Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
The Lawyer Thread Where We Stop Ruining Other Threads (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter Henry Ford
- Start date
Zow
Footballguy
Well, I don't think I can discuss details. Just go watch cape fear.
Poke_4_Life
Footballguy
To be fair, I have a few lawyer friends and I almost went to law school. I'm pretty happy with IT as my career, but I probably could have made it as a lawyer specializing in IT cases (forensics, cyber, etc, all things I do now) and be making Chet type money now. Law school scared me though, I hate writing. Still do, that's why I'm in IT.Poke_4_Life said:What kind ofdoes it make me that I've read this entire thread and I'm not a lawyer?
Surely I'm not alone...
El Floppo
Footballguy
I hate writing too. that's why I make pretty pictures of stuff.To be fair, I have a few lawyer friends and I almost went to law school. I'm pretty happy with IT as my career, but I probably could have made it as a lawyer specializing in IT cases (forensics, cyber, etc, all things I do now) and be making Chet type money now. Law school scared me though, I hate writing. Still do, that's why I'm in IT.Poke_4_Life said:What kind of
Surely I'm not alone...
I would have been a terrible lawyer.
Are Lawyers Getting Dumber? Yes, says the woman who runs the bar exam
Last August, the tens of thousands of answer sheets from the bar exam started to stream into the National Conference of Bar Examiners. The initial results were so glaringly bad that staffers raced to tell their boss, Erica Moeser. In most states, the exam spans two days: The first is devoted to six hours of writing, and the second day brings six hours of multiple-choice questions. The NCBE, a nonprofit in Madison, Wis., creates and scores the multiple-choice part of the test, administered in every state but Louisiana. Those two days of bubble-filling and essay-scribbling are extremely stressful. For people who just spent three years studying the intricacies of the law, with the expectation that their $120,000 in tuition would translate into a bright white-collar future, failure can wreak emotional carnage. It can cost more than $800 to take the exam, and bombing the first time can mean losing a law firm job.
When he saw the abysmal returns, Mark Albanese, director of testing and research at the NCBE, scrambled to check his staff’s work. Once he and Moeser were confident the test had been fairly scored, they began reporting the numbers to state officials, who released their results to the public over the course of several weeks.
In Idaho, bar pass rates dropped 15 percentage points, from 80 percent to 65 percent. In Delaware, Iowa, Minnesota, Oregon, Tennessee, and Texas, scores dropped 9 percentage points or more. By the time all the states published their numbers, it was clear that the July exam had been a disaster everywhere. Scores on the multiple-choice part of the test registered their largest single-year drop in the four-decade history of the test.
“It was tremendously embarrassing,” says Matt Aksamit, a graduate of Creighton University School of Law, who failed Nebraska’s July bar exam last year. “I think a lot of people can relate to what it’s like to work hard for something and fall short of what you want.” (Aksamit took it again in February and passed.)
Panic swept the bottom half of American law schools, all of which are ranked partly on the basis of their ability to get their graduates into the profession. Moeser sent a letter to law school deans. She outlined future changes to the exam and how to prepare for them. Then she made a hard turn to the July exam. “The group that sat in July 2014 was less able than the group that sat in July 2013,” she wrote. It’s not us, Moeser was essentially saying. It’s you.
“Her response was the height of arrogance,” says Nick Allard, the dean of Brooklyn Law School. “That statement was so demonstrably false, so corrosive.” Allard wrote to Moeser in November, demanding that she apologize to law grads, calling her letter “offensive” and saying that the test and her views on the people who took it were “matters of national concern.” Two weeks later, a group of 79 deans, mostly from bottom-tier schools, sent a letter asking for an investigation to determine “the integrity and fairness of the July 2014 exam.”
Moeser wasn’t swayed. She responded in December, saying she regretted offending people by characterizing the students as “less able”—but maintained that they were relatively bad at taking the exam. In January, Stephen Ferruolo, the dean of the University of San Diego School of Law, asked Moeser to explain how the NCBE scored the test. Moeser rebuffed him, instead inviting Ferruolo to consider the decline in his students’ Law School Admission Test scores in recent years, which, she wrote, “mark the beginning of a slide that has continued.” The implication: Ferruolo and the rest of the people running law schools not named Stanford or Harvard should get used to higher fail rates.
