|
Pro bono would work well if, say, the government taxed everyone and set up funds for free legal services and paid lawyers to provide them. Of course then if you accepted LawAid or LawCare funds you would have to deal with every idiot in the legal questions megathread at $90/he so maybe that sucks actually.
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 14:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 18:56 |
|
|
Alexeythegreat posted:I'm in a good one, forunately, but whatever nightmarish stories you are referring to are true for ~90% of the Russian hospitals It was porn Alexey.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 14:25
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Pro bono would work well if, say, the government taxed everyone and set up funds for free legal services and paid lawyers to provide them. Of course then if you accepted LawAid or LawCare funds you would have to deal with every idiot in the legal questions megathread at $90/he so maybe that sucks actually. "I'm sorry, that's not an issue I can help you with. You may wish to consider consulting the state Civil Practice and Remedies code and Google." Cash 90 dollar check. I could literally do that 8 hours a day giving each person a 45-60min consult.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 14:27
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Pro bono would work well if, say, the government taxed everyone and set up funds for free legal services and paid lawyers to provide them. Of course then if you accepted LawAid or LawCare funds you would have to deal with every idiot in the legal questions megathread at $90/he so maybe that sucks actually. $90 per hour with zero overhead is a $172k/year job, assuming you take a month of unpaid vacation a year and work 40 hour weeks otherwise so, uh, that's a pretty good deal. You'd have to pay for your own benefits but w/e.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 15:01
|
|
|
I would gladly do my veteran's clinic work for $90/hr full time. I'm sure there is a fuckton of lawyers who would be pretty happy for a $90/hr job even if it was all contract work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 15:26
|
|
|
You would have zero difficulty staffing legal clinics nationwide if you were paying attorneys $90/hr. Hell, get a nationwide bar and just treat it like a residency. Reminder that entry level state attorney jobs in Florida and a lot of the rest of the country are starting between $39k-45k/year. Mr. Nice! fucked around with this message at 15:30 on Jul 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 15:28
|
|
|
Pro Bono for student loan credits.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 15:34
|
|
|
Roger_Mudd posted:Pro Bono for student loan credits. If people could do this no one would ever want for an attorney again even if you went 50 cents on the dollar for reasonable fees. There are lots of ways ensure the poor have representation. I think the real issue, though, is that legal services for the poor are in the same category as other services for the downtrodden, veterans, disabled persons, or any other maligned group. It's all lip service and no one in charge really gives a gently caress either way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 15:40
|
|
|
The problem is most new attorneys wouldn't be great at clinics. They haven't seen practical effects of law yet. We'd be better off treating it like a real residency. Lawyers who want to go work for whatever are free to do so. But if you're interested, your first 2 years can be done in a place like a legal aid, government, regulatory agency, public defender...prosecutor...etc. Government funds the spots for 2 years with a 50k then 60k salary. There'd never be a shortage of free lawyers for the poor. 2 years of training would make you way more hireable or able to solo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 15:50
|
|
|
No what would happen is you would have 200 “client consults” a day and LawCare would not approve any services as “legally necessary” so you would get the base rate of $1.14 per non-serviceable consult or whatever
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 15:52
|
|
|
Oh you would absolutely need supervising attorneys on staff, but that shouldn't be a problem either as there are plenty of senior attorneys looking for a nice cushy gig where they have little work to do other than oversight.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 15:52
|
|
|
.
Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 04:08 on Jul 13, 2021 |
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 16:06
|
|
|
We'll never have a nationwide lawyer licensing service so this doesn't do much benefit. Dropping CA, NY, and FL lawyers onto North Dakota oil fields isn't going to help anyone there that needs a ND lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 16:09
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:We'll never have a nationwide lawyer licensing service so this doesn't do much benefit. Dropping CA, NY, and FL lawyers onto North Dakota oil fields isn't going to help anyone there that needs a ND lawyer. just abolish ND and allow NY or CA to annex it as a colony
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 16:10
|
|
|
I'd say abolish all states and have a uniform codified law that covers the entire country instead of 50 independent systems with another completely independent and sometimes superior system on top that has 12 different regional varieties to boot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 16:12
|
|
|
You all must not field calls from people looking for a lawyer on a regular basis. The fact that there isn't a scientific, medical underpinning for any perceived legal problem makes it so different from like a government funded medical clinic as to be entirely un-analogous. Like, just today, "Hey, do you know anything about evictions?" "Yes, whats up?" "Well I was late on my rent, so they sent me a notice of eviction. Can I sue them?" **10 minutes of asking questions, explaining default under a contract, etc.** "So when they emailed and told me since I caught up on my rent that I'm not being evicted, I don't need to sue them?" That'll be $90. Also, Doctors don't have to rely on what people tell them about their test results. If someone says, "I have high blood pressure" the Doctor can check. If someone tells a lawyer, "The apartments told me since I paid my rent, I wasn't getting evicted." If they're lying (which they do a lot) or mistaken (which they are a lot) or the other side is going to lie about it in Court (which they do a lot) then that eviction hearing on Wednesday is going to be funny.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 16:38
|
|
|
It's a pipe dream blarzgh. Let us have our fantasies of an actual training process.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 17:00
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:You all must not field calls from people looking for a lawyer on a regular basis. 100% of my legal work over the last year and half has been people walking in with stories similar to that, and you're correct that most do not need a lawyer. However, although it might be easier to directly measure a person's heartrate than it is to call their landlord and talk to them, it's not really onerously difficult to make a phone call to sort out the truth of the matter. Had someone's car get towed because the property manager spent zero time bothering to find out who owned the car. When the veteran asked the PM what happened to her car, she told her about towing it and said she'd get it returned. Four days later the car was towed back and the landlord was demanding $360 for towing and storage fees. Although she was less than happy to talk to me on the phone (I've never spoken to a happy apartment manager), in the end the property owner ate the storage fees and the resident paid just for towing one way as a compromise because she didn't actually report the vehicle to management like her lease requires. Another one is an eviction where we won for the vet and now we're going to collect attorney fees under statute and put them into the clinic coffers (and maybe pay me for my hour of research on the subject). Hot Dog Day #91 posted:It's a pipe dream blarzgh. Let us have our fantasies of an actual training process. Mostly this, though. Any of the systems we described would fail hilariously for any number of reasons, but, man, we're orphaning children to raucous applause from half the country. We need a little something to distract us from life.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 17:16
|
|
|
Obviously we need a national mandate for people to purchase legal insurance from insurance companies who will in turn pay attorneys to represent whoever is in their network when they come in to make a claim (after satisfying their yearly deductible) I'm actually running into issue with this for a friend. He appears to have a fairly straightforward security deposit claim and the county allows for suing for attorneys fees. But he can't find a lawyer who'll talk to him for less than 300 up front and earns too much working at a gas station to get under the income limit for the free places. It's over like 100 bucks that he really needs and I don't know how he'd afford the filing fee or service costs up front. Just sucks all around mastershakeman fucked around with this message at 17:21 on Jul 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 17:17
|
|
|
Who the gently caress would do document review over a legit PD gig? Idiot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 17:21
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Who the gently caress would do document review over a legit PD gig? Toona the Cat posted:This job starts off great. You feel like you're making a difference. You even do a few suppression motions that someone else argues, and they win. They thank you for your help. You then get certified to do hearings under supervision. You don't win all that often, but you get thanked once in awhile. Then, you realize, after the 100th or so motion for bond reduction for a guy accused of ejaculating in his 5 year old step-child's mouth that maybe this isn't the line of work you want to do. Smart. And honorable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
I cringe when I think about the probono/clinic work I did in 3L/articling/first year call before I got a full time job. I didn't know what the gently caress I was doing and probably actively made things worse for the people I "helped".
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
Lol: https://mobile.twitter.com/Popehat/status/1015316669957148672
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 20:51
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Who the gently caress would do document review over a legit PD gig? Sounds like the type who would mortgage his house for law school then break up with his second wife over his "study partner" all while having a kid to take care of, probably.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 22:03
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:You absolute loving moron People with JDs are the walking epitome of “Don’t you know there’s no difference between good things and bad things?”
