|
Man defending a deposition is super easy, especially when the other side proves that one of their claims is time-barred.
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 16:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:59 |
|
|
Hey guys. Getting my 6 month check in on the thread out of the way. Quick question for you all (particularly those of you who hire, especially those who hire in-house counsel) - I've been working in the communications department (on policy formation/research) of a major gubernatorial campaign for the past couple of months. The candidate happens to be a pretty moderate democrat. I'm applying for an in-house position with an insurance company. On my resume, do I a.)include the campaign position on my resume and use the candidate's name, b.)include the campaign position on my resume but do not include the candidate's name, or c.) don't mention the position at all on my resume. Keep in mind that this has been an unpaid position that I've been doing while not being otherwise gainfully employed over the past 2.5 months.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 16:37
|
|
|
stupid puma posted:Hey guys. Getting my 6 month check in on the thread out of the way. I've seen people putting the position and candidate's name. "Intern for John Q. Smith's Goobernatorial campaign."
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 17:16
|
|
|
I started some of the posts made by the guy with the fiestacat avatar in the legal questions thread and god I'm never doing defense work ever ever
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 18:19
|
|
|
terrorist ambulance posted:I started some of the posts made by the guy with the fiestacat avatar in the legal questions thread and god I'm never doing defense work ever ever is that bloke having his troubles in cook county i wonder
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 18:38
|
|
|
Lykourgos posted:is that bloke having his troubles in cook county i wonder He's trying to withdraw a plea on an open and shut drunk driving case. We've been trying to warn him that this will end in jail time and tears. Do what you will to him
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 18:41
|
|
|
JudicialRestraints posted:He's trying to withdraw a plea on an open and shut drunk driving case. We've been trying to warn him that this will end in jail time and tears. w.. wh... what why anyway I was just wondering what courthouse/room he's in. At any rate the prosecutors are a nice, friendly lot around here so I'm sure he'll be fine.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 18:49
|
|
|
Lykourgos posted:w.. wh... what He's getting in his prosecutors face and accusing him of all kinds of things. Fireworks will fly, fun for the whole family.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 19:15
|
|
|
JudicialRestraints posted:He's getting in his prosecutors face and accusing him of all kinds of things. Fireworks will fly, fun for the whole family. Cases like this are why I'm glad I no longer do criminal law. 1. Defendant trying to weasel his way out the plea deal he agreed to? Check. 2. Blaming his lawyer for helping him take the plea deal? Check. 3. Also, the police and DA are out to get him? Check. 4. So now he's apparently representing himself? Check. 5. But he managed to gently caress up his handwritten pro se motions? Check. From here its a short jump to filing grievances against everyone involved and suing his lawyer, the DA, and the judge in small claims court.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 19:38
|
|
|
GamingHyena posted:Cases like this are why I'm glad I no longer do criminal law. how is he going to sue the asa and the judge? also, number 3 is somehow true... why? because he posted that they were? I'm sure the police and the asa would post otherwise if they were the posting sort
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 19:57
|
|
|
GamingHyena posted:Cases like this are why I'm glad I no longer do criminal law. Yeah it's all that stuff but also more. Most people would just ask if what they were doing is a good idea, get told no, and go on to do their own thing in the face of opposition or reconsider. He instead posts these incredibly long posts all one after another arguing with internet people, most of which have more experience and knowledge than he does, about how they are wrong. There's a kind of intense and tireless contrariness in that that you only usually see in people who belong to a militia and buy gold because it'll hold its value in the coming apocalypse. He seems a little touched
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 20:10
|
|
|
terrorist ambulance posted:Yeah it's all that stuff but also more. Most people would just ask if what they were doing is a good idea, get told no, and go on to do their own thing in the face of opposition or reconsider. He instead posts these incredibly long posts all one after another arguing with internet people, most of which have more experience and knowledge than he does, about how they are wrong. There's a kind of intense and tireless contrariness in that that you only usually see in people who belong to a militia and buy gold because it'll hold its value in the coming apocalypse. He seems a little touched This guy should hire Dan Dargon's law firm. I hear they're good at arguing with various officials and creatively bypassing court orders.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 20:23
|
|
|
Adar posted:This guy should hire Dan Dargon's law firm. I hear they're good at arguing with various officials and creatively bypassing court orders. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 20:58
|
|
|
ahahahaha post the source for that please webb
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 20:59
|
|
|
http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/police-investigating-lawyer It's actually from the beginning of July, kind of disappointed I missed it the first time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 21:01
|
|
|
i'm the last person who should be making fun of a fat guy but honestly who told him that suit was a good idea, tan is not slimming!
