative area. Also the area where Timothy McVeigh mainly lived and hung out and actually considered buying property - to give you an idea of the politics of the area. When I was a new PDO I was assigned to a lower court that had jurisdiction in that area so I would get a ton of these guys (and many of them for multiple cases) since their most common offenses were misdemeanor administrative crimes like driving on a suspended license (most common), too much junk in their yard or an excess of dogs, etc. They also enjoyed their meth and booze so meth charges and DUI were also common. Of course, the common thread to these crimes is that they are arguably all victimless and really stem from a simple scenario of the government saying "you can't do these things unless we let you" and these people saying "we don't have a contract with you and to get out from under your power we are declaring ourselves sovereign." I actually somewhat understand their philosophy (i.e. that laws should be only applicable where there is an actual contract between the individual and the state) but of course there is simply no basis in law for that and these people cite to sections of the UCC and admiralty law that are clearly inapplicable. They were quite interesting though from an entertainment perspective and the group in the area actually went as far to create their own little country and gave each other driver's licenses and permits to commit crimes. There was even a guy who gave himself a law license from this fictitious country and he'd show up to all the trials and sit right behind defense table and try to give advice the entire time. It was great.

I haven't had nearly as many of them since I left that office. Frankly, I'm a bit disappointed because I'm probably behind on their zany arguments.

 

[Zow]

So, the deck wasn't just stacked against you, they looked at the cards first before giving you what they felt like dealing to you. Nice.

Fortunately, I think the ruling is so bad it could be overturned on appeal.

Found that we hadn't proved causation. Which is ridiculous. If he found that they'd proved an act of God, maybe a touch tougher.

Had a torts prof in law school tell us that the easiest bet to make in the courtroom is to bet on whoever had the orphans or nuns and priests on their side.

 

[Buckfast 1]

Had a client facing 180 years in a case set for trial next month move to represent himself. It was granted with me remaining on as advisory counsel. Client's first point of order is to make about 10 different motions, many of which I advised against (like waiving a jury trial and asking that a victim on one of his previous cases be permitted to testify) that took an hour of the Court's time and set it way behind on its calendar. This should be interesting to follow.

I love occasionally being standby counsel. Just seeing watching the judge and prosecutor have to deal with the crazy instead of me is a joy.

I haven't done it before. I know i'm going to struggle with the not offering help unless asked part of it. But, this is a child sex case where the victim is going to testify. Couple that with an incredibly long-winded, hyper-focused defendant (for example, there are over 1,000 correspondences in the file between defendant and previous counsels) and this should get really wacky. Of course, like many have, the defendant may opt for counsel the day of trial and I'm stuck begging for a continuance, losing, then trudging through a trial where a ineffective claim is inevitable.

Yeah there's always a good chance your guy comes to his senses and bails. I had that happen with a nutty sovereign citizen tax protester guy recently. He wanted to be pro se, filed tons of meaningless documents, etc, but refused to participate at all at trial other than protest that the court had no authority, that he wasn't the fictitious person accused in the indictment, that there was no accuser taking the stand, etc.The judge ended up making me try the case while the guy watched it on closed circuit from another room.

Another time (with another sovereign citizen tax protester) the guy was righteously indignant that he would absolutely represent himself, that I was a fraud, etc. He got literally about 3 questions into crossing the first witness before figuring out he was in way over his head and asking me to do it.

SO HAVE FUN!

I had a couple of those guys before on stupid Driving on Suspended License cases or DUIs. I'd tell them to either let me do my thing or fire me if they wanted to make a motion pursuant admiralty law since the flag in the court had gold trim or assert the UCC applied to criminal cases or some ####. I knew the judge pretty well on one of the cases I remained on and my client, while he had some kooky theories, was actually very easy to get along with, so I actually did assert some zany Flag Act motion during trial on the position that I didn't know it to be a frivolous motion. Judge was cool enough to overrule but let issue stand. Guy filed his own appeal and, while his arguments obviously had no merit, the pleadings he filed were actually pretty good.

I have found though that when these constitutionalists get charged with a felony where prison is in play they usually let their crazy theories take a backseat and will listen to an actual lawyer and be represented at trial. Had your scenario occur above with a co-worker where the guy got halfway through his opening statement, choked, then asked for a lawyer (co-worker remained on as advisory counsel so she could step right in).

How often do you guys end up with these soverign-citizen type defendants? I've heard of it on the internets before, but I didn't figure there were more than like a couple dozen nutjobs out there actually willing to go to court with it.

