Lawyer & Law School Megathread #12: Started Out Barrister, Ended Up Barista

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Business, Finance, and Careers > Lawyer & Law School Megathread #12: Started Out Barrister, Ended Up Barista

«‹›1550 »

Soothing Vapors: Mar 26, 2006; Associate Justice Lena "Kegels" Dunham: An uncool thought to have: 'is that guy walking in the dark behind me a rapist? Never mind, he's Asian.

Phil Moscowitz posted:

Just a little flair in a demand letter sent by my client (a lawyer) to the lawyer for an opposing party in the case in which I represent my client, concerning some tangential poo poo that I unfortunately can't get into because it's hilarious.

You can practically see the smug smile on his fat face when he wrote that

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.

my legal archenemy is the same. he's on the other side of the state so I don't have to deal with him more than 2-3 times a year, but I got sick of the cycle of "Ray misrepresents what SV said in an e-mail" -> "SV produces the email and proves Ray is a lying dickhole" -> "Ray claims SV misunderstood what he meant when he was lying out his rear end." I just don't email him or speak to him outside the presence of a judge anymore

# ? Jul 9, 2018 21:52

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 5, 2024 07:33

HiddenReplaced: Apr 21, 2007; Yeah...
it's wanking time.

Soothing Vapors posted:

HEY BABY

also lol whoever you added on linkedin isn't me, I never delete anyone so that it looks like I'm popular. I add random-rear end bot accounts if they friend me

Sorry - I was wrong. I was searching the wrong name. We're still Linkedin buddies. I like your new firm pic. The hint of gray is very refined.

# ? Jul 9, 2018 22:00

blarzgh: Apr 14, 2009; SNITCHIN' RANDY; Grimey Drawer

I had an attorney claim our designation of experts (for fees) was untimely because they received it on January 16, but it was due on January 15. In Texas, btw, the rule is first it has to be untimely, and second that allowing the testimony would constitute 'unfair surprise' and this was 3 months before trial and they had all our bills already. But goddamn, she was gonna die on that hill.

In my letter to the Court I wrote, "Although counsel is correct that their office received the designation on the 16th, and it appears they did send their designation on the 15th, per (Rule of Civ Pro I don't remember) when the date for serving a responsive document falls on a federal holiday, the date for service moves to the next business day. Because my office was celebrating the birth and legacy of America's greatest Civil Rights leader, Dr. Martin Luther King on the 15th, we did not serve the response until the day it was due, on the 16th."

# ? Jul 9, 2018 22:15

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

It's like none of you people have gotten to the point where you have a court reporter on every call with opposing counsel before.

# ? Jul 9, 2018 22:43

ActusRhesus: Sep 18, 2007; "Perhaps the fact the defendant had to be dragged out of the courtroom while declaring 'Death to you all, a Jihad on the court' may have had something to do with the revocation of his bond. That or calling the judge a bald-headed cock-sucker. Either way."

In one of my last filings with them I dropped a footnote in the certification �the undersigned hereby certifies that at 3:15 pm in the presence of [redacted supervising state�s attorney] the above documents were provided to administrative support personnel for processing. However as this is a Friday it is possible the documents will not be received by the post office until the following Monday. This is in no way an attempt to perpetuate a fraud on the court. The respondent preemptively consents to a three day extension for the filing of the petitioner�s reply.� The judges loved it. They hate her too.

# ? Jul 9, 2018 23:56

Hoshi: Jan 20, 2013

This all makes me want to be a lawyer

# ? Jul 10, 2018 00:15

Mr. Nice!: Oct 13, 2005; bone shaking.
soul baking.

no, don't!

# ? Jul 10, 2018 00:16

Hoshi: Jan 20, 2013

I won't I'm just making long term plans to be an island actuary and make friends with island lawyers to live vicariously through them

# ? Jul 10, 2018 00:38

Vox Nihili: May 28, 2008

Hoshi posted:

I won't I'm just making long term plans to be an island actuary and make friends with island lawyers to live vicariously through them

Learn to "think like a lawyer" to maximize the speed at which your brain switches back and forth between cruel, bullying derision (human interaction) and exhausted, defeated drudgery (all other work). Your superiors will provide many hands-on examples. Soon you won't be able to do all the other thoughts at all!

# ? Jul 10, 2018 01:50

FrozenVent: May 1, 2009; The Boeing 737-200QC is the undisputed workhorse of the skies.

I�m glad I didn�t go to law school because now I get to walk in the counsel's office with the most cockamamie hairbrained scheme, drop some random legal trivia bomb and walk away to enjoy my weekend while he�s stuck researching it.

