|
I haven’t heard about that happening yet though I suppose it could start on the hardware side of things. In software everything has moved to telework. The big changes have been shifting internal resources to specially help clients that matter more in various aspects of the Covid crisis, and also jiggering with numbers to reduce overload.
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2020 15:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:25 |
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:In-house and lawyers with corporate clients: Anybody seeing your company/client successfully use COVID as a force majeure event to get out of a contract? If the other side is accepting that argument, are you seeing contract terminations or just deferrals of performance? From what I am seeing (in-house), the answer seems to be "not yet". Force majeure, whether a boilerplate common law-style clause or the statutory force majeure that we have in the civil code, is simply narrow enough that very few obligations will be actually properly blocked by the poo poo that's going on. I suspect that even if global supply and production chains break down completely, it will be very hard to use force majeure to use to get out of a contract unless you have something like a specific ban on importation/exportation or something, or people have to come over and do something overseas. In my civil code system, it does not strike me as unthinkable that the statutory force majeure could be tweaked so that there won't be as strong a causal link needed as is the case now, but that hasn't happened (at least yet). What I do expect is a loving tsunami of bankruptcies, which will naturally domino around the globe until everything is a ruin.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2020 16:42
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:In-house and lawyers with corporate clients: Anybody seeing your company/client successfully use COVID as a force majeure event to get out of a contract? If the other side is accepting that argument, are you seeing contract terminations or just deferrals of performance? No one's really fighting on a deferral of performance right now, but how badly the contract is impacted is on a sliding scale from not at all (we can perform remote work) to lol (hotel space rental).
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2020 17:51
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:That can't happen, constitutionally. It can happen in military courts only because they waive a lot of constitutional protections. Double jeopardy, or something else? Double jeopardy applies to courts martial. An acquittal can't be reviewed, de novo or otherwise, only convictions. Was that the constitutional protection you had in mind?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2020 18:47
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Double jeopardy, or something else? Double jeopardy applies to courts martial. Sixth amendment right to trial by jury. If you have somebody reviewing the fact finder de novo, you're voiding the right to jury trial. In military courts that's ok for ~reasons~. Edit: I think? I'm not a military law expert
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2020 19:04
|
|
|
Took a call from OC. He started to get huffy. I started to get huffy. Wrapped it up with, "Look [OC], I'll discuss it with my client, but we're not getting any where, and I can't blow up this GD kiddie pool while I'm talking to you."
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2020 21:53
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Sixth amendment right to trial by jury. If you have somebody reviewing the fact finder de novo, you're voiding the right to jury trial. In military courts that's ok for ~reasons~. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (state law case) reviews the fact finder, though not de novo - but I don't see how a different standard of review would change any effect of right to jury trial. (Though Jackson was a non-jury trial, the holding applies to jury trials too) On the other hand, Jackson is about protecting the constitutional right to be convicted only by proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which the de novo bit for reviews of court martial convictions supplies in excess of the federal minimums. I don't see how right to jury trial could possibly be affected by granting a defendant a more favorable standard of review. It's the defendant's right to jury trial and the more deferential review offers the defendant a second bite at the factual guilt determination. Conceptually, it's no different from Jackson, just more friendly to an accused. Art. 66(c), UCMJ can never be a substitute for a jury trial - it just lays out the power of the lower appellate court. I might have claimed expert in the late 90s to mid 00s, but I haven't kept up with military law. During that time, including 3 1/2 years doing appellate defense, I never ran across anything connecting Art. 66(c) review to a limitation of the right to jury trial. I like your out of the box idea, I just can't see any way it could ever benefit a defendant at trial or on appeal. (There are limits, like how and by whom the venire is formed, and the numbers of jurors) To end with an aside, (?) the reason for the broader powers of review of a conviction is that they were intentional, as another way the UCMJ was written to curb the excesses and injustices of military discipline/justice that everybody found out about/experienced during WWII.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2020 23:21
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Took a call from OC. He started to get huffy. I started to get huffy. Wrapped it up with, "Look [OC], I'll discuss it with my client, but we're not getting any where, and I can't blow up this GD kiddie pool while I'm talking to you." Lol I’m just ignoring everyone
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 00:24