Back when I worked at the U.S. Attorney's office, we actually encountered the sovereign citizen defendants frequently enough that they hosted a training on the issue. They were usually tax evasion cases that arose from rural parts of the state.

 

[Henry Ford]

So, the deck wasn't just stacked against you, they looked at the cards first before giving you what they felt like dealing to you. Nice.

Fortunately, I think the ruling is so bad it could be overturned on appeal.

Found that we hadn't proved causation. Which is ridiculous. If he found that they'd proved an act of God, maybe a touch tougher.

Had a torts prof in law school tell us that the easiest bet to make in the courtroom is to bet on whoever had the orphans or nuns and priests on their side.

Let me add to that that in the middle of nowhere in Louisiana, the easy bet is on the white people.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I may post repeatedly, and angrily, in this thread later while horrifyingly drunk.

:subscribing:

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Well that sounds more real than hypo... but my feeling is that the agency managing the pump has a duty to maintain it. If the pump fails due to defect that's different. But if someone doesn't do their duty then it's like an air traffic controller who decides to get lunch while planes are in the air, unacceptable.

Eta - uh that last part is an interesting twist but my thought is that yeah some subdivisions would never be left unattended and some might not get the attention they deserve, all based on who lives there.

 

[Henry Ford]

Well that sounds more real than hypo...

Yeah, sorry. My angry posting is probably ill-advised.

 

[Henry Ford]

The worst part is that not a single client ever expected us to win this. They said so from the day they found out where we had to file it.

 

[NCCommish]

The worst part is that not a single client ever expected us to win this. They said so from the day they found out where we had to file it.

It's sad really. Best wishes on appeal.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I just got ruled against in a big case, just flat-out denied that the defendant had liability. Absolutely gut-shot right now. Stunned. Have no idea how this happened.

Except that we were suing a Parish in that Parish's courthouse, and the Parish President is a friend of the judge, and opposing counsel and the judge work 1 block away from one another. Oh, and this is out in the sticks in the middle of nowhere.

Other than that, I have no idea what just happened. Onward to appeal. Sigh.

I'm sorry this happened to you man. The motion to recuse is WAY underused in LA. This sht is so common here and it really pisses me off. I really hope you kick their asses on appeal.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Hey Henry, I just wanted to send a note out saying sorry for seemingly suggesting that your hypo might have been a real case, I just meant it sounded like something that could actually happen in LA.

Fwiw this morning's Picayune has a story on a local case in which a local judge overseeing the Ninth Ward toxic site case awarded the special master's roll for disbursement of some $14 million to the former Orleans civil sheriff. You will see the article points out that he was her political "godfather" and that he made $1.4 million off that sweetheart assignment for doing less than a year's work. Meanwhile the poor people who lived on that site got checks in the 3-6,000 range, after having struggled for 30-40 years with health problems, loss of land value, etc., etc., etc. - Anyway they interview a couple legal experts who talk about why the judge had an ethical conflict in assigning the sheriff. Hopefully it's useful to you in the future.

 

[Henry Ford]

Hey Henry, I just wanted to send a note out saying sorry for seemingly suggesting that your hypo might have been a real case, I just meant it sounded like something that could actually happen in LA.

Fwiw this morning's Picayune has a story on a local case in which a local judge overseeing the Ninth Ward toxic site case awarded the special master's roll for disbursement of some $14 million to the former Orleans civil sheriff. You will see the article points out that he was her political "godfather" and that he made $1.4 million off that sweetheart assignment for doing less than a year's work. Meanwhile the poor people who lived on that site got checks in the 3-6,000 range, after having struggled for 30-40 years with health problems, loss of land value, etc., etc., etc. - Anyway they interview a couple legal experts who talk about why the judge had an ethical conflict in assigning the sheriff. Hopefully it's useful to you in the future.

I appreciate it - sadly, it isn't as helpful as you'd hope. The problem is, politics and the judicial system are so intertwined in this state - partially because of historical influence, partially just a byproduct of elected judges - that no one's hands are all that clean. When I'm trying a case in the middle of nowhere, the judges and the parish officials are always friends, the local lawyers all go golfing with the judges, and they all work together to elect each other/send each other business - it's just a horrible setup.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Just had to throw a family client out of the office. Always fun. Called my wife to vent and to laugh at myself a little and her response.... don't worry, I just picked up a bottle of Jack for you.

So I have that going for me. Which is nice.