I also get to say poo poo in meetings like �we disagree with your point of view and we believe our position to be defensible in court� while he turns shades of purple.

# ? Jul 10, 2018 02:42

sullat: Jan 9, 2012

FrozenVent posted:

I�m glad I didn�t go to law school because now I get to walk in the counsel's office with the most cockamamie hairbrained scheme, drop some random legal trivia bomb and walk away to enjoy my weekend while he�s stuck researching it.

I also get to say poo poo in meetings like �we disagree with your point of view and we believe our position to be defensible in court� while he turns shades of purple.

You're doing God's work, son. Maybe not the Judeo-Christian one, probably one of the other ones. Coyote, maybe.

# ? Jul 10, 2018 02:51

EwokEntourage: Jun 10, 2008; BREYER: Actually, Antonin, you got it backwards. See, a power bottom is actually generating all the dissents by doing most of the work.

SCALIA: Stephen, I've heard that speed has something to do with it.

BREYER: Speed has everything to do with it.

blarzgh posted:

I had an attorney claim our designation of experts (for fees) was untimely because they received it on January 16, but it was due on January 15. In Texas, btw, the rule is first it has to be untimely, and second that allowing the testimony would constitute 'unfair surprise' and this was 3 months before trial and they had all our bills already. But goddamn, she was gonna die on that hill.

In my letter to the Court I wrote, "Although counsel is correct that their office received the designation on the 16th, and it appears they did send their designation on the 15th, per (Rule of Civ Pro I don't remember) when the date for serving a responsive document falls on a federal holiday, the date for service moves to the next business day. Because my office was celebrating the birth and legacy of America's greatest Civil Rights leader, Dr. Martin Luther King on the 15th, we did not serve the response until the day it was due, on the 16th."

We had one where the responsive date fell on a Sunday, and then that Monday was a holiday, so we responded on Tuesday. OC argued it only rolled one day, regardless if that next day was. A holiday

# ? Jul 10, 2018 02:57

Phil Moscowitz: Feb 19, 2007; If blood be the price of admiralty,
Lord God, we ha' paid in full!

EwokEntourage posted:

We had one where the responsive date fell on a Sunday, and then that Monday was a holiday, so we responded on Tuesday. OC argued it only rolled one day, regardless if that next day was. A holiday

How is this exact scenario not explicitly defined in your written code of civil procedure or whatever you have?

# ? Jul 10, 2018 03:21

EwokEntourage: Jun 10, 2008; BREYER: Actually, Antonin, you got it backwards. See, a power bottom is actually generating all the dissents by doing most of the work.

SCALIA: Stephen, I've heard that speed has something to do with it.

BREYER: Speed has everything to do with it.

Phil Moscowitz posted:

How is this exact scenario not explicitly defined in your written code of civil procedure or whatever you have?

It is. Rolls to next non weekend / non holiday like every other court

Turns out an attorney willing to tell obvious lies to a judge can also misrepresent the TRCP

# ? Jul 10, 2018 03:28

echopapa: Jun 2, 2005; El Presidente smiles upon this thread.

I once worked with a lawyer who referred to an opposing party�s argument in a brief and added a footnote:

�See, generally, Harry Frankfurt, On Bullshit (2005)�

# ? Jul 10, 2018 04:05

blarzgh: Apr 14, 2009; SNITCHIN' RANDY; Grimey Drawer

EwokEntourage posted:

Turns out an attorney willing to tell obvious lies to a judge can also misrepresent the TRCP

Yeah, this one always gets me. Like do they think no one will bother to look it up? Does it ever work? My favorite are the old, lazy attorneys who tell the judge, "the law is clear that [here's what I want it to be] and I've got a supreme Court case right on point. Not with me, but it's there, I have it. For real"

# ? Jul 10, 2018 05:48

ActusRhesus: Sep 18, 2007; "Perhaps the fact the defendant had to be dragged out of the courtroom while declaring 'Death to you all, a Jihad on the court' may have had something to do with the revocation of his bond. That or calling the judge a bald-headed cock-sucker. Either way."

blarzgh posted:

Yeah, this one always gets me. Like do they think no one will bother to look it up? Does it ever work? My favorite are the old, lazy attorneys who tell the judge, "the law is clear that [here's what I want it to be] and I've got a supreme Court case right on point. Not with me, but it's there, I have it. For real"

My favorite is still, in open court:

Attorney: [Incorrect statement of the law.]
Me: There was a subsequent case that narrowed down the parameters of that. And is almost completely on point here.
Attorney: Oh yeah? What?
Me: [case name].
Attorney: [misrepresentation of the facts of that case and argument about how it doesn't apply.]
Me: Really? Because the court seemed to adopt the facts as stated in the state's brief...which I wrote.

