|
Mr. Nice! posted:Waiting on a court ordered phone call from OC that was supposed to happen 2 hours ago. Please just loving settle so I can move on with my life. Dusted...
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 19:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 12:53 |
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:be warned, no one who goes to Fish's cabin ever returns That is a scurrilous and slanderous accusation. People return, both eventually and metaphorically. Hieronymous Alloy posted:It's a bit of a meta-joke about the forums, actually. That's pretty interesting. I have a whole bunch of cabinetry.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:That is a scurrilous and slanderous accusation. People return, both eventually and metaphorically. For the heads, yeah?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 19:10
|
|
|
Kawasaki Nun posted:For the heads, yeah? All of the skulls get mounted on the wall, actually.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 19:12
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:That is a scurrilous and slanderous accusation. People return, both eventually and metaphorically. It's like the walking with Jesus poem, except the tracks are in the snow, not sand, and you're being carried to a peat bog, not the beach.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 19:22
|
|
|
disjoe posted:I am in fact drafting a multistate mortgage right now and none of this poo poo makes any sense even to an attorney. My state requires an attorney handle all real estate closings  They generally justify their fees by arranging to have a title search done, but I've seen cases where they somehow managed to blow it. Everyone in my state is functionally 400 years old, though. Well (subtracts 1860 from 2019) 159 years old. I don't do real estate law though. I was mostly thinking of the recent "Am I in a HOA?" discussion in the "legal questions" thread.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 19:26
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:Do US states have land registers? We’ve been all registry in the UK since before I qualified in the dim and distant early 2000s. We have something similar. Each State is broken down into Counties. Each county has a "Clerk" who's official job is to keep all vital records, birth certificates, death certificates, marriage records, etc. and also Land Records. So there is an office of "Deed Records" in every county thats maintained and managed by the "County Clerk." Maintained just means they keep the records in order (mostly electronic these days.) Any asswipe can go in and file anything they want as long as they pay the filing fee. There is no administrative review of what gets filed. Therefore, any disputes have to go to regular Court to get resolved - there is no in-house staff or administrative process.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 20:20
|
|
|
Family Court Dad, Esq. https://twitter.com/bradheath/status/1151559612610613248
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 20:37
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:Family Court Dad, Esq. I just read the 7 page opinion and woof. It ends with the judge saying “you have 14 days to show cause why you’re not paying the defenses legal fees. Also we reported you to your state bar and are openly questioning your fitness to practice law.”
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 20:57
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:My state requires an attorney handle all real estate closings Nah that makes sense. I work in an oil and gas context so our title work is usually done by land men. I think in commercial non-O&G contexts the attorneys outsource the title search process to Fidelity or some poo poo. blarzgh posted:We have something similar. Each State is broken down into Counties. Each county has a "Clerk" who's official job is to keep all vital records, birth certificates, death certificates, marriage records, etc. and also Land Records. So there is an office of "Deed Records" in every county thats maintained and managed by the "County Clerk." Maintained just means they keep the records in order (mostly electronic these days.) Any asswipe can go in and file anything they want as long as they pay the filing fee. Well, any asswipe can go in and file anything they want as long as they pay the filing fee plus comply with whatever dumbass rules the clerk's office feels like enforcing that particular day. You'd be amazed at how many different rejections you can get from the same set of rules and the same form of documents.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 21:06
|
|
|
woof! (this is in response to the dumbass who thought he could soft-appeal his custody loss to federal loving court by suing the child psychologist)
blarzgh fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Jul 17, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 21:11
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:I just read the 7 page opinion and woof. It ends with the judge saying “you have 14 days to show cause why you’re not paying the defenses legal fees. Also we reported you to your state bar and are openly questioning your fitness to practice law.” Yeah it’s a doozy. Also they were like “wtf why are you trying to do this as a John Doe”
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 21:14
|
|
|
i looked the guy up and the appeal of the order taking his kid away from him is replete with statements that he lied to the court about the record and he got held in contempt by the trial court, they're not big fans of him either he escaped criminal contempt in the trial court for lying to the trial court because the lie was so bizarre and pointless the court couldn't find the necessary intent to obstruct justice
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 21:25
