Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

The Lawyer Thread Where We Stop Ruining Other Threads


Recommended Posts

I've never nailed a client, though I had one (a cute, bubbly real estate agent) who I feel sure I could have as we just clicked. Anyway, I can't imagine how much of a mess that would become. It's hard enough (ha!) managing clients as it is.

I had one client I represented on a DUI back when I was a student-attorney in Minnesota who, after chatting with her after her sentencing, seemed waiting for me to ask her out and I definitely wanted. She was a local college girl, totally cute and totally put together/normal (just made the dumb mistake of drinking and driving) and I frankly don't think there would have been anything unethical about it. However, in the moment I decided not to and had to somewhat awkwardly end the conversation. Definitely the one I remember looking back upon thinking maybe I should have pulled the trigger.

During my years as a public defender in my mid to late twenties I had the occasion to represent some exotic dancers and other morally lax girls. Was probably offered thank you sexual favors a half a dozen times (with one particular dancer inviting me to her club after hours so her and her colleagues could "show [me] the night of my life"). Never had much trouble turning those down though. However, I noticed that now I'm 30, married, and don't have time to stay in great shape those offers have stopped. :sadbanana:

If you were done representing her, then no ethical problem.

As ridiculous as this may sound, as a public defender I didn't want to mess with it in the event it could be construed as payment for services rendered.*

*I couldn't even accept de minimis gifts under my contract and if I did it was fireable. Had to turn down a box of Omaha Steaks once and run after people who thanked me with a 100 dollar handshake. That hurt.

To my way of thinking (and undoubtedly to your client's way of thinking) the sex/relationship wouldn't be a "gift", so funny enough I'd have less ethical problem with that than I would with the steaks or the padded handshake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 6.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I don't know if there's a real pinnacle to this profession. Some times it really seems like there isn't one. But I do now know that when you're standing there waiting and hoping for two words instead

Made partner today. 

Big news for The_Son - just found out he got the Rubenstein Scholarship from Chicago! Full tuition + a $20,000 per year stipend. Last week he was fortunate enough to be offered a full-tuition scholars

I've never nailed a client, though I had one (a cute, bubbly real estate agent) who I feel sure I could have as we just clicked. Anyway, I can't imagine how much of a mess that would become. It's hard enough (ha!) managing clients as it is.

I had one client I represented on a DUI back when I was a student-attorney in Minnesota who, after chatting with her after her sentencing, seemed waiting for me to ask her out and I definitely wanted. She was a local college girl, totally cute and totally put together/normal (just made the dumb mistake of drinking and driving) and I frankly don't think there would have been anything unethical about it. However, in the moment I decided not to and had to somewhat awkwardly end the conversation. Definitely the one I remember looking back upon thinking maybe I should have pulled the trigger.

During my years as a public defender in my mid to late twenties I had the occasion to represent some exotic dancers and other morally lax girls. Was probably offered thank you sexual favors a half a dozen times (with one particular dancer inviting me to her club after hours so her and her colleagues could "show [me] the night of my life"). Never had much trouble turning those down though. However, I noticed that now I'm 30, married, and don't have time to stay in great shape those offers have stopped. :sadbanana:

If you were done representing her, then no ethical problem.

As ridiculous as this may sound, as a public defender I didn't want to mess with it in the event it could be construed as payment for services rendered.*

*I couldn't even accept de minimis gifts under my contract and if I did it was fireable. Had to turn down a box of Omaha Steaks once and run after people who thanked me with a 100 dollar handshake. That hurt.

To my way of thinking (and undoubtedly to your client's way of thinking) the sex/relationship wouldn't be a "gift", so funny enough I'd have less ethical problem with that than I would with the steaks or the padded handshake.

Would it change your mind to know that the odds would be pretty strong the girl(s) would likely have meth lesions?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never nailed a client, though I had one (a cute, bubbly real estate agent) who I feel sure I could have as we just clicked. Anyway, I can't imagine how much of a mess that would become. It's hard enough (ha!) managing clients as it is.

I had one client I represented on a DUI back when I was a student-attorney in Minnesota who, after chatting with her after her sentencing, seemed waiting for me to ask her out and I definitely wanted. She was a local college girl, totally cute and totally put together/normal (just made the dumb mistake of drinking and driving) and I frankly don't think there would have been anything unethical about it. However, in the moment I decided not to and had to somewhat awkwardly end the conversation. Definitely the one I remember looking back upon thinking maybe I should have pulled the trigger.

