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

[-fish-]

Being a lawyer is either really fun or really sucky. There's not a whole lot of middle ground.

 

[Christo]

Being a lawyer is either really fun or really sucky. There's not a whole lot of middle ground.

If it weren't for clients, opposing counsel, and judges it'd be a blast.

 

[Henry Ford]

Being a lawyer is either really fun or really sucky. There's not a whole lot of middle ground.

If it weren't for clients, opposing counsel, and judges it'd be a blast.

And juries. And witnesses.Just people in general.

 

[FattyVM]

Lawyerguys. Graduating next spring, should I be sending out job applications now? My practice area is kind of niche (IP) and I have to stay localish due to having elderly family members, so the firm choices are somewhat limited, but I have some commercial sector options I think.

 

[Sweet J]

Lawyerguys. Graduating next spring, should I be sending out job applications now? My practice area is kind of niche (IP) and I have to stay localish due to having elderly family members, so the firm choices are somewhat limited, but I have some commercial sector options I think.

I'm confused. Why wait?

 

[Zow]

Lawyerguys. Graduating next spring, should I be sending out job applications now? My practice area is kind of niche (IP) and I have to stay localish due to having elderly family members, so

the firm choices are somewhat limited, but I have some commercial sector options I think.

Did you intern with them? Maybe volunteer to get your foot in the door?You sound like the majority of my friends who had better grades than I did but didn't do any sort of job searching or networking during law school then struggled and were shocked when they couldn't find a cushy job a block from their house. These firms need to know who you are. I'll defer to guys like Otis who work in your field if they had better advice, but I'm a huge proponent of networking and interning. I've had four jobs now - all but one obtained from firms reaching out to me - and none of them even saw my grades and 3/4 don't even know where I went to law school. Granted, this may different for the large IP firms.

 

[FattyVM]

Didn't know if it was appropriate. It's 8 months in the future, and I couldn't even start as an intern now since I'm already employed by a firm. Hoping to knock out the patent bar this winter and am schedule to take the summer bar, so that would be the timeline I would have to give them.

Does not seem like any place will twiddle their thumbs to wait that long with how many underemployed lawyers there are out there right now.

 

[FattyVM]

Lawyerguys. Graduating next spring, should I be sending out job applications now? My practice area is kind of niche (IP) and I have to stay localish due to having elderly family members, so

the firm choices are somewhat limited, but I have some commercial sector options I think.

Did you intern with them? Maybe volunteer to get your foot in the door?You sound like the majority of my friends who had better grades than I did but didn't do any sort of job searching or networking during law school then struggled and were shocked when they couldn't find a cushy job a block from their house. These firms need to know who you are. I'll defer to guys like Otis who work in your field if they had better advice, but I'm a huge proponent of networking and interning. I've had four jobs now - all but one obtained from firms reaching out to me - and none of them even saw my grades and 3/4 don't even know where I went to law school. Granted, this may different for the large IP firms.

Love the firm I'm working at, largest in the area that focuses on this type of law. But I know we, the firm, pretty much brought new employees in last year instead of hiring the 3-L coworkers, even after they had expressed interest.

 

[El Floppo]

Didn't know if it was appropriate. It's 8 months in the future, and I couldn't even start as an intern now since I'm already employed by a firm. Hoping to knock out the patent bar this winter and am schedule to take the summer bar, so that would be the timeline I would have to give them.

Does not seem like any place will twiddle their thumbs to wait that long with how many underemployed lawyers there are out there right now.

I'm not a lawyer... and still not sure why I read the thread, but...

IMO, it's not inappropriate to instigate communication with firms you'd like to work for- especially if there a limited few in that camp. I used to do "informational interviews" with different firms I was interested in- reach out to them as a meet and greet, regardless of whether they were hiring, and let them know my situation and that I was interested in working with them when the situation was right for all parties. Got two jobs this way.

Maybe it's different in lawyerland than architecture, but I don't see the harm in reaching out to these firms to let them know you're interested, graduating and taking the bar whenever, nice to meet you, let's keep in contact.

 

[El Floppo]

and btw- architecture, like law, would be a big party if not for the clients, contractors and governing agencies.

 

[thecatch]

Didn't know if it was appropriate. It's 8 months in the future, and I couldn't even start as an intern now since I'm already employed by a firm. Hoping to knock out the patent bar this winter and am schedule to take the summer bar, so that would be the timeline I would have to give them.

Does not seem like any place will twiddle their thumbs to wait that long with how many underemployed lawyers there are out there right now.