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:i looked the guy up and the appeal of the order taking his kid away from him is replete with statements that he lied to the court about the record and he got held in contempt by the trial court, they're not big fans of him either What was the lie?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:What was the lie? he brazenly lied about the name of a therapist he started taking his kids to was (from the decision it basically sounds like he was trying to get his kids to lie to the therapist to manufacture abuse allegations) he testified for like 20 minutes about it being guy X and lots of stuff about guy X's therapy sessions. then the first thing on cross is "here's an email saying the therapist is lady Y. what the gently caress" and then he starts hemming and hawing and saying guy X is in charge and he was just talking about guy X because he's the point of contact but actually the kids never saw guy X. the court decision basically is "you obviously lied but i have no loving idea why so i can't find any attempt to obstruct justice"
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 21:40
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:he brazenly lied about the name of a therapist he started taking his kids to was (from the decision it basically sounds like he was trying to get his kids to lie to the therapist to manufacture abuse allegations) Boy, this guys just not great at lawyering— trial level, appellate level... who wants to keep an eye out for his certiorari
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 21:43
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:Yeah it’s a doozy. Also they were like “wtf why are you trying to do this as a John Doe” That was some cold poo poo. The appellate judges sua sponte changed the case from john and jane doe vs doctor to him vs doctor while telling him that he was not just wrong for suing in their name, but he also failed to follow proper procedure by not using the kids initials instead of fictitious names. In my legal practice life, OC finally got back with me. We’re still marching to trial. This is a losing case for his client, but yet we inch closer forward with each day. At this point I’m just trying to save his client’s money because I really don’t want to have to travel across state to try this case.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 22:28
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:he brazenly lied about the name of a therapist he started taking his kids to was (from the decision it basically sounds like he was trying to get his kids to lie to the therapist to manufacture abuse allegations) Holy lol, the judges in my county would have eviscerated him for that and probably find him in contempt. He got out lucky and then tried the federal stunt. Amazing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 22:29
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:Family Court Dad, Esq. Is a state ever a person under any statute?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 22:39
|
|
|
Munin posted:Is a state ever a person under any statute? Yes. To give one really quick example: ARIZ. REV. STAT. §1-215 posted:§1-215. Definitions. In the statutes and laws of this state, unless the context otherwise requires:
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 23:03
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:That was some cold poo poo. The appellate judges sua sponte changed the case from john and jane doe vs doctor to him vs doctor while telling him that he was not just wrong for suing in their name, but he also failed to follow proper procedure by not using the kids initials instead of fictitious names. This is something I've pushed courts on actually. Different courts in my state have different confidentiality rules, some just anonymize to initials which is not sufficient, and importantly in cases that involve parents and children, anonymizing the children but not the parents is just a token gesture, not real anonymity protection. "Minor Child of [Parent's Full Legal Name] is a sex abuse victim" is not really accomplishing anything. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2019 23:08
|
|
|
for anyone that has read OPs and still somehow wants to go to law school: Someone in my former class just leaked a creepy excel spreadsheet that was basically dossiers kept on other students by the Kaplan reps judging how "popular" "well liked" and a bunch of other factors and criteria arbitrary kept on students to figure out how to sell them the program harder have fun 
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 00:00
|
|
|
Kimsemus posted:for anyone that has read OPs and still somehow wants to go to law school: Eh, that's not much different from what Facebook, Google, and Something Awful are doing to us.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 02:43
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:This is something I've pushed courts on actually. Different courts in my state have different confidentiality rules, some just anonymize to initials which is not sufficient, and importantly in cases that involve parents and children, anonymizing the children but not the parents is just a token gesture, not real anonymity protection. "Minor Child of [Parent's Full Legal Name] is a sex abuse victim" is not really accomplishing anything. Mass is pretty good about this-- in cases involving abuse, everyone is initials. In parental rights termination cases, everybody gets a pseudonym as necessary, starting up top with the kid-- they're always "Adoption of (pseudonym)". Sex offender cases are ID'd by the internal number that the board uses. All the stuff you'd expect to be anonymized, is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 02:51
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:Do US states have land registers? We’ve been all registry in the UK since before I qualified in the dim and distant early 2000s. Usually in states with Torrens systems - 20% have some form of it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 07:28
|
|
|
sullat posted:Eh, that's not much different from what Facebook, Google, and Something Awful are doing to us. Something Awfuls spreadsheet only has one line and it says "Username: Lowtax; Spine: Broken"
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 09:00