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 21:07
|
|
|
Chakron posted:my frigates, your honor...
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 21:11
|
|
|
Lykourgos posted:how is he going to sue the asa and the judge? He'll end up trying to sue them personally. I know that doesn't make sense, but defendants like that do a whole host of things that don't make sense. At least you guys aren't dealing with people like the guy who argued that his whole trial was illegitimate because his name was spelled in capital letters on court documents, in a capital murder case.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 21:56
|
|
|
terrorist ambulance posted:I started some of the posts made by the guy with the fiestacat avatar in the legal questions thread and god I'm never doing defense work ever ever GamingHyena posted:Cases like this are why I'm glad I no longer do criminal law. I'll take an indigent criminal defendant over an insurance company defendant any day. e: Besides, clients like this and ^^the black death penalty guy using white separatist/tax dodger tactics^^ are problems for the judge, not counsel. Chakron posted:joat mon fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Aug 1, 2010 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 22:15
|
|
|
joat mon posted:It's not the weak chin or the bad suit or the obesity that makes him look like a slob. Although those certainly go a long way! I support physical fitness requirements as a licensing prerequisite.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 22:23
|
|
|
JudicialRestraints posted:He's getting in his prosecutors face and accusing him of all kinds of things. Fireworks will fly, fun for the whole family. I'm just worried we're not going to get the end of the saga. It's going to end on a cliffhanger, with him going into court and then we'll never know what happens next.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 23:01
|
|
|
Alaemon posted:I'm just worried we're not going to get the end of the saga. It's going to end on a cliffhanger, with him going into court and then we'll never know what happens next. There's no cliffhanger or suspense there. If he all of a sudden stops posting we know what happened; it's not like if it turned out well he'd be able to shut up about it
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 23:25
|
|
|
I was thinking about going to law school but I took the OP's advice and burned a pile of cash instead. Now I feel like I've had some of the experience, but I can't figure out how to round this out by simulating going to class with IzzyFnStradlin. Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 23:53
|
|
|
If anyone is willing to share a really cool resume template they like or take a look at mine, I'd really appreciate it. Gotta get it up for OCI in the next couple of days.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 23:55
|
|
|
nous_ posted:I was thinking about going to law school but I took the OP's advice and burned a pile of cash instead. Now I feel like I've had some of the experience, but I can't figure out how to round this out by simulating going to class with IzzyFnStradlin. Thoughts? Bring a laptop to a psych ward, play solitaire
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 00:16
|
|
|
Ainsley McTree posted:Bring a laptop to a psych ward, play solitaire Take a photo with your name on a post-it next to it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 02:33
|
|
|
Can someone tell me how does the American legal system function without an official language? I'm not one of the raargh lazy immigrants taking are jerbs idiots, but on a purely practical level it seems like a nightmare. In government organizations (legislatures, various agencies) there are presumbaly internal instructions on the language used, but those are obviously inapplicable to correspondence with outsiders. Any act involving informed consent or request of information becomes infinitely more complicated. More importantly, in criminal justice, on what basis can it be presumed that the summons to court someone receives in English will be understood? Even if there's some law on state or even federal level prescribing in which language legal proceedings are conducted, it would seem obvious the constitution is hierarchically far above this and five minutes with wikipedia (sorry) give a long list of possible problems. At least 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 10th, and 15th amendments would raise serious issues about use of English. At its most absurd, what's legally stopping some state legislature from writing laws in Mongolian and what stops a citizen claiming that having (the official version of) laws in English violates equal protection, suffrage, and the long suffering 10th amendment. Of course, it's simpler once the judicial process has already begun and a translator, if requested, is provided by the court. The problem comes before: when the traffic ticket is written in English, when your request to a government agency in Urdu doesn't receive a timely answer, when election ballots are written in English in Latin alphabet and not in Kyrgyz and Cyrillic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 11:28
|
|
|
Pretty sure that most courts have rules, and in these rules it specifies that the language used must be English.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 14:36
|
|
|