“The response is to stonewall,” Ferruolo says. “Where’s the accountability? I’m not looking to find more information so I can attack the NCBE. I am looking for more information so I can do my job as a dean.”
This year’s results, which will start coming out in September, may be the most critical in the exam’s history. Lawyers and those who hope to join their ranks will soon know if last year was an aberration or a symptom of a worsening problem. Critics of the bar exam say the test is broken, while Moeser maintains the reason so many students are failing is that they are less prepared. “You can squawk loud and long about what’s happening,” Moeser says, “but you’ve got to look at who your student body is.”
Whether or not the profession is in crisis—a perennial lament—there’s no question that American legal education is in the midst of an unprecedented slump. In 2015 fewer people applied to law school than at any point in the last 30 years. Law schools are seeing enrollments plummet and have tried to keep their campuses alive by admitting students with worse credentials. That may force some law firms and consumers to rely on lawyers of a lower caliber, industry watchers say, but the fight will ultimately be most painful for the middling students, who are promised a shot at a legal career but in reality face long odds of becoming lawyers.
As the controversy raged on into this spring, Moeser’s detractors seized on an irony of her résumé. Wisconsin is the only state that doesn’t require its local graduates to take the bar exam in order to practice law. Moeser never sat for it. “The person who is the czarina, who determines more and more every year what Americans have to learn to pass the bar to become licensed lawyers … never took the bar,” Allard says. “Who is she to say what the standard is? Who is she?”
Here's the link for those interested in the rest.
Last August, the tens of thousands of answer sheets from the bar exam started to stream into the National Conference of Bar Examiners. The initial results were so glaringly bad that staffers raced to tell their boss, Erica Moeser. In most states, the exam spans two days: The first is devoted to six hours of writing, and the second day brings six hours of multiple-choice questions. The NCBE, a nonprofit in Madison, Wis., creates and scores the multiple-choice part of the test, administered in every state but Louisiana. Those two days of bubble-filling and essay-scribbling are extremely stressful. For people who just spent three years studying the intricacies of the law, with the expectation that their $120,000 in tuition would translate into a bright white-collar future, failure can wreak emotional carnage. It can cost more than $800 to take the exam, and bombing the first time can mean losing a law firm job.
When he saw the abysmal returns, Mark Albanese, director of testing and research at the NCBE, scrambled to check his staff’s work. Once he and Moeser were confident the test had been fairly scored, they began reporting the numbers to state officials, who released their results to the public over the course of several weeks.
In Idaho, bar pass rates dropped 15 percentage points, from 80 percent to 65 percent. In Delaware, Iowa, Minnesota, Oregon, Tennessee, and Texas, scores dropped 9 percentage points or more. By the time all the states published their numbers, it was clear that the July exam had been a disaster everywhere. Scores on the multiple-choice part of the test registered their largest single-year drop in the four-decade history of the test.
“It was tremendously embarrassing,” says Matt Aksamit, a graduate of Creighton University School of Law, who failed Nebraska’s July bar exam last year. “I think a lot of people can relate to what it’s like to work hard for something and fall short of what you want.” (Aksamit took it again in February and passed.)
Panic swept the bottom half of American law schools, all of which are ranked partly on the basis of their ability to get their graduates into the profession. Moeser sent a letter to law school deans. She outlined future changes to the exam and how to prepare for them. Then she made a hard turn to the July exam. “The group that sat in July 2014 was less able than the group that sat in July 2013,” she wrote. It’s not us, Moeser was essentially saying. It’s you.
“Her response was the height of arrogance,” says Nick Allard, the dean of Brooklyn Law School. “That statement was so demonstrably false, so corrosive.” Allard wrote to Moeser in November, demanding that she apologize to law grads, calling her letter “offensive” and saying that the test and her views on the people who took it were “matters of national concern.” Two weeks later, a group of 79 deans, mostly from bottom-tier schools, sent a letter asking for an investigation to determine “the integrity and fairness of the July 2014 exam.”
