What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Lawyer Thread Where We Stop Ruining Other Threads (5 Viewers)

Oh my God, I just had the greatest idea. You know those old exhibits that you accumulate around the office and have no idea what to do with?

I can attach them all to this discovery and get rid of them.

 
Oh my God, I just had the greatest idea. You know those old exhibits that you accumulate around the office and have no idea what to do with?

I can attach them all to this discovery and get rid of them.
I was just looking around my office thinking what a great way this would be to clean out a bunch of useless junk. You could send him my paralegal.

 
Oh my God, I just had the greatest idea. You know those old exhibits that you accumulate around the office and have no idea what to do with?

I can attach them all to this discovery and get rid of them.
I was just looking around my office thinking what a great way this would be to clean out a bunch of useless junk. You could send him my paralegal.
I have a 375 lb section of chaser wire sitting on the floor of my file room.

 
Just received greatest discovery requests of all time:

Request for production No. 1: Produce all documents or tangible things that support the allegations of your Petition.

Request for production No. 2: Produce all documents or tangible things that do not support the allegations of your Petition.

I'm dying over here.
Do they have to pay copying costs?
Response to No. 2: Objection, vague and overly broad. Subject to said objection and without waiving same, attached please find a copy of Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats and a photograph of a dead muskrat.
Plaintiff reserves the right to seasonably amend this response after sufficient discovery of the contents of icanhascheezburger.com.

 
Just received greatest discovery requests of all time:

Request for production No. 1: Produce all documents or tangible things that support the allegations of your Petition.

Request for production No. 2: Produce all documents or tangible things that do not support the allegations of your Petition.

I'm dying over here.
The second one is a bit far-reaching, but a picture of a dead muskrat is pretty clearly responsive.

 
Just received greatest discovery requests of all time:

Request for production No. 1: Produce all documents or tangible things that support the allegations of your Petition.

Request for production No. 2: Produce all documents or tangible things that do not support the allegations of your Petition.

I'm dying over here.
The second one is a bit far-reaching, but a picture of a dead muskrat is pretty clearly responsive.
Hell, produce the dead muskrat.

 
http://www.pressherald.com/news/Opening_delayed_in_trial_of_defendant_ordered_to_represent_himself_.html

Wondering what you guys thought of this... (full story link above)

Joshua Nisbet, a criminal defendant described as so uncooperative with his court-appointed attorneys that a judge stripped him of his constitutional right to a lawyer, was polite, deferential and self-effacing Monday as he began representing himself on the first day of his trial on a robbery charge.


Nisbet, who turns 37 on Tuesday, drew some chuckles from jurors and apologized to a witness he questioned on the first day of his trial in the Cumberland County Courthouse.

The defendant, dressed in a pink-striped shirt and pink-patterned tie, stood in sharp contrast to the obstinate, “paranoid” man described by Justice Thomas Warren when he issued his order – unprecedented in Maine – that Nisbet had “forfeited his right to counsel.”
Seems hard to believe that this judge can bar you from having counsel. As a layman I would think someone could use that on appeal.
It's certainly a potential issue. In my state though a decent amount of deference would be given to the trial court judge in determining a constructive waiver of counsel. The judge did a smart thing by appointing advisory counsel (I'd note though as a previous public defender there isn't anything much worse than being made advisory counsel) so he's probably okay.

I will say though that in my experience judges really do tend to try to exhaust all other remedies before finding a constructive/implied waiver of counsel. Usually the judge will just deny the defendant's request for new case (after like the second or third time) and then deny the attorney's request to get off it too. That usually forces the defendant to be somewhat cooperative or at least allows the lawyer to defend the case without distraction from the client.

This situation reminds me of one of the crazier things I've seen as a lawyer. Back when I was at the pub def's office one of my co-workers was doing a sentencing on a pretty difficult defendant. Defendant was being sentenced on a stip 10 year sentence. Defendant, for a variety of reasons, decides to essentially filibuster the hearing during his time to speak upon sentencing. Ranted about fascism, read some Marx, etc. Finally when judge shut him down the defendant could visibly be seen weighing his options to further disrupt the hearing. Defendant, who was already in high security and had a guard immediately behind him, decided the "only" person he could reasonably get at was my co-worker. So he attacked him. Got a punch in and my poor co-worker (imagine your pro typical pub def from Kentucky who is in his 50s and chain smokes) couldn't defend himself. Guards did a nice job stopping it quickly, but the lawyer's arm got caught up in the defendant's chains and his arm got yanked out of the socket. Naturally, the hearing had to be continued.