# ? Jul 10, 2018 12:42

Bulky Bartokomous: Nov 3, 2006; In Mypos, only the strong survive.

Yay, I�m going to be a JAG. I hope I can fly F-14s like the TV show. :toot:

# ? Jul 10, 2018 13:21

Pook Good Mook: Aug 6, 2013; ENFORCE THE UNITED STATES DRESS CODE AT ALL COSTS!

This message paid for by the Men's Wearhouse& Jos A Bank Lobbying Group

Bulky Bartokomous posted:

Yay, I’m going to be a JAG. I hope I can fly F-14s like the TV show.

Congrats! Have fun when you get posted as a SAUSA and help deport children.

But seriously, congrats and good luck.

# ? Jul 10, 2018 13:42

joat mon: Oct 15, 2009; I am the master of my lamp;
I am the captain of my tub.

Bulky Bartokomous posted:

Yay, I’m going to be a JAG. I hope I can fly F-14s like the TV show.

Cool. You'll have fun and learn a lot of different law. What branch?

# ? Jul 10, 2018 14:13

Bulky Bartokomous: Nov 3, 2006; In Mypos, only the strong survive.

Thanks! Army Reserves. I�m prior service so I�m sure that helped a lot.

Bulky Bartokomous fucked around with this message at 16:16 on Jul 10, 2018

# ? Jul 10, 2018 14:23

ActusRhesus: Sep 18, 2007; "Perhaps the fact the defendant had to be dragged out of the courtroom while declaring 'Death to you all, a Jihad on the court' may have had something to do with the revocation of his bond. That or calling the judge a bald-headed cock-sucker. Either way."

Bulky Bartokomous posted:

Yay, I�m going to be a JAG. I hope I can fly F-14s like the TV show.

I�m so sorry.

# ? Jul 10, 2018 15:41

Soothing Vapors: Mar 26, 2006; Associate Justice Lena "Kegels" Dunham: An uncool thought to have: 'is that guy walking in the dark behind me a rapist? Never mind, he's Asian.

HiddenReplaced posted:

Sorry - I was wrong. I was searching the wrong name. We're still Linkedin buddies. I like your new firm pic. The hint of gray is very refined.

You may be having a stroke, friend

Pook Good Mook posted:

Congrats! Have fun when you get posted as a SAUSA and help deport children.

Isn't this the main appeal of the job for the sociopaths who go into JAG

# ? Jul 10, 2018 15:48

ActusRhesus: Sep 18, 2007; "Perhaps the fact the defendant had to be dragged out of the courtroom while declaring 'Death to you all, a Jihad on the court' may have had something to do with the revocation of his bond. That or calling the judge a bald-headed cock-sucker. Either way."

Heh. Speak of the devil. Another case of �Actus Rhesus said blah blah blah�... except I didn�t. From my favorite form. Somehow �my previous standing non-objection policy on continuances no longer applies. Please notify me on all future requests. They will be addressed on a case by case basis� is the same as �counsel has a standing policy to object to anything from this firm.�

Also. Whaaaaaaaaaaa. I can�t do this on time because look how many cases I have. Whaaaaaaaa. He says to the woman with a caseload literally three times that size. Plus two homicide cases.

Isn�t there a professional responsibility rule about not taking on more cases than you can handle?

# ? Jul 10, 2018 15:50

Bulky Bartokomous: Nov 3, 2006; In Mypos, only the strong survive.

Soothing Vapors posted:

Isn't this the main appeal of the job for the sociopaths who go into JAG

I can only speak for myself but it was the main selling point for me.

# ? Jul 10, 2018 15:53

Toona the Cat: Jun 9, 2004; The Greatest

Doc review is the most boring easy money ever. Free coffee, too.

# ? Jul 10, 2018 15:58

mikeraskol: May 3, 2006; Oh yeah. I was killing you.

Toona the Cat posted:

Doc review is the most boring easy money ever. Free coffee, too.

# ? Jul 10, 2018 16:05

TheMadMilkman: Dec 10, 2007

Toona the Cat posted:

Doc review is the most boring easy money ever. Free coffee, too.

Just wait until you get assigned the emails from the junior executive with a midget porn fetish.

I only got the marketing secretary's inbox full of wedding plans. The other guy in the room had all the fun.

# ? Jul 10, 2018 16:42

Look Sir Droids: Jan 27, 2015; The tracks go off in this direction.