During my years as a public defender in my mid to late twenties I had the occasion to represent some exotic dancers and other morally lax girls. Was probably offered thank you sexual favors a half a dozen times (with one particular dancer inviting me to her club after hours so her and her colleagues could "show [me] the night of my life"). Never had much trouble turning those down though. However, I noticed that now I'm 30, married, and don't have time to stay in great shape those offers have stopped. :sadbanana:

If you were done representing her, then no ethical problem.

As ridiculous as this may sound, as a public defender I didn't want to mess with it in the event it could be construed as payment for services rendered.*

*I couldn't even accept de minimis gifts under my contract and if I did it was fireable. Had to turn down a box of Omaha Steaks once and run after people who thanked me with a 100 dollar handshake. That hurt.

To my way of thinking (and undoubtedly to your client's way of thinking) the sex/relationship wouldn't be a "gift", so funny enough I'd have less ethical problem with that than I would with the steaks or the padded handshake.

Would it change your mind to know that the odds would be pretty strong the girl(s) would likely have meth lesions?

That would definitely be important information to have, but it would not affect my analysis on the ethical end of things.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not been following the Oscar Pistorius murder trial all that closely but when I have read about it the insight into how their judicial system works is interesting. I have a tough time believing, for example, that the presentation of the crime scene photos to the defendant merely for shock value during cross-examination would fly in the US.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, I can't understand why everywhere else in this country is just ecstatic to have common law B.S. pop up in judicial decisions. "Well, we know this is what the legislature said, but because of the common law..."

:confused:

As opposed to... "custom". :mellow:

I'm not 100% fluent in ChristoSpeak, but I think he meant that appellate courts outside of LA do the exact opposite of what Henry implied, that is, where the legislature has spoken, they trump common law.

:yes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, I can't understand why everywhere else in this country is just ecstatic to have common law B.S. pop up in judicial decisions. "Well, we know this is what the legislature said, but because of the common law..."

:confused:

As opposed to... "custom". :mellow:

I'm not 100% fluent in ChristoSpeak, but I think he meant that appellate courts outside of LA do the exact opposite of what Henry implied, that is, where the legislature has spoken, they trump common law.

Depends. Legislative intent and legislation vary greatly, and legislation deviating from the common law is still strictly construed as far as I know.

It's not my fault the legislature isn't smart enough to draft a statute that says what they mean. Fix it. Until then, I'm going with what you said, not what you meant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

What doesn't make sense?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

Judges around here tend to be super liberal in awarding costs if you made an offer of judgment

Oh, sorry.... defense verdict. Yeah, you're right. If you get a defense verdict you can already get costs, right?

Edited by Henry Ford
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

The rules are going to differ state to state, but pay close attention to format because you tend to need strict technical compliance on these things to activate the provisions that entitle you to additional costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not been following the Oscar Pistorius murder trial all that closely but when I have read about it the insight into how their judicial system works is interesting. I have a tough time believing, for example, that the presentation of the crime scene photos to the defendant merely for shock value during cross-examination would fly in the US.

If it was merely for shock value of course it wouldn't; it would draw the quickest 403 relevance objection known to man and may be grounds for a mis-trial.

But this doesn't mean that the picture wouldn't come in, not by a long shot. If the picture offers any probative value (which it almost always does) the state can use grisly crime scene photos in its case in chief. It could also use the photo in its cross-examination of the defendant to be either demonstrative or for impeachment - and this opportunity would likely arise IMO.

Probably the best example I've seen of this by a prosecutor was during a baby murder case (shaken baby) where the defense was the child accidentally fell in the tub. The Defendant, on direct, naturally laid out his account of how the bathing was bathing and fell and it was an accident etc. On cross, the prosecutor did a great job of locking the Defendant into those statements. To impeach and to then have the Defendant demonstrate his story, the prosecutor put up on the projection screen the god awful pictures of the dead, naked baby with fingerprint looking bruises all over its body. He then made the Defendant identify each injury and what, from his recollection of the fall, would have caused it. The Defendant initially started crying and then broke down and lost it to the point of a recess when the prosecutor pointed to the bruises looking most like fingerprint indentations and made the Defendant try to describe how they were caused by the fall. It was awful to watch but incredibly effective and totally fair game IMO.

Edited by Zow
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

What doesn't make sense?