Moeser wasn’t swayed. She responded in December, saying she regretted offending people by characterizing the students as “less able”—but maintained that they were relatively bad at taking the exam. In January, Stephen Ferruolo, the dean of the University of San Diego School of Law, asked Moeser to explain how the NCBE scored the test. Moeser rebuffed him, instead inviting Ferruolo to consider the decline in his students’ Law School Admission Test scores in recent years, which, she wrote, “mark the beginning of a slide that has continued.” The implication: Ferruolo and the rest of the people running law schools not named Stanford or Harvard should get used to higher fail rates.
“The response is to stonewall,” Ferruolo says. “Where’s the accountability? I’m not looking to find more information so I can attack the NCBE. I am looking for more information so I can do my job as a dean.”
This year’s results, which will start coming out in September, may be the most critical in the exam’s history. Lawyers and those who hope to join their ranks will soon know if last year was an aberration or a symptom of a worsening problem. Critics of the bar exam say the test is broken, while Moeser maintains the reason so many students are failing is that they are less prepared. “You can squawk loud and long about what’s happening,” Moeser says, “but you’ve got to look at who your student body is.”
Whether or not the profession is in crisis—a perennial lament—there’s no question that American legal education is in the midst of an unprecedented slump. In 2015 fewer people applied to law school than at any point in the last 30 years. Law schools are seeing enrollments plummet and have tried to keep their campuses alive by admitting students with worse credentials. That may force some law firms and consumers to rely on lawyers of a lower caliber, industry watchers say, but the fight will ultimately be most painful for the middling students, who are promised a shot at a legal career but in reality face long odds of becoming lawyers.
As the controversy raged on into this spring, Moeser’s detractors seized on an irony of her résumé. Wisconsin is the only state that doesn’t require its local graduates to take the bar exam in order to practice law. Moeser never sat for it. “The person who is the czarina, who determines more and more every year what Americans have to learn to pass the bar to become licensed lawyers … never took the bar,” Allard says. “Who is she to say what the standard is? Who is she?”
Here's the link for those interested in the rest.
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Makes sense. With the cost of a JD and the legal job market for the last five years, you'd have to be an idiot to sign up for Law school.
Last edited by a moderator:
Zow
Footballguy
I love it when a client calls and is a total jerk to my staff by claiming they I've never called them back and technology actually allows us to confirm that, in fact, said client never actually called me in the first place so I had zero way of knowing they were expecting a call back from me.
Did I say love it? I mean it makes me want to throw a chair through a wall.
Did I say love it? I mean it makes me want to throw a chair through a wall.
randall146
Footballguy
A sovereign citizen ex-client of mine has filed suit in state court against me, a few judges, a few prosecutors, some clerks, around a dozen cops, and 99 unnamed cops. He's looking for around $36 million in damages.
The accusation? That we engaged in piracy.
If you recall, these are the lunatics that think the law doesn't apply to them, the United States isn't real, and all courts are actually only admiralty courts. So he's invoking admiralty jurisdiction by accusing us all of denying him his property and freedom by piracy. I represented this guy in his trial for threatening IRS agents who were auditing him.
I wanted to answer the complaint by denying piracy, but have the answer handwritten using exclusively pirate talk and olde English. The lawyer the government hired for me won't allow that though.
One of the judges he is suing is presiding over his ongoing probation violation hearing. He thought he'd get a recusal by suing her and the prosecutor. Instead she locked him up and told him he'd have plenty of time to research his case in the law library.
The accusation? That we engaged in piracy.
If you recall, these are the lunatics that think the law doesn't apply to them, the United States isn't real, and all courts are actually only admiralty courts. So he's invoking admiralty jurisdiction by accusing us all of denying him his property and freedom by piracy. I represented this guy in his trial for threatening IRS agents who were auditing him.
I wanted to answer the complaint by denying piracy, but have the answer handwritten using exclusively pirate talk and olde English. The lawyer the government hired for me won't allow that though.