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
Was Toona the guy who said something like he loved the part of being a PD where you schmooze with the prosecutors to try to get a good deal? Because I loving hate those kind of defense attorneys. Give me what I want or we're going to trial bitch. I lost a property damage trial yesterday where the guy had a horrible record. I went and talked to him afterward and he was actually in a good mood. I asked him why, and he said he never had anyone take any of his cases to trial before. I was way more pissed about losing than him, he was just happy someone stood up for him for once. Tokelau All Star fucked around with this message at 06:16 on Jul 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 06:09
|
|
|
.
Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 04:08 on Jul 13, 2021 |
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 06:15
|
|
|
It's an old tweet and maybe been posted here but I found it amusing: https://twitter.com/madler9000/status/798203707594637312
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 01:31
|
|
|
Tokelau All Star posted:Was Toona the guy who said something like he loved the part of being a PD where you schmooze with the prosecutors to try to get a good deal? Because I loving hate those kind of defense attorneys. Give me what I want or we're going to trial bitch. Yeah. Same. "Take the fair offer I've given you, or we're going to trial, bitch." (Caveat... I'll let them hold out until after suppression hearings, motions in limine, porter hearings, etc. are done, and won't retract a fair offer just because we won all the pretrial work. It was fair then, it's fair now. If we lose, the deal may get better, obviously) From the other side of the fence, I can say at least in our office, schmoozing is just obnoxious and not likely to get you anywhere. Someone kissing my rear end is not going to get them a better deal. We have a pretty good working relationship with the local PDs. They're straight shooters. They don't jerk us around. So if we can work something out that's fair in light of all the factors, great. but I wouldn't call what they do "schmoozing". It's called not being a shithead and being a reasonably competent professional. (Admittedly, my relationship with the PDs is even stronger than the already good working relationship because I defend all the ineffective assistance of counsel claims brought against them in habeas.) On the flip side, someone who has been nothing but an rear end in a top hat and has repeatedly shown that we can't trust anything they say gets a much different experience. There's one firm I will not have any discussions with, oral or written, outside of either a pretrial with a judge present, or in open court on the record. I am not alone in this policy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 17:13
|
|
|
Wait what is the consequence for a PD losing an ineffective assistance of counsel claim? Do they have to cough up the cost of that defense back to the PD system or something? Just had for their reputation?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 17:44
|
|
|
It depends? being forced to reimburse the cost won't happen. but their could be malpractice suits/grievances... and reputation damage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 17:48
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:On the flip side, someone who has been nothing but an rear end in a top hat and has repeatedly shown that we can't trust anything they say gets a much different experience. There's one firm I will not have any discussions with, oral or written, outside of either a pretrial with a judge present, or in open court on the record. I am not alone in this policy. OK, you've mentioned this rogue criminal defense firm like 3 times now. Let's get the juicy, non-doxxing details about these guys.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 19:17
|
|
|
Kawasaki Nun posted:Wait what is the consequence for a PD losing an ineffective assistance of counsel claim? Do they have to cough up the cost of that defense back to the PD system or something? Just had for their reputation? The former defense attorney doesn't lose so much as the convicted man wins. If there are consequences on the defense attorney they either come through the internal process at the office, which is going to be different everywhere (and will usually depend more on office politics than what actually happened), or through a bar complaint or a civil action. However the fact pattern where you could actually get civil damages out of an ineffective defense attorney would have to be pretty outrageous and typically ineffective attorneys don't have the deep pockets to go after to make it worth it anyway. Normally when you win an IAC you don't actually care much about what happens to the former defense attorney because your next step is turning whatever remedy you got into what you actually want for your client. If you're at the point of IAC for a homicide you're typically so long past the trial that often times they're already retired or dead or disbarred for other shortcomings anyway. I've seen judges refer matters to the bar just out of disgust a few times.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 20:11
|
|
|
Many jurisdictions bar malpractice claims in criminal litigation if the plaintiff cannot prove actual innocence. So providing ineffective assistance won't lead to a civil malpractice action unless if the client can additionally prove actual innocence. I actually think that's a good idea in light of the basic trial by surprise that is criminal law these days, but only if it coincided with courts taking a look at counsel's conduct with an actually critical eye in habeas proceedings. But lol at everything I just said.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 21:52
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:OK, you've mentioned this rogue criminal defense firm like 3 times now. Let's get the juicy, non-doxxing details about these guys. Yeah, I'm really curious how you burn bridges so badly that nobody will even have written discussions with you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
.