Talk to your career services as they will have a much better idea of hiring practices in your market. To the extent larger firms are hiring 3Ls they probably finished in August. But when I was thinking about sending some applications out during my clerkship (so technically a lateral hire at that point), I was told to wait until January or so. So it can vary.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Yes when you are getting a divorce your spouse is allowed discovery into all your income and assets and yes you need to provide that information. No its not me rolling over and giving in you putz.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

So who has any pointers on fighting with the VA? I'm growing rather tired of hearing, "this is just how they work," and I'm ready to use any nuclear weapon in my arsenal such as a really terse worded letter. At the very least.

Anything?

 

[Zow]

Yes when you are getting a divorce your spouse is allowed discovery into all your income and assets and yes you need to provide that information. No its not me rolling over and giving in you putz.

I feel like this is at least a weekly conversation.

 

[thecatch]

So who has any pointers on fighting with the VA? I'm growing rather tired of hearing, "this is just how they work," and I'm ready to use any nuclear weapon in my arsenal such as a really terse worded letter. At the very least.

Anything?

Someone in here awhile back posted about a big win they had at the CAVC.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

It could be. I'm just stressed. At this point the only way I'm going to be able to help all of my pro bono clients and clients with issues with various government agencies is to just run for Congress and then take charge from there, like you can. You know. Because it's easy to do that.

Crap.

 

[NCCommish]

Yes when you are getting a divorce your spouse is allowed discovery into all your income and assets and yes you need to provide that information. No its not me rolling over and giving in you putz.

I think I would end up kicking a lot of people out of my office.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Yes when you are getting a divorce your spouse is allowed discovery into all your income and assets and yes you need to provide that information. No its not me rolling over and giving in you putz.

I think I would end up kicking a lot of people out of my office.

I'll give you one better.

I had a guy that was suing someone for some money. Not a lot. I'm not buying a new car with the fees. Was without question the perfect client. Understood the process. Was always polite. Paid bills on time. You know, the kind of client that in the end makes you feel ok coming into the office the next day.

And then the defendant served us with discovery requests. You would think that I literally called upon the power of Satan and dragged this client through the 7 levels of hell as a testament to power of my office as attorney. The names I was called would break the language filter. The accusations leveled against me were enormous. Again - not for anything I did or said, but because the defendant's attorney served normal, par for the course discovery requests.

My client wasn't on trial and shouldn't have to provide these things. He wasn't giving a thing. When I told him that if he doesn't reply to the requests that he would lose his case, I was once again evil incarnate. I was also fired. Because, as he said, I must not know what my job is and any monkey could prove his case in court. So he went it alone.

I found out later from the other attorney that he did in fact refuse to provide any discovery and when the judge asked why his response, though without colorfol language, was similar to what he told me. Judge dismissed his case. I'm quite sure that he still thinks it is all my fault.

And the best part of the whole entire ordeal? The truly best part? The Defendant, when they served the discovery, offered a settlement of like 50% of the claim. In the midst of yelling at me my client refused to accept anything less than the full amount. So, in the end, he lost it all.

But, it was clearly my fault for......... opening my mail.

 

[NCCommish]

Yes when you are getting a divorce your spouse is allowed discovery into all your income and assets and yes you need to provide that information. No its not me rolling over and giving in you putz.

I think I would end up kicking a lot of people out of my office.

I'll give you one better.I had a guy that was suing someone for some money. Not a lot. I'm not buying a new car with the fees. Was without question the perfect client. Understood the process. Was always polite. Paid bills on time. You know, the kind of client that in the end makes you feel ok coming into the office the next day.

And then the defendant served us with discovery requests. You would think that I literally called upon the power of Satan and dragged this client through the 7 levels of hell as a testament to power of my office as attorney. The names I was called would break the language filter. The accusations leveled against me were enormous. Again - not for anything I did or said, but because the defendant's attorney served normal, par for the course discovery requests.

My client wasn't on trial and shouldn't have to provide these things. He wasn't giving a thing. When I told him that if he doesn't reply to the requests that he would lose his case, I was once again evil incarnate. I was also fired. Because, as he said, I must not know what my job is and any monkey could prove his case in court. So he went it alone.

I found out later from the other attorney that he did in fact refuse to provide any discovery and when the judge asked why his response, though without colorfol language, was similar to what he told me. Judge dismissed his case. I'm quite sure that he still thinks it is all my fault.

And the best part of the whole entire ordeal? The truly best part? The Defendant, when they served the discovery, offered a settlement of like 50% of the claim. In the midst of yelling at me my client refused to accept anything less than the full amount. So, in the end, he lost it all.

But, it was clearly my fault for......... opening my mail.

I never realized how much my last attorney must have liked me. Did what he said no questions asked. And because I did i walked away with a solid win in my books. If you hire someone for their expertise to do something let them do it.

 

[Christo]

Yes when you are getting a divorce your spouse is allowed discovery into all your income and assets and yes you need to provide that information. No its not me rolling over and giving in you putz.