One of the judges he is suing is presiding over his ongoing probation violation hearing. He thought he'd get a recusal by suing her and the prosecutor. Instead she locked him up and told him he'd have plenty of time to research his case in the law library.
randall146
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Well, I guess I have to ask. Did you engage in piracy?
krista4
Footballguy
randall146
Footballguy
I find it hilarious. It's not really a pain because it's so ridiculous (and because I'm not paying for my own lawyer). One problem with these guys though is that they're known to put false liens on people's houses and engage in other paper warfare. If it gets personal and he ####s with my house and family, then we'll have a problem.I'm sorry as I know this must be a pain in the ### for you, but
Handled a mechanics lien case involving one of these guys. It was actually pretty painless - VA has an expedited hearing scheduled for cases involving the validity of mechanics liens and a few weeks later it was over with. I imagine/hope most states have something similar.I find it hilarious. It's not really a pain because it's so ridiculous (and because I'm not paying for my own lawyer). One problem with these guys though is that they're known to put false liens on people's houses and engage in other paper warfare. If it gets personal and he ####s with my house and family, then we'll have a problem.I'm sorry as I know this must be a pain in the ### for you, but
randall146
Footballguy
How easy is it for them to put a lien on your house? Just pay a fee at the town clerk's office?
johnnycakes
Footballguy
randall146
Footballguy
"Them" is sovereign citizen kooks or other frivolous lien filers
Zow
Footballguy
Ah yes, the gold trim on the flag theory.
johnnycakes
Footballguy
CAn't you just pay him in currency of his own sovereign country?
Zow
Footballguy
Probably. Some of these guys local to me actually formed their own country like 5 or 6 years ago to up their game. They called themselves "the little turtle shell band of sovereign individuals" or something like that. Two of the biggest issues they were having is that they kept getting popped for driving on a suspended license (which az law back then punished pretty harshly with two days jail, a big fine, and a year added to license suspension) and judges refusing to allow them to represent each other in court. So to combat that they actually starting giving themselves their own licenses from their made up state and arrrrggguing that az has to recognize them. So they all had drivers licenses and a couple of them had law licenses (I think there was also a fake doctor and fake police officer). Judges shot them down pretty quickly and it all pretty much went away when one their "lawyers" got an aggravated DUI and went to prison, but I thought it was all rather relatively clever.
njherdfan
Footballguy
Just in case anyone hasn't seen the talking frog explaining the finer points of being a sovereign citizen.
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
Where do you people live? Looney toons out there.
randall146
Footballguy
In my town. In your town. They're in every major English speaking country. A Canadian judge dealing with one of these guys did an in depth study of sovereign movements and tactics. One interesting finding is that these groups are in the U.S., UK, Ireland, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Thy all have a similar set of believes, but in each country they have their own unique mythology of why the constitution is invalid, or the tax law never actually passed, etc.
And these aren't philosophical beliefs - in each country they have their own specific set of legal technicalities that supposedly happened. Like in the U.S. they might claim the 14th amendment never officially passed because Kansas never openly ratified it, while in England they might think the fifth duchess of dukenshire never officially married, so she couldn't sign such and such treaty.
Essentially they decide thy don't want to obey certain laws and make up histories and legal theories to support that wish
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
randall146
Footballguy
Correct. My guy had a loaded pistol grip shotgun leaning next to his front door when the IRS came for him.
shadrap
Footballguy
Mom is 83 in Old folks home, has Altiemers(sp?). Nicest lady but doesn't know me anymore. Guy in his mid fifties tried to trip me a few weeks ago when I was visiting. Made a formal complaint, saying he is dangerous. Last Friday he threw my mom on floor & strangled her. Police were called, etc. & he was thrown out & in jail. Mom is okay but scared to death now.
Meeting with staff today. Thinking about a lawsuit. Anything gleaned from it would go towards her care. Moving her to a different home is not an option as it's the only one in town.
Thoughts? Yes, I'm PISSED BEYOND BELIEF.
Meeting with staff today. Thinking about a lawsuit. Anything gleaned from it would go towards her care. Moving her to a different home is not an option as it's the only one in town.
Thoughts? Yes, I'm PISSED BEYOND BELIEF.
Zow
Footballguy
This is so awesome and I've seen several defendants follow this exact script. Gonna have to remember this and send it to the hearing judge next time I see someone try it.
Sweet J
Footballguy
Tom Hagen
Footballguy
Zow
Footballguy
Instinctive
Footballguy
My last day of work is tomorrow, but it's a half-day and like 70% of the office leaves for their Labor Day stuff tonight, so today is the real tough one. Been saying goodbyes and such and it's all very bittersweet.