Just seems like if I make an offer of jmt, then I win, I should get my costs and fees. What I'm reading says that I only get costs and fees if I lose but not as badly as my offer.

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

Judges around here tend to be super liberal in awarding costs if you made an offer of judgment

Oh, sorry.... defense verdict. Yeah, you're right. If you get a defense verdict you can already get costs, right?

Allegedly, but practically speaking it almost never happens. Also, I want the threat of my fee in there.

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

The rules are going to differ state to state, but pay close attention to format because you tend to need strict technical compliance on these things to activate the provisions that entitle you to additional costs.

:thumbup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

What doesn't make sense?

Just seems like if I make an offer of jmt, then I win, I should get my costs and fees. What I'm reading says that I only get costs and fees if I lose but not as badly as my offer.

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

Judges around here tend to be super liberal in awarding costs if you made an offer of judgment

Oh, sorry.... defense verdict. Yeah, you're right. If you get a defense verdict you can already get costs, right?

Allegedly, but practically speaking it almost never happens. Also, I want the threat of my fee in there.

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

The rules are going to differ state to state, but pay close attention to format because you tend to need strict technical compliance on these things to activate the provisions that entitle you to additional costs.

:thumbup:

Your state allows fee shifting under an offer of judgment?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So a buddy of mine has a TRO and he actually was arrested for violation by stepping foot on this property where he used to live...long story but it involves the Los Angeles housing authority and he had slumlords, yada yada yada...the short of it is this. He has bonafide proof that the TRO is built on lie after lie after lie, assuming he can prove that, is it possible the folks who began the TRO against him can be charged with a felony?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we ask legal question in here? Is this a free legal thread?

No. It's a lawyer thread. You may get advice, but also made fun of.

I'll take my chances, it's certainly never stopped me before.

I'm happy to help. Where should I send my retainer agreement?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thorn > the leading case on that, at least when I looked a few years ago, is Delta Airlines v. August. Sorry no cite ATM, but it's a 1981 SCOTUS case. It explains the rationale pretty well, and confirms that there's no award of costs if an OOJ is made and the defense later obtains a verdict. Basic logic is that the plaintiff-offeree didn't get a judgment so the rules don't apply.

This is Fed. R. Civ. P. 68, BTW - - not sure how it works in your state. And I don't necessarily agree with the rationale.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been on the other side of a Rule 68 offer of judgment in federal court. Because it only covers costs, it really didn't cause me much pause at all. It was really too low-ball to be very effective. I think the rule only works well with pretty good offers. This was also a 1983 case, so my fees were already a threat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thorn > the leading case on that, at least when I looked a few years ago, is Delta Airlines v. August. Sorry no cite ATM, but it's a 1981 SCOTUS case. It explains the rationale pretty well, and confirms that there's no award of costs if an OOJ is made and the defense later obtains a verdict. Basic logic is that the plaintiff-offeree didn't get a judgment so the rules don't apply.

This is Fed. R. Civ. P. 68, BTW - - not sure how it works in your state. And I don't necessarily agree with the rationale.

And of course, Rule 68 only makes fees an issue if the underlying statute makes fees an issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

What doesn't make sense?

Just seems like if I make an offer of jmt, then I win, I should get my costs and fees. What I'm reading says that I only get costs and fees if I lose but not as badly as my offer.

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

Judges around here tend to be super liberal in awarding costs if you made an offer of judgment

Oh, sorry.... defense verdict. Yeah, you're right. If you get a defense verdict you can already get costs, right?

Allegedly, but practically speaking it almost never happens. Also, I want the threat of my fee in there.

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

The rules are going to differ state to state, but pay close attention to format because you tend to need strict technical compliance on these things to activate the provisions that entitle you to additional costs.

:thumbup:

Your state allows fee shifting under an offer of judgment?

Not attorneys fees, but you can get augmented costs, the biggest of which is typically expert witness fees. Post trial that can in a lot of cases easily mean tens of thousands of bucks. Look up California Code of Civil Procedure Section 998.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

What doesn't make sense?

Just seems like if I make an offer of jmt, then I win, I should get my costs and fees. What I'm reading says that I only get costs and fees if I lose but not as badly as my offer.

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

Judges around here tend to be super liberal in awarding costs if you made an offer of judgment

Oh, sorry.... defense verdict. Yeah, you're right. If you get a defense verdict you can already get costs, right?