 

[-fish-]

I had some work done by a local family law attorney. Not a big deal...just a modification of my parenting plan and child support. No opposition from my ex, but I don't like navigating the family law courts. I gave this woman a retainer of $1,000. She told me she'd have her paralegal do it to keep costs down. Although the papers got kicked the first time, I was able to fix it myself. They just sent me a letter saying I'm getting back a check for the unused portion of my retainer: $583. Holy cow--a local family law lawyer that isn't a scumbag!

 

[NCCommish]

I was torn on where to post this. Could've gone in the Florida thread but then I noticed this thread was languishing a bit so here we are:

Lawyers Behaving Badly: 3 Accused Of Luring Rival Into DUI With 'Flirtatious' ParalegalCLEARWATER, Fla. (AP) — Four lawyers. Two shock jocks. One flirtatious paralegal.
A Florida judge will soon decide if three well-known Tampa attorneys tricked a rival lawyer into getting a DUI in an attempt to derail opposing counsel on a defamation case. The ethics trial began this week and it has riveted Tampa's legal community with its salacious details of scheming and flirtation, of prior drunk driving arrests and extramarital affairs.

On one side is the Florida Bar, which supports the version of events told by lawyer Phil Campbell. He was charged with DUI two years ago. The Bar alleges that attorneys Stephen Diaco, Robert Adams and Adam Filthaut set Campbell up and used a paralegal and a Tampa police officer to help. They could be sanctioned or disbarred if found guilty.

This story begins in January 2013, when Diaco, Adams and Filthaut represented a radio host named Bubba The Love Sponge Clem in a defamation lawsuit brought by another rival radio host, Todd Schnitt, who claimed Clem had made derogatory remarks about him and his wife on the air and got his fans to harass and threaten them. Campbell represented Schnitt, who now has a national talk radio show. Clem once gained national attention and criticism for castrating a boar live on the air.

After the second day of the trial, Campbell went for drinks and dinner at Malio's, a well-known steakhouse in a round Tampa skyscraper known locally as "The Beer Can Building."

When he was about to leave, two women sat next to him. One, Melissa Personius, was a Diaco, Adams and Filthaut paralegal. She chatted up Campbell, lied about where she worked and flirted with him, according to witness testimony. He responded by bragging about his legal career, even showing her newspaper stories about the Clem-Schnitt trial.

Personius' friend testified she watched as Personius, then 32, bought Campbell, then 65, drinks and a shot of Southern Comfort. When he got up to leave, she followed. Personius told Campbell that she didn't want to leave her car in valet parking. Campbell, who planned to walk to his downtown apartment, said he would drive her car to the parking lot near his home. Moments after he got behind the wheel, Campbell was stopped by Tampa Police Sgt. Ray Fernandez and charged with driving under the influence.

The Florida Bar has accused Personius of taking orders from her bosses to "set up" Campbell.

Investigators later discovered that Fernandez was a family friend of attorney Filthaut's, and records later revealed that Adams, Diaco, Filthaut and Personius had been exchanging texts and phone calls that night. Fernandez and Filthaut also called each other that evening.

Campbell's DUI charge was dropped and Fernandez was fired after an internal investigation. Schnitt lost his lawsuit against Clem, and as part of a mediation agreement, Clem can't talk publicly about Schnitt's wife.

The ongoing ethics trial has been marked by tense cross-examination at times and, at other times, witty repartee and laughter. Most of the attorneys have known each other for years and have argued cases against each other.

By the fourth day of the trial, Melissa Personius' ex-husband took the witness stand. Kris Personius detailed how even though they were divorced, they were still living together when she came home the night of the DUI arrest. She told him that at the behest of her attorney bosses at the firm, she tricked Campbell into driving her car after he had a few drinks, he said. "She was instructed to basically set this guy up," Kris Personius said, adding that he always thought the lawyers who she worked for were "scumbags."

During cross-examination, the attorney for the Diaco and Adams law firm questioned Kris Personius' credibility, detailing his domestic violence injunctions, his past DUI and the fact that he videotaped his ex-wife talking about the alleged setup of Campbell without her consent.

Kris Personius said his ex-wife started to tell him the story, but he initially stopped her. "I went out and smoked, I came back inside and I taped it," he said.

He later played the video to Campbell — but only after he and his ex-wife had custody issues over their two children. The trial is expected to last several more days. Judge W. Douglas Baird will issue a decision later.

___

Any Tampa area lawyers with more salacious details?

 

[Christo]

HFS!

 

[NCCommish]

HFS!

True