I'm really looking forward to going back home, but I also think this may have been the greatest possible internship experience I could have lucked into. I realize I saw a lot of things about legal work that really annoyed me, or made me shake my head, but I also saw how some things get done. Just contrasting the way our office handled things with, for instance, the way the entire Brady saga went down made me very proud of the people I worked with.
Now, on to the 2nd year of law school! Thank you again to those ITT that have helped with job search and general support. I'm looking forward to the next step(s) in no small part because of yall's encouragement and support. Maybe someday I'll have some really good stories to share and contribute in here, but until then I'll just keep reading yours.
I'm really looking forward to going back home, but I also think this may have been the greatest possible internship experience I could have lucked into. I realize I saw a lot of things about legal work that really annoyed me, or made me shake my head, but I also saw how some things get done. Just contrasting the way our office handled things with, for instance, the way the entire Brady saga went down made me very proud of the people I worked with.
Now, on to the 2nd year of law school! Thank you again to those ITT that have helped with job search and general support. I'm looking forward to the next step(s) in no small part because of yall's encouragement and support. Maybe someday I'll have some really good stories to share and contribute in here, but until then I'll just keep reading yours.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Thorn
Footballguy
I'm wondering if this is a small-jurisdiction thing or not: I have a client that is in a contract dispute. Both parties are individuals, and both are represented. I had been emailing back and forth with opposing counsel, trying to see if there was enough common ground to settle or at least attend a voluntary pre-suit mediation. We were basically getting nowhere, he sent me an email to make a "reasonable" demand, I said we're not going to negotiate against ourselves, make a reasonable response to our demand. No response on the Friday before Labor Day. Over the holiday weekend he has my guy served by sheriff. To me that is just a #### move. It would have been one more email to say "can you accept service?" Instead he goes that route. I am in a state with a small bar, it just seems silly to be dickish.
Would you feel the same way? How big is your jurisdiction?
Would you feel the same way? How big is your jurisdiction?
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I know some lawyers like this. Many just don't understand that they can get the other attorney to waive formal service and instead go the easy route.
Zow
Footballguy
**** move. But unfortunately **** moves seem so much more common in civil practice so it's somewhat accepted in my small jurisdiction. I haven't figured out why though.
Zow
Footballguy
Zow
Footballguy
It's Friday at 5:30 and I'm still at the office. Have a ton of work piled up and I wasted three hours in court waiting for a big sentencing hearing (scheduled for 2:30) that the judge took up at 4:45 and simply continued for a few weeks. Thanks, judge, you knew I was sitting there the whole time but you insisted you could complete your calendar and were way off. Now I have to come into the office tomorrow to finish what I didn't today.
After court I go back to office to call back clients. On the very first one i get cursed out and hung up by a divorce client, whose soon-to-be ex took the family dog while he was at the store, because I won't immediately go get said dog. Surprisingly, lawyers don't carte blanche authority to just break into homes demanding the return of animals.
I wish it were legal to drink and drive. I so want to be hammered when I get home after this hour commute.
After court I go back to office to call back clients. On the very first one i get cursed out and hung up by a divorce client, whose soon-to-be ex took the family dog while he was at the store, because I won't immediately go get said dog. Surprisingly, lawyers don't carte blanche authority to just break into homes demanding the return of animals.
I wish it were legal to drink and drive. I so want to be hammered when I get home after this hour commute.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I think I just realized I've never confirmed a default before in my whole career. I'm doing some pro bono work and don't even know what to do after getting the preliminary default. I think I have to ask someone.
-fish-
Footballguy
default---->default judgment----->enter judgment---->send it off to a collections attorney
Henry Ford
Footballguy
preliminary default --> motion for confirmation of preliminary default which must attach evidence and testimony, form of which I've never used --> ??? --> profit
Buckfast 1
Footballguy
I've been prepping for an employment discrimination trial, which is scheduled to begin in two weeks. The judge in this case told me that she would not entertain a motion for summary judgment and that it would be a waste of resources for me to even file one. Nonetheless, I filed an MSJ anyways. The case was reassigned to a new judge a couple days ago, and I just got an email from the new judge saying that she was granting my MSJ. Wahoo! And I got the email just an hour before I am leaving to attend the first of four beer festivals in four consecutive days for Great American Beer Festival week. Instead of feeling guilty about my binge drinking during trial prep, I can celebrate wholeheartedly with world class beers. What timing.