 

[Zow]

It could be. I'm just stressed. At this point the only way I'm going to be able to help all of my pro bono clients and clients with issues with various government agencies is to just run for Congress and then take charge from there, like you can. You know. Because it's easy to do that.

Crap.

I've repeatedly advised clients that the best thing they can do for their case is to vote democrat/libertarian. Since they love their guns and churches as much as anyone, I don't think they listen to my advice.

 

[Zow]

Yes when you are getting a divorce your spouse is allowed discovery into all your income and assets and yes you need to provide that information. No its not me rolling over and giving in you putz.

I think I would end up kicking a lot of people out of my office.

I'll give you one better.

I had a guy that was suing someone for some money. Not a lot. I'm not buying a new car with the fees. Was without question the perfect client. Understood the process. Was always polite. Paid bills on time. You know, the kind of client that in the end makes you feel ok coming into the office the next day.

And then the defendant served us with discovery requests. You would think that I literally called upon the power of Satan and dragged this client through the 7 levels of hell as a testament to power of my office as attorney. The names I was called would break the language filter. The accusations leveled against me were enormous. Again - not for anything I did or said, but because the defendant's attorney served normal, par for the course discovery requests.

My client wasn't on trial and shouldn't have to provide these things. He wasn't giving a thing. When I told him that if he doesn't reply to the requests that he would lose his case, I was once again evil incarnate. I was also fired. Because, as he said, I must not know what my job is and any monkey could prove his case in court. So he went it alone.

I found out later from the other attorney that he did in fact refuse to provide any discovery and when the judge asked why his response, though without colorfol language, was similar to what he told me. Judge dismissed his case. I'm quite sure that he still thinks it is all my fault.

And the best part of the whole entire ordeal? The truly best part? The Defendant, when they served the discovery, offered a settlement of like 50% of the claim. In the midst of yelling at me my client refused to accept anything less than the full amount. So, in the end, he lost it all.

But, it was clearly my fault for......... opening my mail.

Awesome.

 

[Zow]

Yes when you are getting a divorce your spouse is allowed discovery into all your income and assets and yes you need to provide that information. No its not me rolling over and giving in you putz.

I think I would end up kicking a lot of people out of my office.

I'll give you one better.I had a guy that was suing someone for some money. Not a lot. I'm not buying a new car with the fees. Was without question the perfect client. Understood the process. Was always polite. Paid bills on time. You know, the kind of client that in the end makes you feel ok coming into the office the next day.

And then the defendant served us with discovery requests. You would think that I literally called upon the power of Satan and dragged this client through the 7 levels of hell as a testament to power of my office as attorney. The names I was called would break the language filter. The accusations leveled against me were enormous. Again - not for anything I did or said, but because the defendant's attorney served normal, par for the course discovery requests.

My client wasn't on trial and shouldn't have to provide these things. He wasn't giving a thing. When I told him that if he doesn't reply to the requests that he would lose his case, I was once again evil incarnate. I was also fired. Because, as he said, I must not know what my job is and any monkey could prove his case in court. So he went it alone.

I found out later from the other attorney that he did in fact refuse to provide any discovery and when the judge asked why his response, though without colorfol language, was similar to what he told me. Judge dismissed his case. I'm quite sure that he still thinks it is all my fault.

And the best part of the whole entire ordeal? The truly best part? The Defendant, when they served the discovery, offered a settlement of like 50% of the claim. In the midst of yelling at me my client refused to accept anything less than the full amount. So, in the end, he lost it all.

But, it was clearly my fault for......... opening my mail.

I never realized how much my last attorney must have liked me. Did what he said no questions asked. And because I did i walked away with a solid win in my books. If you hire someone for their expertise to do something let them do it.

You'd think this would be the case. I mean, when most of us go to the doctor and they tells us to do x, y, and z to ease our ailments, we trust them and do it. We know doctors aren't perfect but know far more than we do so it certainly makes sense to listen. I don't see why this same rationale doesn't apply to hiring an attorney.

But good god this is definitely NOT the case. It's absolutely common from somebody to obtain my services and then not follow my recommendations or not listen to my instructions. Sometimes it's painful because you see them essentially snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Sometimes it's just amusing because you sit back and wonder how somebody could be so irrational.

Heck, I've had a client literally do the opposite of ​every single thing I told her to do. I advised that there was enough evidence, particularly from her admission to committing the crime alleged, that she could be convicted. As an alternative I worked out an agreement whereby if she merely pays a fine and stays out of trouble for a year the case would be automatically dismissed. I advise she really should consider this option because it's the only way to guarantee a dismissal of the case and avoiding the collateral consequences of the offense charge is, in the long run, incredibly beneficial. Next to an outright dismissal, there is no better potential resolution of the case. Client insisted the offer was crap and demanded a speedy trial.