Allegedly, but practically speaking it almost never happens. Also, I want the threat of my fee in there.

Anyone have any experience with making an offer of judgment? From what I'm reading, it has no effect if there is an eventual defense verdict. This seems so counter-intuitive to me I feel like I'm missing something.

The rules are going to differ state to state, but pay close attention to format because you tend to need strict technical compliance on these things to activate the provisions that entitle you to additional costs.

:thumbup:

Your state allows fee shifting under an offer of judgment?

Not attorneys fees, but you can get augmented costs, the biggest of which is typically expert witness fees. Post trial that can in a lot of cases easily mean tens of thousands of bucks. Look up California Code of Civil Procedure Section 998.

We can already get those.

I was referring to Thorn's statement that he wants the threat of "his fee."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any good stories lately?

Sure: here's a report that I wrote up yesterday for an appearance I covered for another attorney through an office that sets up such things (essentially an appearance counsel broker) - the names were changed to protect the pathetic:

"I was contacted by [barbara] on Friday, April 4, about appearing in Dept 20 for a trial matter on behalf of the plaintiff. The instructions with the assignment were to seek a 60-day continuance of the trial because the attorney of record (AOR), who we at the time thought was [Kenneth Garvey], was having some unspecified health problems.

Both [barbara] and I agreed that we should get some additional information about the AOR's circumstances to convey to the court, and [barbara] indicated that she would attempt to do so over the weekend. [barbara] also advised me that she was having trouble communicating with the representative from the attorney's office and was even having trouble finding a good telephone number. She and I agreed that in the absence of more information I'd attempt to make the appearance and do the best I could under the circumstances.

Over the weekend I received no further information. I spoke again with [barbara] before the scheduled hearing and she indicated that she would again try to get further information. In quick succession during the hour preceding the 9:30 hearing I received three voice mail messages from [barbara]: 1) confirming that she continued to be unable to reach the AOR to get further information and that I should appear and do the best I could; then 2) indicating that I should NOT appear per the AOR's representative; then finally 3) indicating that I SHOULD appear after all. The last message added that the AOR's rep, named [Lucy Gonzalez], would be appearing with me in court and would have medical documents with her to substantiate the AOR's medical incapacity.

Ms. [Gonzalez] immediately thereafter contacted me by telephone and I indicated to her that I would meet her in front of Dept [99], which I did at about 9:10. She is a Filipina woman who was seated on a bench outside the courtroom, and she was accompanied by an Anglo man wearing a t-shirt and blue jeans. I asked her if she was Ms. [Gonzalez] and she said she was. The man was standing right next to us and said nothing, so I asked him who he was, and he identified himself as [Kenneth Garvey].

I advised Mr. [Garvey] that it was my impression that he was medically unable as the AOR to appear at the trial and that I was therefore surprised at his presence. I asked why he could not make the appearance himself. He responded that he was the general counsel for the corporation (and apparently therefore a witness) and that representing the corporation would be a conflict of interest. At some point he mentioned to me (possibly as a way of explaining his informal dress) that he'd just returned from two months in the Philippines.

I asked if there was an AOR for the corporation and he said there was. I asked who that was and he told me her name was [Kelly Bennett], and she was located in San Jose and wouldn't be making the trip down. I asked why not and he said something to the effect that "she can't be making trips back and forth". He added that she hadn't made an appearance in the case for nine months. I indicated to him that that was all well and good but that the court would be expecting her to make the appearance as the AOR absent a valid reason, such as a health problem. I asked if she was the one who had health problems.

Mr. [Garvey] didn't answer my question directly and instead inquired what kind of law did I practice. I told him, "Civil litigation, but if you're wondering whether I'm going to just step into a trial matter cold without the benefit of the file [which they clearly did not have with them] the answer is 'No'." I added that I was "concerned" that I'd been told I was appearing for an ill attorney and yet was in fact being presented with another scenario entirely.

I indicated that I would need to speak with Ms. [bennett], and I asked if they had her number for me to call. Ms. [Gonzalez] fumbled around with her phone for a few minutes before I finally just Googled the number on my phone and called Ms. [bennett]. I left a voice mail message for her describing who I was and outlining the basics of the situation and my confusion over it.

I then called [barbara] and described the above situation to her. She (after checking in the office) and I both agreed that I should not make the appearance and that I should just walk away. [barbara] reiterated how bizarre this was given that her original contact person with Mr. [Garvey]'s office, [Denise], had repeated to her the story about a medical problem just this morning.