billion dollar bitch posted:Pretty sure that most courts have rules, and in these rules it specifies that the language used must be English. In California, things like the summons and subpoenas are printed in both English and Spanish. But other than that, the courts do have rules that their "ordinary business" is transacted in English.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 15:02
|
|
|
Hey guys, when sending my office your unsolicited resumes, please address it to someone in particular and include a cover letter so we at least know for which job you are begging.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 16:18
|
|
|
poofactory posted:Hey guys, when sending my office your unsolicited resumes, please address it to someone in particular and include a cover letter so we at least know for which job you are begging. should the photo of my dick be attached to the application package or faxed later with supplemental material?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 16:19
|
|
|
billion dollar bitch posted:Pretty sure that most courts have rules, and in these rules it specifies that the language used must be English. nudipedalia posted:In government organizations (legislatures, various agencies) there are presumbaly internal instructions on the language used, but those are obviously inapplicable to correspondence with outsiders. Obviously, there is some form of normative document, but on what basis is this power delegated to courts? Court regulations are inapplicable to third parties (people beginning a judicial process, witnesses) because they are by their nature internal documents. If language is decided on a state level, it's an unimaginable mess - how many state constitutions explicitly state the language of the proceedings and legislative acts or delegate the power to other bodies, like courts. Once again reductio ad absurdum: let's say Utah legislature decides to pass laws in reformed Egyptian inscribed on golden tablets and not recognize other states laws because they have not recieved adequate (Egyptian) notice of them. And all these seem to run afoul of the constitution in a number of ways. Is this one of those fuzzy common law piles of praxis that can be challenged at any time?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 16:19
|
|
|
poofactory posted:Hey guys, when sending my office your unsolicited resumes, please address it to someone in particular and include a cover letter so we at least know for which job you are begging. I've found that by doing this you can get as far as a personalized rejection notice. It's well worth the extra effort.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 16:30
|
|
|
JudicialRestraints posted:I've found that by doing this you can get as far as a personalized rejection notice. It's well worth the extra effort. No, it is going in the trash either way but at least it looks more professional. CmdrSmirnoff posted:should the photo of my dick be attached to the application package or faxed later with supplemental material? no one is interested in your dick, fag.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 16:52
|
|
|
What's the protocol for emailing firms to try to get interviews for 2L summer positions? Just resume + basic cover letter? Should the cover letter be within the email body or a separate PDF?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 16:57
|
|
|
jake1357 posted:What's the protocol for emailing firms to try to get interviews for 2L summer positions? Just resume + basic cover letter? Should the cover letter be within the email body or a separate PDF? As a side question, is a physical mailing better than e-mail to send unsolicited resumes/cover letters?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 17:14
|
|
|
Yojimbo Sancho posted:As a side question, is a physical mailing better than e-mail to send unsolicited resumes/cover letters? Based on no evidence whatsoever, I'll speculate that physical mail is better than e-mail, reason being that no one wants their inbox flooded with spam. (Your unsolicited resume is basically spam.) It's easier to filter physical mail than e-mail, so I think physical mail is less intrusive. Physical mail also shows that you put some nonzero amount of effort into applying for the position, but who knows how much that matters since your chances of being hired based on an unsolicited submission are slim to none anyway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 17:21
|
|
|
nudipedalia posted:Obviously, there is some form of normative document, but on what basis is this power delegated to courts? Court regulations are inapplicable to third parties (people beginning a judicial process, witnesses) because they are by their nature internal documents. If language is decided on a state level, it's an unimaginable mess - how many state constitutions explicitly state the language of the proceedings and legislative acts or delegate the power to other bodies, like courts. Once again reductio ad absurdum: let's say Utah legislature decides to pass laws in reformed Egyptian inscribed on golden tablets and not recognize other states laws because they have not recieved adequate (Egyptian) notice of them. What makes court regulations and other government procedures inapplicable to third parties? Not sure what the constitutional problems are. Due process probably requires translators for non-English speaking parties in some judicial and administrative proceedings (particularly criminal defendants). The right to vote might require ballots in other languages (and we do all of that). But it doesn't run afoul of the Constitution for the government to prefer English and to do its ordinary business in English.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 17:23