In preparation of the trial I advised that I listed witnesses X, Y, and Z and that they needed to be at trial. Day of trial she shows up with witnesses A, B, and C (none of whom she ever told me about before) and insists X, Y, and Z didn't need to be there. Client is appalled that witnesses A, B, and C are precluded from testifying.

The State concludes its case which could not have realistically gone much better for us. In short, the state really didn't prove its case because a key state's witness didn't show up. I make a motion for a directed verdict and lose, but the judge, who pretty much never grants this motion, makes statements suggesting it's very close and the state may not be able to meet its ultimate burden. I advise client I think we're going to win and that she shouldn't testify. In response, client demands to testify and, on cross, proceeds to ultimately admit to every element of the crime.

After client is convicted, I advise her of her appeal rights. I advise that while the appeal would cost me like ten hours of worth of work, appealing her case would be absolutely no further cost to her, would suspend the sentence she received (fine, some counseling, and a short jail stint), and that, ultimately, she should appeal because there is absolutely nothing to lose by appealing her conviction. Client chooses not to appeal.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Lol. I know her. Didn't know she was in Arizona too

 

[NCCommish]

Yes when you are getting a divorce your spouse is allowed discovery into all your income and assets and yes you need to provide that information. No its not me rolling over and giving in you putz.

I think I would end up kicking a lot of people out of my office.

I'll give you one better.I had a guy that was suing someone for some money. Not a lot. I'm not buying a new car with the fees. Was without question the perfect client. Understood the process. Was always polite. Paid bills on time. You know, the kind of client that in the end makes you feel ok coming into the office the next day.

And then the defendant served us with discovery requests. You would think that I literally called upon the power of Satan and dragged this client through the 7 levels of hell as a testament to power of my office as attorney. The names I was called would break the language filter. The accusations leveled against me were enormous. Again - not for anything I did or said, but because the defendant's attorney served normal, par for the course discovery requests.

My client wasn't on trial and shouldn't have to provide these things. He wasn't giving a thing. When I told him that if he doesn't reply to the requests that he would lose his case, I was once again evil incarnate. I was also fired. Because, as he said, I must not know what my job is and any monkey could prove his case in court. So he went it alone.

I found out later from the other attorney that he did in fact refuse to provide any discovery and when the judge asked why his response, though without colorfol language, was similar to what he told me. Judge dismissed his case. I'm quite sure that he still thinks it is all my fault.

And the best part of the whole entire ordeal? The truly best part? The Defendant, when they served the discovery, offered a settlement of like 50% of the claim. In the midst of yelling at me my client refused to accept anything less than the full amount. So, in the end, he lost it all.

But, it was clearly my fault for......... opening my mail.

I never realized how much my last attorney must have liked me. Did what he said no questions asked. And because I did i walked away with a solid win in my books. If you hire someone for their expertise to do something let them do it.

You'd think this would be the case. I mean, when most of us go to the doctor and they tells us to do x, y, and z to ease our ailments, we trust them and do it. We know doctors aren't perfect but know far more than we do so it certainly makes sense to listen. I don't see why this same rationale doesn't apply to hiring an attorney.

But good god this is definitely NOT the case. It's absolutely common from somebody to obtain my services and then not follow my recommendations or not listen to my instructions. Sometimes it's painful because you see them essentially snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Sometimes it's just amusing because you sit back and wonder how somebody could be so irrational.

Heck, I've had a client literally do the opposite of ​every single thing I told her to do. I advised that there was enough evidence, particularly from her admission to committing the crime alleged, that she could be convicted. As an alternative I worked out an agreement whereby if she merely pays a fine and stays out of trouble for a year the case would be automatically dismissed. I advise she really should consider this option because it's the only way to guarantee a dismissal of the case and avoiding the collateral consequences of the offense charge is, in the long run, incredibly beneficial. Next to an outright dismissal, there is no better potential resolution of the case. Client insisted the offer was crap and demanded a speedy trial.

In preparation of the trial I advised that I listed witnesses X, Y, and Z and that they needed to be at trial. Day of trial she shows up with witnesses A, B, and C (none of whom she ever told me about before) and insists X, Y, and Z didn't need to be there. Client is appalled that witnesses A, B, and C are precluded from testifying.

The State concludes its case which could not have realistically gone much better for us. In short, the state really didn't prove its case because a key state's witness didn't show up. I make a motion for a directed verdict and lose, but the judge, who pretty much never grants this motion, makes statements suggesting it's very close and the state may not be able to meet its ultimate burden. I advise client I think we're going to win and that she shouldn't testify. In response, client demands to testify and, on cross, proceeds to ultimately admit to every element of the crime.