TheMadMilkman posted:

Just wait until you get assigned the emails from the junior executive with a midget porn fetish.

[x] Responsive
[x] Hot

# ? Jul 10, 2018 16:48

Vox Nihili: May 28, 2008

Toona the Cat posted:

Doc review is the most boring easy money ever. Free coffee, too.

What are they paying you?

# ? Jul 10, 2018 16:50

Toona the Cat: Jun 9, 2004; The Greatest

Vox Nihili posted:

What are they paying you?

Between hours and wages, I�m making 4x what I did at the PD, and that�s without overtime.

# ? Jul 10, 2018 16:52

Look Sir Droids: Jan 27, 2015; The tracks go off in this direction.

Why are they paying an unlicensed law grad to do doc review when there are plenty of licensed people that will eat that poo poo up? Are you below Tier 1 review?

# ? Jul 10, 2018 16:54

Toona the Cat: Jun 9, 2004; The Greatest

First Level Review

# ? Jul 10, 2018 17:56

blarzgh: Apr 14, 2009; SNITCHIN' RANDY; Grimey Drawer

I love you

# ? Jul 10, 2018 20:01

Hoshi: Jan 20, 2013

blarzgh posted:

I love you

I'd love you if you explained what that means

# ? Jul 10, 2018 20:06

yronic heroism: Oct 31, 2008

ActusRhesus posted:

My favorite is still, in open court:

Attorney: [Incorrect statement of the law.]
Me: There was a subsequent case that narrowed down the parameters of that. And is almost completely on point here.
Attorney: Oh yeah? What?
Me: [case name].
Attorney: [misrepresentation of the facts of that case and argument about how it doesn't apply.]
Me: Really? Because the court seemed to adopt the facts as stated in the state's brief...which I wrote.

I was almost inclined to add �then everyone clapped and the judge gave me a high five.� But what normally is poo poo that didn�t happen will happen surprisingly often when attorneys are involved.

# ? Jul 10, 2018 20:12

yronic heroism: Oct 31, 2008

blarzgh posted:

Yeah, this one always gets me. Like do they think no one will bother to look it up? Does it ever work? My favorite are the old, lazy attorneys who tell the judge, "the law is clear that [here's what I want it to be] and I've got a supreme Court case right on point. Not with me, but it's there, I have it. For real"

A lot of the true dinosaurs either really believe what they�re saying or are at least masters at convincing/fooling themselves.

# ? Jul 10, 2018 20:14

ActusRhesus: Sep 18, 2007; "Perhaps the fact the defendant had to be dragged out of the courtroom while declaring 'Death to you all, a Jihad on the court' may have had something to do with the revocation of his bond. That or calling the judge a bald-headed cock-sucker. Either way."

Hoshi posted:

I'd love you if you explained what that means

Have you truly never learned to love? Wait... you�re a lawyer. Of course you haven�t.

yronic heroism posted:

I was almost inclined to add “then everyone clapped and the judge gave me a high five.” But what normally is poo poo that didn’t happen will happen surprisingly often when attorneys are involved.

Nah. Nothing that over the top. I actually like that lawyer. He�s not a bad guy. Reasonable to work with. Just always really off on his law. I suspect he�s a �headnotes� reader.

# ? Jul 10, 2018 20:15

Hoshi: Jan 20, 2013

ActusRhesus posted:

Have you truly never learned to love? Wait... you’re a lawyer. Of course you haven’t.

Nah. Nothing that over the top. I actually like that lawyer. He’s not a bad guy. Reasonable to work with. Just always really off on his law. I suspect he’s a “headnotes” reader.

Actuarially I'm just here to learn how not to protect my profession

# ? Jul 10, 2018 20:17

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 5, 2024 07:33

Nonexistence: Jan 6, 2014

yronic heroism posted:

A lot of the true dinosaurs either really believe what they’re saying or are at least masters at convincing/fooling themselves.

It's always surprising to me how many attorneys have to actually convince themselves they're right. If one side isn't bullshitting there's usually an honest open question as to the law or a critical fact that reasonable minds could disagree on, but rather than just say "oh ok I'll just paint this in the light most favorable to my client because that's my job," some attorneys honestly must convince themselves that they are objectively right and any other position is obviously wrong, and I'm not talking about just grandstanding to others like that's the case. Like just play the hand you're dealt, there's no need for the cognitive dissonance that your pair of 7s is a royal flush.

# ? Jul 10, 2018 20:42

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Business, Finance, and Careers > Lawyer & Law School Megathread #12: Started Out Barrister, Ended Up Barista

«‹›1550 »