Phil Moscowitz fucked around with this message at 06:11 on Aug 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
I once had a lawyer in Brazos County send me an email claiming that the only reason I'd filed counterclaims after we rejected their dumbass settlement offer was "because you and your client can hear the roar of the Summary Judgment Freight Train a comin round the bend." and I'm not joking and he wasn't either. We served him with discovery questions that would make his client start admitting poo poo to the lawyer, and they non-suited with prejudice. At a deposition, I asked an associate from the firm if that sort of letter was 'normal' and the poor, beaten down kid was like, "yeah, one time he sent a response letter to a settlement offer that was just 20 lines, block text justified of 'hahahahahahahahahaha'..."
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2018 20:04
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:Yeah, I'm really curious how you burn bridges so badly that nobody will even have written discussions with you. on a professional level they habitually misrepresent discussions, and it's a pain in the dick to have to go "may I have a brief recess to pull up the e-mails" every time it happens. Which is often. Additionally, they are such belligerent shits to work with that making them do things on the record is one of the most effective ways to force them to not be complete assholes. In front of judges they almost behave like rational humans. On a professional courtesy level, one of their favorite habeas claims is to allege prosecutorial misconduct with zero evidence to back it up. For example (non doxxable abridged version). "Insert claim here." Transcript refutes claim. "Transcript is not accurate." Pulls up FTR audio record of proceedings. It is accurate. "The prosecutors colluded with the court staff to edit the audio. We have an expert who will prove this." Expert has no idea how FTR works. If she wants to play that game, she will do so with no help from me. On a personal level...bitch tried to accuse me of fraudulent misrepresentations to the court. (Last year I signed a document certification on July 1 (a Friday). My secretary didn't get it into the mail pickup box. The fourth of July happened. People took monday off. It was not postmarked until the 6th. FRAUDULENT CERTIFICATION! WILLFUL AND DELIBERATE MISREPRESENTATION!!!!!! ORAL ARGUMENT DEMANDED. By the way.. one of the things she asked for in her supervisory order was that we hand serve all documents in the future.... she uses a PO Box. Bitch can suck dynamite as far as I am concerned. I will not lift a finger to make her life easier.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2018 21:18
|
|
|
I gave a presentation on my group to the summer associates and most were yawning and actively checking their phone. What I’m saying is, it’s the children that are wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 18:56 |
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:on a professional level they habitually misrepresent discussions, and it's a pain in the dick to have to go "may I have a brief recess to pull up the e-mails" every time it happens. Which is often. Additionally, they are such belligerent shits to work with that making them do things on the record is one of the most effective ways to force them to not be complete assholes. In front of judges they almost behave like rational humans. That sounds oddly familiar. Oslo crim defence firms pull this poo poo all the time, we call it «defender theater» because all of it is for the benefit of their client. Crim defence clients are usually not bright, and can't tell that the whole performance tanks their chances in court, pisses off the judge and the prosecutor while never ever working in any measurable way. Of course, it looks very blustery and effective, which when the client inevitably goes away, gets them loads more clients through reputation. It's cynical, it's unethical and it's loving annoying. But it gets them clients. I have never seen a PD pull this poo poo, nor have I ever done so myself (obviously). Sometimes it backfires though. Disbarrment usually. Sometimes a court ban (ban from appearing at local court). There are some recent... examples.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2018 21:49
|
|