After client is convicted, I advise her of her appeal rights. I advise that while the appeal would cost me like ten hours of worth of work, appealing her case would be absolutely no further cost to her, would suspend the sentence she received (fine, some counseling, and a short jail stint), and that, ultimately, she should appeal because there is absolutely nothing to lose by appealing her conviction. Client chooses not to appeal.

You can't fix stupid. In my own field of IT I see the same thing all the time. People hire me. They pay a lot of money for my time. I'm pretty good at what i do. Then they do what they want regardless of my suggestions. They insist I want them to spend money so I can make more. In the long run they pay me more to fix their new issues than they ever would have if they just did what I said to start with. Different consequences but same stupid.

 

[Zow]

Was she hot? You better be hot to be that stupid.

Offdee 5.

 

[-fish-]

Crazy lady that's running a brothel out of a condominium is suing my client (pro se, of course), along with the city police department and some other people, for "violation of the privacy policy" and "harassment by the police department."

My client shows up twice in the allegations in her complaint--both times in the context of hearsay conversations she had with an employee. No allegation of wrongdoing; no request for relief.

I filed a 12(b)(6) motion. She responded by faxing a letter to my client and some "unidentified recipients" in the form of a press release to "All the Reporters" describing a massive conspiracy between the police, Boeing, and the superior court to foreclose on her house. Somewhere in there, she describes my partner (who had nothing to do with this case) as being "a law student or fresh out of law school" and accusing him of bribing the courts to dismiss her case because he's afraid to face her in trial.

Sometimes at least it's entertaining.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Hahahahahahaha.

 

[Zow]

Crazy lady that's running a brothel out of a condominium is suing my client (pro se, of course), along with the city police department and some other people, for "violation of the privacy policy" and "harassment by the police department."

My client shows up twice in the allegations in her complaint--both times in the context of hearsay conversations she had with an employee. No allegation of wrongdoing; no request for relief.

I filed a 12(b)(6) motion. She responded by faxing a letter to my client and some "unidentified recipients" in the form of a press release to "All the Reporters" describing a massive conspiracy between the police, Boeing, and the superior court to foreclose on her house. Somewhere in there, she describes my partner (who had nothing to do with this case) as being "a law student or fresh out of law school" and accusing him of bribing the courts to dismiss her case because he's afraid to face her in trial.

Sometimes at least it's entertaining.

She sounds awesome.

 

[Zow]

Karma is a #####. Since making the aove lengthy post I just had two clients irrationally turn down two really good revised plea offers that I worked hard to get.

 

[Christo]

Yes when you are getting a divorce your spouse is allowed discovery into all your income and assets and yes you need to provide that information. No its not me rolling over and giving in you putz.

I think I would end up kicking a lot of people out of my office.

I'll give you one better.

I had a guy that was suing someone for some money. Not a lot. I'm not buying a new car with the fees. Was without question the perfect client. Understood the process. Was always polite. Paid bills on time. You know, the kind of client that in the end makes you feel ok coming into the office the next day.

And then the defendant served us with discovery requests. You would think that I literally called upon the power of Satan and dragged this client through the 7 levels of hell as a testament to power of my office as attorney. The names I was called would break the language filter. The accusations leveled against me were enormous. Again - not for anything I did or said, but because the defendant's attorney served normal, par for the course discovery requests.

My client wasn't on trial and shouldn't have to provide these things. He wasn't giving a thing. When I told him that if he doesn't reply to the requests that he would lose his case, I was once again evil incarnate. I was also fired. Because, as he said, I must not know what my job is and any monkey could prove his case in court. So he went it alone.

I found out later from the other attorney that he did in fact refuse to provide any discovery and when the judge asked why his response, though without colorfol language, was similar to what he told me. Judge dismissed his case. I'm quite sure that he still thinks it is all my fault.

And the best part of the whole entire ordeal? The truly best part? The Defendant, when they served the discovery, offered a settlement of like 50% of the claim. In the midst of yelling at me my client refused to accept anything less than the full amount. So, in the end, he lost it all.

But, it was clearly my fault for......... opening my mail.

The flip-side of this is the clients who withhold documents in response to discovery but then bring them to you after discovery has closed and ask "if they will help." Oh, you mean this document they specifically asked for in their document request and you told me didn't exist and then signed a declaration of completeness under oath?

 

[Zow]

Yes when you are getting a divorce your spouse is allowed discovery into all your income and assets and yes you need to provide that information. No its not me rolling over and giving in you putz.

I think I would end up kicking a lot of people out of my office.

I'll give you one better.

