|
Taco maker in the morning, lawyer in the afternoon.
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 18:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 20:17 |
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Kinda wanna hire Mr. NICE now. Yeah I think the guy might be a competent lawyer because he explained that poo poo way better than I would have.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 18:24
|
|
|
Also, that recording is hilarious and I would have loving died. On the spot. Luckily that wouldn't have happened here, the appeal would just have been denied after not getting remedied sufficiently the first time and he'd have never seen the courthouse with it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 18:35
|
|
|
Can't believe this modern-day Van Buren/Jefferson Davis hasn't been posted. https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...m=.a4c0ec674781 quote:
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:Can't believe this modern-day Van Buren/Jefferson Davis hasn't been posted. Edit: I really hope bama lawyer's clients had no valid claim. Edit2: Ignoring everything else that makes him a clear poo poo stain, this still got a "hell yeah" from me quote:Pressed to elaborate, Woodard said: “Just because I represent a pervert doesn’t mean I support perversion. I represent murderers, drug dealers and perverts. Miraculously, I’m not one of them. If you know any, send them my way — only the rich ones.” nm fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Jul 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 18:59
|
|
|
See this is what happens when Revenge of the Nerds metastasizes in to a world view ethos.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 19:01
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Dang. Go Navy, then. In the mid 90s the SpCMs at Lejune ran about 45% unauthorized absences, 40% hot urinalysises and 15% everything else. Probably a combination of A. Marine culture is a little different. They’d court-martial a ham sandwich for not having enough mustard. B. Post 9/11 fighting 2 wars commands don’t want to waste the time or money. As an SJA my advice was generally “do you think this person deserves no poo poo jail time and/or a federal conviction, or do you just want them gone?” If the view was not “yes they deserve brig time and a criminal record” we went for admin boards.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 19:36
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:Can't believe this modern-day Van Buren/Jefferson Davis hasn't been posted. Linguistically clever, morally repugnant. An attorney, in other words.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
it's like all my sexual fantasies about Phil Mouskewitz were brought to life horrible, shambling life
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 19:45
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:As an SJA my advice was generally “do you think this person deserves no poo poo jail time and/or a federal conviction, or do you just want them gone?” If the view was not “yes they deserve brig time and a criminal record” we went for admin boards. hosed up that a non-lawyer gets to call the shots imo. What’s even the point of being a minister of justice if you still have to look like you’re listening intently to a client?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
Eh. The boss usually followed my advice. But that’s basically the argument for removing certain cases from the military justice system all together.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 23:04
|
|
|
A person I loathe with the fire of a thousand suns (as does pretty much everyone) has just been disclosed as an “expert.” Literally salivating.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 23:34
|
|
|
Quick poll: When Opposing Counsel gets fired for cause, should new counsel from the same firm get the benefit of an unopposed continuance or should the answer be “tough luck, you are successor to whatever the last guy hosed up deal w/it.”
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 23:40
|
|
|
.
Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 04:06 on Jul 13, 2021 |
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 23:45
|
|
|
He's gonna get it from the judge of they fired the guy from the firm.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 23:47
|
|
|
I finally listened to this and wow. This is magical.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 00:23
|
|
|
It needs to be a rule of civ pro that an unopposed motion for continuance should always be granted within the Supreme Court's guidelines for case length
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 00:37
|
|
|
I never game deadlines so I'm shocked when others do, or when people think it's the winning strategy. I'm not trying to room anyone's life with bad settings and I expect the same courtesy. I usually get it though? Maybe it's because I'm extremely not healthy so I get slack?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 01:43
|
|
|
What grinds my gears is just the firm made the call to fire the guy when they did, they should arrange coverage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 01:58
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:I never game deadlines so I'm shocked when others do, or when people think it's the winning strategy. I'm not trying to room anyone's life with bad settings and I expect the same courtesy. In crim law you work with the same attorneys over and over and over so you have everything to lose "gaming" wins that way because the next time you need something the opposition is less likely to work with you. The only time timing thing anyone raises a stink over is if you've got an expert scheduled for a date you can't move, or "discovery" as a reason for continuing has been abused and the judge should hear why poo poo is getting pushed for the third time. Most of the time the judge is going to put their foot down before the other attorney will. Especially if the defendant is in jail.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 02:53
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:What grinds my gears is just the firm made the call to fire the guy when they did, they should arrange coverage. "For cause" typically means they did something blatantly illegal and need to be gone NOW. You can't really do an orderly transition when the guy was caught embezzling funds or assaulting a coworker.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 03:19
|
|
|
This dude is going to work at basically the epicenter of big law in my city. I don't have the heart to tell him the horrible truth...