The judge, just wanting to get the defendant to DOC as soon as possible, set the hearing for the next day. Our office, anticipating a change of counsel, filed the motion and had conflict counsel at the ready to argue the issue of whether the judge lawfully stopped the defendant's "filibuster." To everyone's surprise, the judge denied the attorney's motion to withdraw, reasoning that it was a stip sentence, the defendant was incapacitated (judge found implied waiver of physical presence and had defendant on video). In viewing probably the most ethical thing I've ever seen I watched my co-worker argue on behalf of the defendant, the same defendant who had put him in the hospital the day before, for twenty minutes.

As a result of this the incident actually spark a change in state law to make it a felony to assault a court appointed attorney (previously assault was only enhanced to a felony if the assault was on a judge or prosecutor).

 
Just received greatest discovery requests of all time:

Request for production No. 1: Produce all documents or tangible things that support the allegations of your Petition.

Request for production No. 2: Produce all documents or tangible things that do not support the allegations of your Petition.

I'm dying over here.
Just curious, do you have to label which is which?

 
Can the NBA legally make Donald Sterling sell?

Figure one of you might have a decent understanding of this...
The Commish just explained the process. He can't. It's up to the owners by 3/4 vote.
You know if Sterling wants to go out in a blaze of glory if necessary he could make this really ugly.
I can't watch the press conference, but ESPN says he's banned for life, AND he has to pay a $2,500,000 fine. Am I missing something, or why would he pay that fine to the league he's now banned from?

 
njherdfan said:
Yankee23Fan said:
Christo said:
fantasycurse42 said:
Can the NBA legally make Donald Sterling sell?

Figure one of you might have a decent understanding of this...
The Commish just explained the process. He can't. It's up to the owners by 3/4 vote.
You know if Sterling wants to go out in a blaze of glory if necessary he could make this really ugly.
I can't watch the press conference, but ESPN says he's banned for life, AND he has to pay a $2,500,000 fine. Am I missing something, or why would he pay that fine to the league he's now banned from?
He still owns the team. One of the hooks to cause a forfeiture of a franchise is not meeting your financial obligations to the league.

 
Ok, who here is a Cali attorney. The Clippers are owned by a corporation - how hard is it to find the ownership of that corp and who are the shareholders and officers?

 
Ok, who here is a Cali attorney. The Clippers are owned by a corporation - how hard is it to find the ownership of that corp and who are the shareholders and officers?
Doubt they'd put the ownership in a California corp...Delaware or Nevada more likely

 
Yankee23Fan said:
Christo said:
fantasycurse42 said:
Can the NBA legally make Donald Sterling sell?

Figure one of you might have a decent understanding of this...
The Commish just explained the process. He can't. It's up to the owners by 3/4 vote.
You know if Sterling wants to go out in a blaze of glory if necessary he could make this really ugly.
That wasn't the question, counselor.

 
If I were an NBA owner I wouldn't vote to boot him. Look he is ### and a repugnant one at that. But this is still America and he has the right to be a repugnant ###. I side with Cuban here. Fine him and do whatever else but taking his team for words that were spoken is, IMO, a very dangerous precedent to set within the league.

 
Ditka Butkus said:
Christo said:
fantasycurse42 said:
Can the NBA legally make Donald Sterling sell?

Figure one of you might have a decent understanding of this...
The Commish just explained the process. He can't. It's up to the owners by 3/4 vote.
Seems like that would be tough to get. More than likely some of them may say something stupid in the future and they know it.
Cuban has already said as much. Don't know if he'll stick to his guns though.

 
Yankee23Fan said:
Christo said:
fantasycurse42 said:
Can the NBA legally make Donald Sterling sell?

Figure one of you might have a decent understanding of this...
The Commish just explained the process. He can't. It's up to the owners by 3/4 vote.
You know if Sterling wants to go out in a blaze of glory if necessary he could make this really ugly.
That wasn't the question, counselor.
I know but my look into this is more entertaining.

Can the NBA force him? It's probably not clear that 3/4 can. But they can make him so uncomfortable that if he had any humanity he would have to sell.

The better story though is how his corporation is held. I doubt he is the sole 100% owner of that corporation. Which, if I am right, means that the NBA going after him and in the process throughout all of this the coporation loses money, the minority owners have the ability to do what the NBA might not have in the end, and that is to get rid of him - one way or the other.

My blaze of glory comment was with particularity to what he knows about other owners and especially the prior commissioner. You know full well this guy knows where some bodies are burried. Like I said, he could go out in a blaze of glory.

 
If I'm an owner, I'm calling a meeting with my players to discuss this and find out how they feel about it before I cast a vote.