I had a guy that was suing someone for some money. Not a lot. I'm not buying a new car with the fees. Was without question the perfect client. Understood the process. Was always polite. Paid bills on time. You know, the kind of client that in the end makes you feel ok coming into the office the next day.

And then the defendant served us with discovery requests. You would think that I literally called upon the power of Satan and dragged this client through the 7 levels of hell as a testament to power of my office as attorney. The names I was called would break the language filter. The accusations leveled against me were enormous. Again - not for anything I did or said, but because the defendant's attorney served normal, par for the course discovery requests.

My client wasn't on trial and shouldn't have to provide these things. He wasn't giving a thing. When I told him that if he doesn't reply to the requests that he would lose his case, I was once again evil incarnate. I was also fired. Because, as he said, I must not know what my job is and any monkey could prove his case in court. So he went it alone.

I found out later from the other attorney that he did in fact refuse to provide any discovery and when the judge asked why his response, though without colorfol language, was similar to what he told me. Judge dismissed his case. I'm quite sure that he still thinks it is all my fault.

And the best part of the whole entire ordeal? The truly best part? The Defendant, when they served the discovery, offered a settlement of like 50% of the claim. In the midst of yelling at me my client refused to accept anything less than the full amount. So, in the end, he lost it all.

But, it was clearly my fault for......... opening my mail.

The flip-side of this is the clients who withhold documents in response to discovery but then bring them to you after discovery has closed and ask "if they will help." Oh, you mean this document they specifically asked for in their document request and you told me didn't exist and then signed a declaration of completeness under oath?

On this topic, I had another attorney, who I generally get along with, send my office a nasty letter essentially yelling at us for not making certain our clients fill out a standard financial information affidavit better. Aside from us giving them the paperwork and telling them they need to fill it out as thoroughly as possible, I'm not sure what else he wants us to do.

 

[Thorn]

Yes when you are getting a divorce your spouse is allowed discovery into all your income and assets and yes you need to provide that information. No its not me rolling over and giving in you putz.

I feel like this is at least a weekly conversation.

Potential client: "I want a real bulldog!"

Thorn: "I'm not your guy."

 

[Yankee23Fan]

So, depositions when your adversary is pro se.

Awesome.

There is a bottle of Jack Daniels in my house waiting for me that must be literally scared to death right now for reasons it can't explain.

 

[Zow]

Yes when you are getting a divorce your spouse is allowed discovery into all your income and assets and yes you need to provide that information. No its not me rolling over and giving in you putz.

I feel like this is at least a weekly conversation.

Potential client: "I want a real bulldog!"

Thorn: "I'm not your guy."

This is also a weekly exchange that I have.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Somewhat interesting local case

The Amberton wall that has divided two southwest Bakersfield neighborhoods since 2013 must come down, a Kern County Superior Court judge ruled Tuesday.

The cinderblock barrier homeowner Michael Hansen had built on his private property in June 2013 blocked a public walkway between Stockdale Estates, where Hansen and his family live, and Amberton, Kern County Superior Court Judge David R. Lampe wrote in a tentative decision.

News of a ruling thrilled the wall’s opponents, some of whom had used the walkway for more than a generation to exercise, walk dogs and take children to and from school.

But Hansen’s attorney, Ray Mullen, said he expects the case will be appealed, leaving things status quo for now.

Hansen testified in court last month that as a boy he used the walkway himself to get from Old Stockdale to Stockdale Elementary School.


He said he commissioned the wall after his car and house were broken into several times — and he believed the walkway, which had been used by a generation of students to walk to school, had become an easy access point for criminals to prey on both subdivisions.

A group of residents, many of them members of the Amberton-Stockdale Alliance, disagreed and sued Hansen and his father, Dan Hansen, in August 2013, alleging the walkway was a public facility and should not be blocked.

On the Amberton side, the walkway between the two neighborhoods was recorded as a public easement, but that never happened on the Stockdale Estates side.

During the four-day civil trial, a Bakersfield Police Department crime analyst testified residential burglaries in Amberton and Stockdale Estates more than tripled between 2010 and 2013, when Hansen had the wall built.

But former Tenneco Realty Development Corp. executive Charles F. Tolfree, whose company developed much of Amberton in the 1970s and Stockdale Estates in the 1980s, said under oath the company had intended a walkway linking the two neighborhoods.

In his decision, Lampe said the Hansens “acquired no rights as bona fide purchasers” since the walkway was there before they bought the property.

But the judge said the underlying issue went beyond maintaining safe routes to Stockdale Elementary School or Actis Junior High — or building a barrier to crime.

“All of this was irrelevant to the question. The right-of-way exists or it does not,” Lampe wrote, adding: “It does.”