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 06:54
|
|
|
Sab0921 posted:This dude is going to work at basically the epicenter of big law in my city. I don't have the heart to tell him the horrible truth... I can't watch the video so what if child bad 
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 07:01
|
|
|
Hoshi posted:I can't watch the video so what if child bad The video is about toddler aged children representing themselves in deportation proceedings. I just can't tell him that he sold his soul to big law....he will not have, be encouraged to or really given the opportunity to help these kids - not when sig page packets need to go out tomorrow - the fuckin asylum pro bono poo poo better wait
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 07:10
|
|
|
Sab0921 posted:The video is about toddler aged children representing themselves in deportation proceedings. Eh. Biglaw loves to have their associates do that kind of poo poo (up to a point). Makes them look good, lets the partners feel like they have souls, and gets them into the yearly “this firm has good pro bono!” writeup. Especially lit associates, since it’s the only way they’re getting stand up experience any time soon. He’ll probably get a chance to do that kind of thing... for 50-100 of his 2500 billable hours.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 08:38
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Quick poll: When Opposing Counsel gets fired for cause, should new counsel from the same firm get the benefit of an unopposed continuance or should the answer be “tough luck, you are successor to whatever the last guy hosed up deal w/it.” Agree with pook. The habeas attorneys have really high turnover so I get this call a lot. There are some things I will say “tough poo poo” to (request to amend a petition for the fifth time a month before trial on a 2014 docket number case) but “hey. I just got this file dumped on me. Help?” No need to be an rear end. There is one firm I oppose everything on principle.... but they worked really hard to earn that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 12:31
|
|
|
Kalman posted:Eh. Biglaw loves to have their associates do that kind of poo poo (up to a point). Makes them look good, lets the partners feel like they have souls, and gets them into the yearly “this firm has good pro bono!” writeup. Especially lit associates, since it’s the only way they’re getting stand up experience any time soon. We get 20 - that 20 better not interfere with billable work either.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 13:21
|
|
|
Florida bar rules strongly encourage every lawyer perform at least 20 hours/year or donate $375 to a legal aid fund. You can carry over excess pro bono up to 3 years
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 14:17
|
|
|
Lol strongly
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 14:47
|
|
|
I was terrible at pro bono work and stopped doing it the moment I qualified (in UK we do 2 years on half pay as a trainee first, which is like being a first second year associate with less cash but no law school debt). I remember sniggering inappropriately when doing civic centre work for a guy who had gone bald and wanted to sue the company that sold him lovely hair restoration product (snake oil). I feel bad about that now. OTOH I did rewrite and unfuck a lovely franchising contract for a Somali immigrant who wanted to start up a kwik-copy printing and reprographics business so she could be financially independent of her abusive husband. That felt good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 14:50
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Agree with pook. The habeas attorneys have really high turnover so I get this call a lot. There are some things I will say “tough poo poo” to (request to amend a petition for the fifth time a month before trial on a 2014 docket number case) but “hey. I just got this file dumped on me. Help?” No need to be an rear end. There is one firm I oppose everything on principle.... but they worked really hard to earn that. Fair enough. Konstantin posted:"For cause" typically means they did something blatantly illegal and need to be gone NOW. You can't really do an orderly transition when the guy was caught embezzling funds or assaulting a coworker. I get that, but part of me says that’s on the managing partners for a bad hire and I want to see partners canceling their golf commitments to get their own hands dirty (assuming a non-complex case, which this is). Arguably a dickish position but I feel they should accept a certain amount of pain along with their associates. OTOH that will never happen so the good thing to do is be nice to the yronic heroism fucked around with this message at 15:38 on Jul 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 15:27
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:Lol strongly There’s zero enforcement mechanism behind it if you don’t. You are required to report donated hours/money once annually even if you did nothing, though. So you can say gently caress pro bono work, but you have to tell the bar you did zero hours that year and couldn’t be assed to donate $375 instead.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 18:52
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Fair enough. I'm confused why you think denying an extension will make the partner cancel their golf commitment. It'll just make the associate stay up all night and get double bitched at by the partner.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 18:55
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:There’s zero enforcement mechanism behind it if you don’t. You are required to report donated hours/money once annually even if you did nothing, though. So you can say gently caress pro bono work, but you have to tell the bar you did zero hours that year and couldn’t be assed to donate $375 instead. Yeah, Tennessee does that too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 19:17
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:I'm confused why you think denying an extension will make the partner cancel their golf commitment. It'll just make the associate stay up all night and get double bitched at by the partner. I get that, hence “otoh”
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Incorporating by reference para 1-x where x is the paragraph before the first claim would have been fine. It's blanket "everything before this point is realleged" that the 11th circuit doesn't like, and there are a long string of cases including the one I pointed out that say specifically "do not do that because it's treated as incorporating previous claims into subsequent ones." It's a minor procedural quibble, but literally changing the first sentence of each claim to exactly what you typed instead of the blanket phrase would have been acceptable. Re-alleging every single paragraph is SOP for every complaint I've read. (Not in the Eleventh Circuit, so it doesn't really matter. Just one of those little "wait, you call your clerk's office a 'Prothonotary?'" moments.) One of my pet peeves is that under our court rules, you have three options in a responsive pleading: admit, deny, or deny for lack of information or belief. Most importantly anything not denied is admitted. 98% of the answers I read respond with "neither admit nor deny but leave plaintiffs to their strictest proofs." Which if we are actually applying the rules is an admission. I'd like to see cases get dismissed en masse until someone puts that phrase out of its misery, but there's a reason research attorneys aren't judges.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 07:07
|
|
|
Alaemon posted:One of my pet peeves is that under our court rules, you have three options in a responsive pleading: admit, deny, or deny for lack of information or belief. Most importantly anything not denied is admitted. Texas has general denials. 1 page that says "nope". It's awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 14:53
|
|
|
Roger_Mudd posted:Texas has general denials. 1 page that says "nope". It's awesome. this is basically the only good part of texas civil procedure
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 14:58
|
|
|
Has anybody dealt with producing emails but having to redact something from one of the attachments? Is that possible without doing the production in print?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 16:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 20:17 |
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:Has anybody dealt with producing emails but having to redact something from one of the attachments? Is that possible without doing the production in print? I thought basically every doc review database had that ability. Each attachment is a separate image that can be redacted and you're not producing the raw files.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 16:21
|
|