I returned to Mr. [Garvey] and Ms. [Gonzalez] and advised them that I'd been instructed by [the office] not to make the appearance and that if they had any questions they should call [the office]. I asked who [Denise] was and Mr. [Garvey] replied, "Secretary." I asked whose secretary she was (she could, after all, have worked for Ms. [bennett]) and both he and Ms. [Gonzalez] replied, "She works for us." I asked if they had any idea why [Denise] had been claiming that the attorney was unable to appear because of some form of medical problem and both Mr. [Garvey] and Ms. [Gonzalez] were silent, exchanged glances with each other and actually averted their eyes from me.

Mr. [Garvey] changed the subject and made a comment to the effect that they obviously needed to advise the court that Ms. [bennett] would no longer be the AOR, and that they'd need a 60-day continuance (this parallels the 60-day request articulated by [Denise] , which suggests that [Denise] was receiving instructions from Mr. [Garvey]). He then asked me (apparently as a further attempt to retain my services) how long it would take for an attorney to "get up to speed" on the case, and I told him that without seeing the file there was no way of knowing as some cases can be reviewed in minutes and others might require weeks or more.

I reiterated my intention to leave, and at that point departed. Ms. [Gonzalez] stated at the end that they would still pay the appearance fee to [the office].

I again called [barbara] to advise her of the above as I departed the courthouse. I never set foot in Dept [99]."

So what kind of scam do you think they were trying to pull? :popcorn:

Sending a dupe in to get a continuance they knew they could not get, having ignored and neglected the matter and the Court's specific Orders after their last in a series of bogus continuances. They hoped the Court would not hammer a clearly unwitting dupe for what would appear to the dupe to be a routine request.

Their plan would have worked too, were it not for you meddling kids the fact that they were not dealing with a dupe.

Edited by Ditkaless Wonders
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thorn > the leading case on that, at least when I looked a few years ago, is Delta Airlines v. August. Sorry no cite ATM, but it's a 1981 SCOTUS case. It explains the rationale pretty well, and confirms that there's no award of costs if an OOJ is made and the defense later obtains a verdict. Basic logic is that the plaintiff-offeree didn't get a judgment so the rules don't apply.

This is Fed. R. Civ. P. 68, BTW - - not sure how it works in your state. And I don't necessarily agree with the rationale.

Thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thorn > the leading case on that, at least when I looked a few years ago, is Delta Airlines v. August. Sorry no cite ATM, but it's a 1981 SCOTUS case. It explains the rationale pretty well, and confirms that there's no award of costs if an OOJ is made and the defense later obtains a verdict. Basic logic is that the plaintiff-offeree didn't get a judgment so the rules don't apply.

This is Fed. R. Civ. P. 68, BTW - - not sure how it works in your state. And I don't necessarily agree with the rationale.

Thank you!

Np, brah.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, time to start a divorce trial brief. Yipee! There are no worse trial briefs in all of law. In fact some are actually fun, like prerogative writ trials - those briefs are actually legal work and fun to write. Divorce?

Ah, the nature of the action is that the people hate each other; the legal contentions? Yeah, they want a fricken divorce; Damages? This is a divorce judge, murder is cheaper and easier on all parties so what exactly are you going to do for my client on damages? Oh, that's right, nothing. But here is 10 pages of law on that point just to be clear. List of exhibits? Sure. I have three boxes. None of it matters. Yet I have to label all of it. Oh, that's right at the end you are just going to most likely split the baby in some way because you have too many other cases to look through all this stuff. Ok, I will still label away. Witnesses? This is a divorce. I need my client and God, and God is at the beach the day of trial and out of my jurisdiction for service. Proposed findings of fact? Sure, here's one - it's a divorce why the hell do I have to write a brief?

Ok. done venting. Back to work. "Alimony is based on these 16 criteria and the Plaintiff will brief each separate criteria as it pertains to the case at hand......" :wall:

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:



1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion"…. with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.


2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute… with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.


3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.



I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, time to start a divorce trial brief. Yipee! There are no worse trial briefs in all of law. In fact some are actually fun, like prerogative writ trials - those briefs are actually legal work and fun to write. Divorce?