Lampe didn’t rule in favor of the plaintiffs on every issue in the case, but he also issued a permanent injunction prohibiting the Hansens from blocking the walkway and ordering them to restore the passageway between the two subdivisions, along with the sidewalk and landscaping.

Lampe did allow the Hansens to build “some type of gate, such as a spring-loaded, unlocked gate” across the opening.

Michael Hansen and Dan Hansen did not respond to telephone messages left requesting comment.

Mullen said he thought Lampe’s decision was “incorrect” but “presumably we’ll be filing an appeal.”

“At some point, it’ll probably end up in San Francisco with the California Supreme Court,” Mullen said, adding, “We’ll take it as far as it takes to get it right.”

Attorney Michael T. Whittington, who represented the plaintiffs, said in a statement “the court gave us everything we asked for,” and his clients are hopeful the decision “will lead to the reuniting of the neighborhoods and the classmates, friends and families that benefit from the easement.”

Plaintiff Bryan Bell, a guiding force in the lawsuit against the Hansens, said he was still processing the judge’s decision early Tuesday afternoon.

“I think this case was mostly about fairness. Mostly everybody in the nearby community recognized what that easement was,” Bell said, calling Lampe’s ruling “a victory for the community.”

“I’m just pleased that something that was put there for the public use is now going to remain something there for the public use,” Bell added.

Stockdale Estates resident John Stevens, a retired Kern County senior deputy district attorney, said he wasn’t surprised by the ruling.

“I knew it was a possibility,” Stevens said. “Frankly, I thought Mr. Hansen had a valid reason to build the wall, because part of it was on his private property and he was told by his insurance if some child got hurt going through the walkway he could get held liable.“

Amberton resident Lorie Fox, the prosecution’s first witness, said she was enthusiastic about the prospect the walkway could again be used by young families, and as a safe route to school for students.

Informed the case would likely be appealed, Fox said, ”Already? Oh, gee. Well, here we go again.“

Map

Wall

What the article doesn't mention is that the walkway gave kids a quick and safe way to get to the elementary school that services both neighborhoods. Since the wall went up kids in the Amberton neighborhood have to make a much longer walk to school and it puts them on some very busy streets.

 

[Zow]

My week has been sheer chaos and stress. I've probably worked about 40 hours already and it's Wednesday at lunch. As I laid in bed last night after getting home from the office past 11:00 and my wife, who I hadn't talked to all day, was sound asleep I started fantasizing about far less stressful and time consuming jobs that I could do.

But, of course, there are cool little nuggets to this job that cater to competitiveness and dissipate any thought of changing professions. I just experienced one fifteen minutes ago after getting a ruling in a ridiculously messy, highly contentious divorce case filled with tears, ridiculous allegations, courtroom outbursts, and numerous pleading filed and arguments made by opposing counsel directly attacking my position on the case and even arguing that I took frivolous positions because of my inexperience in this particular area of the law. The parties spent a hefty amount of money on the case and the attorneys put in hours of work.

This case started back in June. Somewhat typical messy and awful divorce case. My client obtained a restraining order alleging domestic violence, opposing party adamantly denies and say it's a lie, allegations of infidelity are hurled both ways, etc. As I usually try to do in these cases, I sent a settlement offer to opposing counsel almost immediately. I thought the offer was incredibly reasonable and explained why I thought it was beneficial to both sides and was what the judge was likely to do anyway. Opposing counsel immediately tells me the offer is ridiculous and his paralegal even goes as far as to call me and say that I had backed away from my word of being a "reasonable lawyer" (I don't recall ever making her this promise and I have no idea why a random paralegal would feel the need to call me). So, we roll up our sleeves and fight.

Three months of temporary orders motions, motions for summary judgment - in all, probably something like 20 pleadings were filed, discovery demands and numerous disclosures sent, dozens of hours billed, and two multiple-hour evidentiary hearings concluded this morning and we got a ruling. That ruling was exactly the same as my offer. Well, aside from the fact that the opposing party had to wait the three months longer to see his kids. As we're leaving the hearing I need to work out some minor details with opposing counsel and, while nothing is said by either of us, it's clear that he acknowledges that he has to eat crow and I was right.

Lawyering may suck sometimes, but if you're a competitive person who wasn't born with natural athletic talent is can definitely satiate the desire to compete and win.

 

[-fish-]

My new partner likes to "accidentally" reply all to emails from opposing counsel with comments like "what an idiot. we should just forget the motion to exclude and let his own witness ruin his case at trial."

 

[krista4]

fish and any others who know about weed law, I'm just curious about a situation a friend of mine is in. She got a notice in the mail for an appearance in federal court on Oct. 7. She had been checking on a trailhead in Olympic National Park and was caught with weed. At the time she wasn't given a ticket or notice or anything; they just took her pipe and nugg.