|
|
|
My coworker told me how to forward our office lines to our cell phones and I said gently caress that
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 02:08
|
|
|
My rule as an in house patent attorney is that if I'm not important enough for you to pay my cell phone bill, I'm not installing my work email on my personal phone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 06:46
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:In-house and lawyers with corporate clients: Anybody seeing your company/client successfully use COVID as a force majeure event to get out of a contract? If the other side is accepting that argument, are you seeing contract terminations or just deferrals of performance? An industry I've got ties to is looking at that en masse with regard to international shipment of raw product, but variable interpretation means right now afaik it's just getting a ton of sideeye.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 07:19
|
|
|
Meatbag Esq. posted:My rule as an in house patent attorney is that if I'm not important enough for you to pay my cell phone bill, I'm not installing my work email on my personal phone. that WAS my rule until two weeks ago :[
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 14:39
|
|
|
almost all of my work the past week and a half has been IT tech support because my bosses are in their late 70s.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 14:40
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:almost all of my work the past week and a half has been IT tech support because my bosses are in their late 70s. When I actually practiced I was my small firms de facto in house IT when it came to removing viruses and 50+ IE toolbars from various computers. I guess I should thank them because I liked it so much better than the lawyering parts that I ended up becoming a full time computer toucher.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 15:15
|
|
|
Woo, got my email confirming my loans are no payment for the next few months and it counts for PSLF.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 23:59
|
|
|
Watching the Rainmaker on Netflix and I have to say the parts about the plaintiff firm, the first hearing/conference in chambers with the defense lawyer played by Jon Voight, and Danny Glover grilling Jon Voight about scheduling are all hilarious and totally realistic
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2020 01:47
|
|
|
Looks like the Supreme Court of Utah is proposing diploma privilege for all applicants who meet certain criteria. Wonder how that works with transferring under the UBE.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2020 01:57
|
|
|
It appears that my choice now is between WashU St. Louis with a nice fat no-strings-attached scholarship and Georgetown without one. Given my complicated circumstances, it's not an easy one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2020 08:19
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:It appears that my choice now is between WashU St. Louis with a nice fat no-strings-attached scholarship and Georgetown without one. Given my complicated circumstances, it's not an easy one. I'd probably lean toward free. Georgetown is a T14, but it is a low t14. This assumes fat means free.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2020 10:05
|
|
|
nm posted:I'd probably lean toward free. Georgetown is a T14, but it is a low t14. This assumes fat means free. If WashU free isn't the option, retake/don't go.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2020 13:32
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:It appears that my choice now is between WashU St. Louis with a nice fat no-strings-attached scholarship and Georgetown without one. Given my complicated circumstances, it's not an easy one. I went to WashU with $120k. I am now at a firm with a double digit percentage of Gerogetown alumni on the roster. If you go to WashU and do well, you'll probably do just as well as anyone from Georgetown. If not, well at least you're not out the money and you'll probably still do OK. If you do badly at Georgetown you're probably going to do no better than the WashU grad and you're still going to be out the money. EDIT also if you do really well in 1L then transferring to Harvard or Columbia is always an option (or Georgetown but probably don't do that), lots of people in my class did.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2020 13:49
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:It appears that my choice now is between WashU St. Louis with a nice fat no-strings-attached scholarship and Georgetown without one. Given my complicated circumstances, it's not an easy one. You should probably take the the free ride, particularly since there are no strings (lurkers should note that some schools have lovely requirements that you have to, e.g., be in the top 50% of the class to keep your scholarship). Now, that being said... Throatwarbler posted:If you go to WashU and do well, you'll probably do just as well as anyone from Georgetown. If not, well at least you're not out the money and you'll probably still do OK. If you do badly at Georgetown you're probably going to do no better than the WashU grad and you're still going to be out the money. It's a bit more nuanced than this. A solid majority of Georgetown grads land in biglaw or better, Georgetown has a big pipeline into working for the feds, and Georgetown has an absolutely enormous and powerful alumni network. You'll very likely be set if you land at 50th percentile at Georgetown, whereas at WashU it's not quite as clear. WashU is still a great school that generally produces great outcomes for its students, but it's worth considering what your specific goals are before pulling the trigger. I also hear that some prospetive students have had success in negotiating for better aid based on scholarship offers from competing schools--it can't hurt to give the Georgetown people a call if you haven't already.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2020 22:59