Ah, the nature of the action is that the people hate each other; the legal contentions? Yeah, they want a fricken divorce; Damages? This is a divorce judge, murder is cheaper and easier on all parties so what exactly are you going to do for my client on damages? Oh, that's right, nothing. But here is 10 pages of law on that point just to be clear. List of exhibits? Sure. I have three boxes. None of it matters. Yet I have to label all of it. Oh, that's right at the end you are just going to most likely split the baby in some way because you have too many other cases to look through all this stuff. Ok, I will still label away. Witnesses? This is a divorce. I need my client and God, and God is at the beach the day of trial and out of my jurisdiction for service. Proposed findings of fact? Sure, here's one - it's a divorce why the hell do I have to write a brief?

Ok. done venting. Back to work. "Alimony is based on these 16 criteria and the Plaintiff will brief each separate criteria as it pertains to the case at hand......" :wall:

I see why you charge so much. Divorce is so much easier to litigate in my jurisdiction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:

1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion". with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.

2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.

3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.

I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.

Don't be snarky, but be blunt. Demolish him with the judge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:

1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion"…. with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.

2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute… with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.

3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.

I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.

I just had to send a frivolous motion notice to an adversary because his position is, well, wholly frivolous and he admits same but he figures it will scare my client enough to force a settlement. He might be right, but in the meantime I had to send him a notice that not only throws him under the bus it runs over him a few times and to an attorney that doesn't know the rule well it could looks like I was making this massively personal, but I'm not.

In other words, it's the nature of the job. Do yours. If he has been practicing for any length of time he will understand you are doing your job. And if he doesn't he is the type of attorney that frankly you shouldn't mind pissing off.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:

1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion"…. with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.

2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute… with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.

3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.

I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.

If you like the guy, a courtesy call to him about this is in line. Otherwise, blow him out of the water in your briefs. Misstating the law is an ethical breach, and it doesn't sound accidental.

Also, don't be snarky* in legal briefs. Be blunt and to the point. The court will appreciate it. After all, it's the court that should be outraged here - it's being fed misquoted law and asked to rule on it.

*yeah, yeah, irony noted that I'm the guy writing this on this board...

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:

1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion". with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.

2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.

3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.

I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.

Don't be snarky, but be blunt. Demolish him with the judge.

:hifive: Wanna cyber?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:

1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion". with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.

2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.

3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.

I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.

Don't be snarky, but be blunt. Demolish him with the judge.

"The Children’s motion, which was filed on X, contains facts coated in a thick, hyperbolic gloss and is littered with circular logic and argument. Yet, despite its length, the motion still somehow lacks any sort of backbone sturdied by applicable law or relevant, expert opinion."

Too much for an opening?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:

1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion". with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.

2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.

3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.

I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.

Don't be snarky, but be blunt. Demolish him with the judge.

"The Children’s motion, which was filed on X, contains facts coated in a thick, hyperbolic gloss and is littered with circular logic and argument. Yet, despite its length, the motion still somehow lacks any sort of backbone sturdied by applicable law or relevant, expert opinion."

Too much for an opening?

I don't like the word sturdied but other than that to be honest I've done similar with lawyers I like.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:

1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion". with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.

2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.

3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.

I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.

Don't be snarky, but be blunt. Demolish him with the judge.

"The Children’s motion, which was filed on X, contains facts coated in a thick, hyperbolic gloss and is littered with circular logic and argument. Yet, despite its length, the motion still somehow lacks any sort of backbone sturdied by applicable law or relevant, expert opinion."

Too much for an opening?

How about, "The Children's motion... lacks any basis in fact and fails to make any convincing arguments in its favor. Worse, it flatly mistates the law in numerous places, and always in ways that are meant to buttress moving party's chances of prevailing..."

And yes, underline "misstates the law".

Edited by T Bell
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm laughing and probably most of us are, but this is the very reason why people hate lawyers and the court system is such a mess. I am firm believer that nicities and platitudes and passive agreesive professionalism is a waste of time and resources. The sentence should read, "The movant has purposely altered the words and meaning of the statute in violation of the ehtical rules of the jursidiction; in short, the movant is lying."

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Then by way of emphasis, in the appropriate part of your brief create a two-column table so you can write out, side-by-side, his version of the statute and the correct version of the statute, bolding/underlining/otherwise highlighting where the language differs.

That's not snarky, that's just good substantive briefing and the court will appreciate the breakdown.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Then by way of emphasis, in the appropriate part of your brief create a two-column table so you can write out, side-by-side, his version of the statute and the correct version of the statute, bolding/underlining/otherwise highlighting where the language differs.