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:We have something similar. Each State is broken down into Counties. Each county has a "Clerk" who's official job is to keep all vital records, birth certificates, death certificates, marriage records, etc. and also Land Records. So there is an office of "Deed Records" in every county thats maintained and managed by the "County Clerk." Maintained just means they keep the records in order (mostly electronic these days.) Any asswipe can go in and file anything they want as long as they pay the filing fee. In PA at least the Recorder of Deeds reviews all filing and can throw them out for not being correct Same with the register of wills and Prothonotary
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 12:51
|
|
|
Talking about Family Law Court Dad, Esq. again this morning had me think of something. I'm sure you all recall the fraudster lawyer I spoke of before that was trying to hitch his ride onto a multi-million dollar tobacco verdict. During the fee slapfight between scammer guy and current counsel, the current counsel submitted the client's bar complaint against former lovely counsel. In it, former counsel was accused of fabricating errata sheets and getting an incompetent dying man to sign them and give false testimony on camera. Said testimony was used as a part of the jury trial. Tobacco co. has no re-opened the case seeking relief from the massive judgment because the plaintiff lied in their case-in-chief or they lied under oath in the bar complaint. One or the other is necessarily true, and it's going to sink the entire thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 12:55
|
|
|
Jesus, loving up so badly you get a tobacco company off the hook has to be up there in the list of stuff that sends you the Bad Place.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 14:45
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:Family Court Dad, Esq. jesus christ that opinion is 7 pages of that dude being chaos dunked into the next century edit: christ even the pacer docket is hilarious R. 16 Motion filed by Appellee Mary K. Gardner to extend time to file appellee brief. R. 17 Order issued GRANTING motion to extend time to file appellee's brief. R. 18 Filed Response in Opposition by Appellants Jane Doe and John Doe to Dr. Gardner's Motion for Extension of Time to File a Brief. dude wrote a 5 page motion arguing against a routine appellate extension of time based on the insane theory that the woman he sued should not be permitted to file anything because she lacked standing to do so, and filed it after the court had granted the extension. I love this man and want to be his best friend. i really need the oral argument recording asap Soothing Vapors fucked around with this message at 15:09 on Jul 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 15:02
|
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:i really need the oral argument recording asap http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/sound/2019/cm.18-2550.18-2550_02_21_2019.mp3
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 15:12
|
|
|
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/sound/2019/cm.18-2550.18-2550_02_21_2019.mp3 he makes it roughly 60 seconds into his argument before Easterbrook starts slowly and methodically dissecting him efb
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 15:13
|
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/sound/2019/cm.18-2550.18-2550_02_21_2019.mp3 he doesn't even make it into his argument lawl "we would have to disagree with the supreme court to allow this sort of a case"
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 15:16
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:he doesn't even make it into his argument lawl yeah lol I should have said he makes it roughly 60 seconds into his meandering, pointless preamble before getting annihilated
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 15:16
|
|
|
lol easterbrook just loses it at the fifteen minute mark and announces "WE ARE NOT GOING TO OVERRULE THE SUPREME COURT" tells the guy that his time is up and to get the gently caress out, and then tells the other side that "we don't need an extensive argument from you" the other attorney correctly reads the room and spends literally twenty seconds basically thanking the court for their time and saying he doesn't want to waste any more of it and rests on his briefs evilweasel fucked around with this message at 15:32 on Jul 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 15:29
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:lol easterbrook just loses it at the fifteen minute mark and announces "WE ARE NOT GOING TO OVERRULE THE SUPREME COURT" tells the guy that his time is up and to get the gently caress out, and then tells the other side that "we don't need an extensive argument from you" I respect Mr. Conrad's ability to read the room, I'm so dumb I probably would have gone up there and used my full 15 minutes
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 15:34
|
|
|
I also respect Mr. Alden because I definitely would have killed myself in the hallway about 30 seconds after that oral argument
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 15:36
|
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/sound/2019/cm.18-2550.18-2550_02_21_2019.mp3 Holy poo poo I love the clearly audible sigh from Easterbrook right at the end before he tells Alden to sit down. I was expecting the coup de grâce to come—“this is black letter law that every attorney should know.” “I do know it—“ “Then you are intentionally asserting a frivolous claim and we are going to render and remand to the trial court for an OSC why you shouldn’t be sanctioned under Rule 11. Bye bye.”
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 16:01
|
|
|
BAH GAWD THAT MAN HAS A (non-custodial) FAMILY!
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 16:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 12:53 |
|
|
This guy gives me hope that I’ll pass the bar.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2019 17:46
|
|