|
|
|
nudipedalia posted:Obviously, there is some form of normative document, but on what basis is this power delegated to courts? Court regulations are inapplicable to third parties (people beginning a judicial process, witnesses) because they are by their nature internal documents. If language is decided on a state level, it's an unimaginable mess - how many state constitutions explicitly state the language of the proceedings and legislative acts or delegate the power to other bodies, like courts. Once again reductio ad absurdum: let's say Utah legislature decides to pass laws in reformed Egyptian inscribed on golden tablets and not recognize other states laws because they have not recieved adequate (Egyptian) notice of them. Generally speaking, judges have the authority to regulate their courthouses and control the trial calendar; if you can't find it explicitly in the state constitution, it doesn't matter because there is federal and state case law. I don't see why court regulations are inapplicable to third parties; if some witness starts rolling around the floor screaming obscenities, he's still going to held in contempt. People will argue that the judge's methods impaired some fundamental right, and a balancing test will be performed to check if that was the case (it's not the case). Anyway, there are issues that crop up. I've never heard of briefs and the like being translated, but the Court does get translators in to help with the trial itself when needed. I have also saw some debate as to whether federal law required a hand-signer to be brought in on a certain trial (at the court's expense) to allow deaf spectators to understand the trial.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 18:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:59 |
|
|
quotison posted:What makes court regulations and other government procedures inapplicable to third parties? Are you seriously asking me to define the difference in applicability of internal and external regulations? No governmental body can claim a power that has not been explicitly granted to it by a properly constituted legislature. Traffic cops can't adjudicate constitutional questions, food stamp clerks can't declare war. I mean, at its simplest, it's the difference between requiring a weapons proficiency certification for cops and cops stopping people on the street with no reasonble suspicion and asking for their certificates whether they are carrying or not. For additional fun, replace cops with someone from Department of Transportation. Health and safety regulations for employees and customers, dispute resolution through HR or customer relations, "my instruction says we need this" vs "law doesn't require me to provide you with it". Do we need to revise the hierarchy of legislative acts with judicial principles up there, followed by constitution, all the way down to specific powers devolved to local agencies? Am I taking a too strict positivist approach due to my continental background? quote:Not sure what the constitutional problems are. Due process probably requires translators for non-English speaking parties in some judicial and administrative proceedings (particularly criminal defendants). The right to vote might require ballots in other languages (and we do all of that). But it doesn't run afoul of the Constitution for the government to prefer English and to do its ordinary business in English. Let's start with a cursory look at amendments: 1st - right to petition in what language?, 4th - warrant in what language?, 5th - due process in what language?; 6th - a pile of stuff starting with a traffic ticket and due notice of accusations in what loving language and on what basis; 15th - suffrage and de facto discrimination of speakers of X where X is any of Russian, Ebonics, Mandarin and some forgotten German dialect for Mennonites? Notice I'm not touching 10th with its federal powers and the interstate commerce nightmare. Why do you presume the primacy of English and on what basis do you define the stopping point in (quick and imprecise example) English - ASL - Braille - Spanish - Ukrainian - Pirahã - brainfuck continuum? e: Lykourgos posted:Generally speaking, judges have the authority to regulate their courthouses and control the trial calendar; if you can't find it explicitly in the state constitution, it doesn't matter because there is federal and state case law. I don't see why court regulations are inapplicable to third parties; if some witness starts rolling around the floor screaming obscenities, he's still going to held in contempt. I must have been unclear: a third party in my poor understanding is someone who is getting involved in court proceedings. Once a witness has entered the courtroom he is presumed to be in understanding of the rules governing it and provided a translator if he requires one, he is not a third person anymore. What's problematic is summoning him before he is involved, presuming he understands English in summons without first enquiring whether he needs a translator. Comedy option: judge decides to hold proceedings in Latin. Summoning him in English can't be done based of court regulations because he is not involved yet and thus is governed by the general body of laws and not specific court regulations. nudipedalia fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Aug 2, 2010 |
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 18:36
|
|