That's not snarky, that's just good substantive briefing and the court will appreciate the breakdown.

I'm laughing and probably most of us are, but this is the very reason why people hate lawyers and the court system is such a mess. I am firm believer that nicities and platitudes and passive agreesive professionalism is a waste of time and resources. The sentence should read, "The movant has purposely altered the words and meaning of the statute in violation of the ehtical rules of the jursidiction; in short, the movant is lying."

That's fine too. It's direct. I like plain language.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:

1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion". with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.

2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.

3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.

I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.

Don't be snarky, but be blunt. Demolish him with the judge.

"The Childrens motion, which was filed on X, contains facts coated in a thick, hyperbolic gloss and is littered with circular logic and argument. Yet, despite its length, the motion still somehow lacks any sort of backbone sturdied by applicable law or relevant, expert opinion."

Too much for an opening?

The motion is unsupported by the facts or the law, and clearly misstates and misquotes the applicable statute in an attempt to argue this untenable position.

Don't get flowery with your language. Hit them with a brick.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:

1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion". with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.

2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.

3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.

I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.

Don't be snarky, but be blunt. Demolish him with the judge.

"The Children’s motion, which was filed on X, contains facts coated in a thick, hyperbolic gloss and is littered with circular logic and argument. Yet, despite its length, the motion still somehow lacks any sort of backbone sturdied by applicable law or relevant, expert opinion."

Too much for an opening?

I hate this kind of legal writing. Hated it as a clerk, as did my judge, hated it as a litigator, especially when associates working for me gave me this kind of stuff, and now hate it when lawyers I hire write like this. Not to offend - cut the drama, its not a novel or a tv show. These sentences don't tell the judge anything useful, but should be the most informative sentences in your response. Say what you want to say without the crap - as Y23 proposed.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:

1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion". with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.

2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.

3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.

I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.

Don't be snarky, but be blunt. Demolish him with the judge.

"The Children’s motion, which was filed on X, contains facts coated in a thick, hyperbolic gloss and is littered with circular logic and argument. Yet, despite its length, the motion still somehow lacks any sort of backbone sturdied by applicable law or relevant, expert opinion."

Too much for an opening?

I hate this kind of legal writing. Hated it as a clerk, as did my judge, hated it as a litigator, especially when associates working for me gave me this kind of stuff, and now hate it when lawyers I hire write like this. Not to offend - cut the drama, its not a novel or a tv show. These sentences don't tell the judge anything useful, but should be the most informative sentences in your response. Say what you want to say without the crap - as Y23 proposed.

I agree completely.

There's a time for some snark. There's a time for a little rhetorical flourish. But when opposing counsel hangs himself with a piece of #### brief, the smart move is to go minimalist. If he's misrepresented the law, say so. Say it right out of the gate. "Party misrepresents the law of this State." If he's making up conclusions, say so. "Party's position is unsupported by the record." Think Hemingway, not David Foster Wallace.

EDIT. Err, or what Henry said.

Edited by Ramsay Hunt Experience
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:

1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion". with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.

2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.

3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.

I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.

Don't be snarky, but be blunt. Demolish him with the judge.

"The Children’s motion, which was filed on X, contains facts coated in a thick, hyperbolic gloss and is littered with circular logic and argument. Yet, despite its length, the motion still somehow lacks any sort of backbone sturdied by applicable law or relevant, expert opinion."

Too much for an opening?

I hate this kind of legal writing. Hated it as a clerk, as did my judge, hated it as a litigator, especially when associates working for me gave me this kind of stuff, and now hate it when lawyers I hire write like this. Not to offend - cut the drama, its not a novel or a tv show. These sentences don't tell the judge anything useful, but should be the most informative sentences in your response. Say what you want to say without the crap - as Y23 proposed.

I agree completely.

There's a time for some snark. There's a time for a little rhetorical flourish. But when opposing counsel hangs himself with a piece of #### brief, the smart move is to go minimalist. If he's misrepresented the law, say so. Say it right out of the gate. "Party misrepresents the law of this State." If he's making up conclusions, say so. "Party's position is unsupported by the record." Think Hemingway, not David Foster Wallace.

:goodposting:

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:

1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion". with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.

2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.

3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.

I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.