Sucks of course since weed is legal in WA but still a problem on federal lands, I guess, but my question is, is that how things work? You don't even get anything given to you at the time but can just receive a notice to appear later? Any idea what the usual penalties would be for this? I'm really bummed for her.

And before anyone suggest that "my friend" is really me, I note that I had to ask Mr. krista what a "nugg" was as I had no idea what she was talking about.

 

[Zow]

fish and any others who know about weed law, I'm just curious about a situation a friend of mine is in. She got a notice in the mail for an appearance in federal court on Oct. 7. She had been checking on a trailhead in Olympic National Park and was caught with weed. At the time she wasn't given a ticket or notice or anything; they just took her pipe and nugg.

Sucks of course since weed is legal in WA but still a problem on federal lands, I guess, but my question is, is that how things work? You don't even get anything given to you at the time but can just receive a notice to appear later? Any idea what the usual penalties would be for this? I'm really bummed for her.

And before anyone suggest that "my friend" is really me, I note that I had to ask Mr. krista what a "nugg" was as I had no idea what she was talking about.

It's not common in my experience but it can work that way.

 

[xulf]

My new partner likes to "accidentally" reply all to emails from opposing counsel with comments like "what an idiot. we should just forget the motion to exclude and let his own witness ruin his case at trial."

Either a genius or the other...

 

[Otis]

My new partner likes to "accidentally" reply all to emails from opposing counsel with comments like "what an idiot. we should just forget the motion to exclude and let his own witness ruin his case at trial."

Great shtick.

 

[-fish-]

fish and any others who know about weed law, I'm just curious about a situation a friend of mine is in. She got a notice in the mail for an appearance in federal court on Oct. 7. She had been checking on a trailhead in Olympic National Park and was caught with weed. At the time she wasn't given a ticket or notice or anything; they just took her pipe and nugg.

Sucks of course since weed is legal in WA but still a problem on federal lands, I guess, but my question is, is that how things work? You don't even get anything given to you at the time but can just receive a notice to appear later? Any idea what the usual penalties would be for this? I'm really bummed for her.

And before anyone suggest that "my friend" is really me, I note that I had to ask Mr. krista what a "nugg" was as I had no idea what she was talking about.

The park rangers are apparently militant about this, and as I understand it despite Holder's memo that enforcing federal law in states where it is legal is a waste of resources, it also stated that keeping marijuana off federal property would remain a priority.

Possession is a federal misdemeanor. I'd tell her to get one of the marijuana law specialists that have sprung up...I'm sure they deal with this on a regular basis.

 

[krista4]

fish and any others who know about weed law, I'm just curious about a situation a friend of mine is in. She got a notice in the mail for an appearance in federal court on Oct. 7. She had been checking on a trailhead in Olympic National Park and was caught with weed. At the time she wasn't given a ticket or notice or anything; they just took her pipe and nugg.

Sucks of course since weed is legal in WA but still a problem on federal lands, I guess, but my question is, is that how things work? You don't even get anything given to you at the time but can just receive a notice to appear later? Any idea what the usual penalties would be for this? I'm really bummed for her.

And before anyone suggest that "my friend" is really me, I note that I had to ask Mr. krista what a "nugg" was as I had no idea what she was talking about.

The park rangers are apparently militant about this, and as I understand it despite Holder's memo that enforcing federal law in states where it is legal is a waste of resources, it also stated that keeping marijuana off federal property would remain a priority.

Possession is a federal misdemeanor. I'd tell her to get one of the marijuana law specialists that have sprung up...I'm sure they deal with this on a regular basis.

Good info, thanks. This friend and a couple of others were also lighting up when we were in the Enchantments a couple of weeks ago. If I'd known this, I would have made sure to stay away when they were. Even though we weren't partaking, we were on my permit and I'd bet they would have found a way to make trouble for me, too.

 

[Zow]

My boss just brought in a bottle of Dom and offered to make me partner with a raise.

I'm mildly annoyed because I still have a bunch of work to do and he's killing my diet bet.

 

[xulf]

My boss just brought in a bottle of Dom and offered to make me partner with a raise.

I'm mildly annoyed because I still have a bunch of work to do and he's killing my diet bet.

Congrats fatty!!

 

[NCCommish]

My boss just brought in a bottle of Dom and offered to make me partner with a raise.

I'm mildly annoyed because I still have a bunch of work to do and he's killing my diet bet.

Congrats my friend. I am sure it is well deserved.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Nice

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

My boss just brought in a bottle of Dom and offered to make me partner with a raise.

I'm mildly annoyed because I still have a bunch of work to do and he's killing my diet bet.

An error occurred

You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Didn't know Krista was such a stoner.