 
Weird, looks like the corporation is not active in CA; according to the Sec of State website it is "suspended".

 
Weird, looks like the corporation is not active in CA; according to the Sec of State website it is "suspended".
Eh we get that all the time. You don't pay your $75.00 annual report fee to keep the address current and you are technically suspended.

Although that is pretty funny.

 
Weird, looks like the corporation is not active in CA; according to the Sec of State website it is "suspended".
Eh we get that all the time. You don't pay your $75.00 annual report fee to keep the address current and you are technically suspended.

Although that is pretty funny.
Yes, I know. I've had paralegals spending a lot of time getting companies back in compliance in the past. Just surprised something so high-profile (and presumably with armies of paralegals to keep such things active) would let that happen.

 
What's the name of the corporate owner? I thought it was LAC Basketball Something-Or-Other. But LAC BASKETBALL CLUB, INC. is active.

That appears to be the right one. The entity's address is also the Clippers' ticket sales office.

ETA: And the agent for service of process is Richard Roeser, the team president.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What's the name of the corporate owner? I thought it was LAC Basketball Something-Or-Other. But LAC BASKETBALL CLUB, INC. is active.

That appears to be the right one. The entity's address is also the Clippers' ticket sales office.

ETA: And the agent for service of process is Richard Roeser, the team president.
Hmmm, I had found the name Los Angeles Clippers, Inc. as the owner, which is the one that was not active. Perhaps it was transferred at some point or one is just a sub of the other.

ETA: Found that here: http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=34101998

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, I can't deal with the NBA thread anymore. I think the members and/or shareholders of the corp are going to be true key here. Even if Sterling fights the league he will lose an internal lawsuit in the end if his actions are devaluing the corp and its assets.

 
So I filed that motion to change judge for cause and avowed I believed that the trial judge, whom I have appeared in front of for hundreds of hearings, is biased towards the state. Filed at 4:56 on the last day.

I went straight to the gym and worked myself into delirium. I'm now about to commence drinking heavily.

 
It is incorporated in California.
It's a closely-held corporation. Not going to be easy to find any current info on owners. You should be able to find the incorporator and the agent for service of process, but otherwise :shrug:

Here's a partial list of some management employees: http://www.insideview.com/directory/los-angeles-clippers-inc
Looks like Sterling wrote that page himself.

lol I was gonna post the same thing.

 
So I filed that motion to change judge for cause and avowed I believed that the trial judge, whom I have appeared in front of for hundreds of hearings, is biased towards the state. Filed at 4:56 on the last day.

I went straight to the gym and worked myself into delirium. I'm now about to commence drinking heavily.
Oof
 
So I filed that motion to change judge for cause and avowed I believed that the trial judge, whom I have appeared in front of for hundreds of hearings, is biased towards the state. Filed at 4:56 on the last day.

I went straight to the gym and worked myself into delirium. I'm now about to commence drinking heavily.
Sounds stressful. But it also sounds like it had to be done. Enjoy the hangover.

 
So I filed that motion to change judge for cause and avowed I believed that the trial judge, whom I have appeared in front of for hundreds of hearings, is biased towards the state. Filed at 4:56 on the last day.

I went straight to the gym and worked myself into delirium. I'm now about to commence drinking heavily.
Oof
Yeah. IIRC you practice in a rural jurisdiction too, so you know the potential implications. This particular judge was a prosecutor in the area for like 10 years, a JOP for ten years, and was appointed to the Superior Court bench (one of eight) this past year. Off the bench he's a pretty nice guy.

As far as I know I have a pretty good reputation amongst the judges. Just incredibly nervous that this may rock the proverbial boat.

 
So I filed that motion to change judge for cause and avowed I believed that the trial judge, whom I have appeared in front of for hundreds of hearings, is biased towards the state. Filed at 4:56 on the last day.

I went straight to the gym and worked myself into delirium. I'm now about to commence drinking heavily.
Oof
Yeah. IIRC you practice in a rural jurisdiction too, so you know the potential implications. This particular judge was a prosecutor in the area for like 10 years, a JOP for ten years, and was appointed to the Superior Court bench (one of eight) this past year. Off the bench he's a pretty nice guy. As far as I know I have a pretty good reputation amongst the judges. Just incredibly nervous that this may rock the proverbial boat.
Yeah... not sure I'd file that with precisely that terminology.I did request that a federal judge recuse herself from a case, and she did, based on previously representing the State on similar litigation.

 
But she disclosed that she had a potential conflict and wanted off the case anyway because she was new and it was a procedural nightmare.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top