Don't be snarky, but be blunt. Demolish him with the judge.

"The Children’s motion, which was filed on X, contains facts coated in a thick, hyperbolic gloss and is littered with circular logic and argument. Yet, despite its length, the motion still somehow lacks any sort of backbone sturdied by applicable law or relevant, expert opinion."

Too much for an opening?

I hate this kind of legal writing. Hated it as a clerk, as did my judge, hated it as a litigator, especially when associates working for me gave me this kind of stuff, and now hate it when lawyers I hire write like this. Not to offend - cut the drama, its not a novel or a tv show. These sentences don't tell the judge anything useful, but should be the most informative sentences in your response. Say what you want to say without the crap - as Y23 proposed.

No offense taken. Appreciate the insight and will tone down the snark.

The tightrope I'm walking here is that our legal community is pretty small and, while I have no personal feelings towards this lawyer in one way or another, inevitably I'm going to have to work the same cases as him in the future. Generally, the local practice is to not hurl direct allegations of unethical conduct, so a lot of time lawyers will dance around it and make flowery, sarcastic suggestions. I imagine though a judge won't be impressed by my sarcasm.

ETA: I'll also admit that part of my motivation here is to express some of my displeasure for the overall course of this case because I think every actor is treating my client unfairly.

Edited by Zow
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:

1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion". with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.

2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.

3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.

I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.

Don't be snarky, but be blunt. Demolish him with the judge.

"The Children’s motion, which was filed on X, contains facts coated in a thick, hyperbolic gloss and is littered with circular logic and argument. Yet, despite its length, the motion still somehow lacks any sort of backbone sturdied by applicable law or relevant, expert opinion."

Too much for an opening?

I'm just a law student here but it seems like what you're saying in your brief is that the opposing attorney wrote a bad brief, but what you're saying in this thread is that he committed an ethical violation and intentionally used altered text in his quote of the law. That's a big difference.

Edited by njherdfan
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a motion filed in a Dependency (CPS case - I represent mom and state has moved for termination of parental rights) filed by the children's attorney requesting visits stop. Children's attorney is an older guy who I used to work with at the Public Defender's Office for a short period until he left to become a contract counsel. His motion includes the following:

1. Formatted in dead on, law-school IRAC format. Seriously the headers are "Issue," "Rule," "Analysis," and "Conclusion". with numbered random points and factual conclusions comprising the "Analysis" section.

2. In the "rule" statement it contains quoted language from a statute with key words omitted and replaced with others which totally change the meaning of the statute. Naturally, the manipulation to the language favors the position in the motion but there is no parenthetical explaining the change. With the correct words, the statute is likely entirely inapplicable and irrelevant to the motion. He cites no other law.

3. The position being taken by the attorney, who is merely the children's attorney (a stark distinction in my jurisdiction from a guardian ad litem), is likely unethical because it is outside the scope of his representation.

I prepared an incredibly blunt, "snarky" response, but am somewhat at a loss of what to do here. I have a feeling this guy's paralegal wrote the motion. An ethical complaint seems a bit extreme here, but I've never been so flabbergasted by a motion.

Don't be snarky, but be blunt. Demolish him with the judge.

"The Children’s motion, which was filed on X, contains facts coated in a thick, hyperbolic gloss and is littered with circular logic and argument. Yet, despite its length, the motion still somehow lacks any sort of backbone sturdied by applicable law or relevant, expert opinion."

Too much for an opening?

I hate this kind of legal writing. Hated it as a clerk, as did my judge, hated it as a litigator, especially when associates working for me gave me this kind of stuff, and now hate it when lawyers I hire write like this. Not to offend - cut the drama, its not a novel or a tv show. These sentences don't tell the judge anything useful, but should be the most informative sentences in your response. Say what you want to say without the crap - as Y23 proposed.

No offense taken. Appreciate the insight and will tone down the snark.

The tightrope I'm walking here is that our legal community is pretty small and, while I have no personal feelings towards this lawyer in one way or another, inevitably I'm going to have to work the same cases as him in the future. Generally, the local practice is to not hurl direct allegations of unethical conduct, so a lot of time lawyers will dance around it and make flowery, sarcastic suggestions. I imagine though a judge won't be impressed by my sarcasm.

Then we go back to the comment by TBell (which honestly was the best one in the entire subthread here) call the guy and ask him just WTF hs is doing and tell him what you have to do to do your job.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...