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:It appears that my choice now is between WashU St. Louis with a nice fat no-strings-attached scholarship and Georgetown without one. Given my complicated circumstances, it's not an easy one. I did my undergrad at WashU. It's a pretty swell place. The park next door to campus is gorgeous and living there is affordable. Don't go to East St. Louis though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2020 23:01
|
|
|
I know we don't have a ton of solos or small firms here, but has anyone had any experience applying for PPP or EIDL loans/grants for law firms? I've applied for both to help out with payroll but haven't heard back on either.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 01:48
|
|
|
 kawasaki nun just could not stop being a dick about people not liking biden.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 02:01
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:
*sigh* Link?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 02:04
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:*sigh* Link? I’m on my phone but it’s the GIP biden sucks thread I made because we were tired of circular bitching in the current events thread. A good number of people are understandably troubled by the prospect of voting for biden.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 02:09
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:It appears that my choice now is between WashU St. Louis with a nice fat no-strings-attached scholarship and Georgetown without one. Given my complicated circumstances, it's not an easy one. Don't you already have practice experience in your country in some form and like almost a decade long career? Do you have a specific job in mind for when you get out? If WashU gets you there then I wouldn't worry about the rankings and I'd take they money. As someone who waited a few years, I think that debt would be a lot tougher to deal with at like 34 vs. 26. That said, negotiate both sides. Ask for more from WashU as you're on the fence and ask for something from Georgetown.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 02:14
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:I’m on my phone but it’s the GIP biden sucks thread I made because we were tired of circular bitching in the current events thread. A good number of people are understandably troubled by the prospect of voting for biden. Good chance his brain melts out his ears by election day, might be problem solved
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 02:18
|
|
|
People get banned for the dumbest poo poo on this stupid website
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 02:29
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:
drat, RIP. I do not envy all of the people who are going to have to try to convince people to vote for Biden. What an awful job. He genuinely makes Hillary look better in retrospect.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 03:00
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:
Not a hard call for me at all. This is a two party system and one is demonstratively better for SCOTUS and the policies Sanders cares about than the other. Not nearly as many people hate Biden as hated Hillary. I don’t understand needing to love or perfectly align with a candidate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 03:08
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:
Pour one out for kawasaki
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 03:31
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:I don’t understand needing to love or perfectly align with a candidate. And some of us don't understand thinking that our lovely two party system necessitates choosing the very marginally better of two bad options.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 04:50
|
|
|
Fuzzie Dunlop posted:Don't you already have practice experience in your country in some form and like almost a decade long career? The other side of the equation is that if I fail to get a good enough job (i.e. one that comes with a work visa, pays sufficiently to sustain a family of three and is stable enough to make us eligible for eventual immigration) lined up for me by graduation time, I'll die (not an exaggeration, that's what going back to my shithole country and detransitioning will amount to). That's why it's very tempting to go for the Georgetown option, because I want to stack my deck as much as possible to avert that possibility. The final thing is that there's a small but nonzero chance that I might be able to get funds for this mad venture from a rich relative rather than the bank (effectively getting my inheritance upfront instead of being saddled with massive debt), but I won't be able to have that discussion with them until the epidemic crisis winds down, and the clock for making the decision keeps ticking. So yes, it's kind of complicated. Rogue AI Goddess fucked around with this message at 09:00 on Apr 11, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 08:53
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:People get banned for the dumbest poo poo on this stupid website Sure, I mean I ate a three-day the other day for bioterrorist posting, I mean what the gently caress? Where's my freedom of screech, mods?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 09:31
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:Yes, that's one of the circumstances I've mentioned. I'll be 40 by the time I graduate, so there aren't all that many productive years left ahead. Have you considered qualifying in England? The QLTS will cost like 10k pounds overall inclusive of all the prep courses (and the sum is spread over like 1,5 years because you need to take the MCT and the OSCE consecutively) and avoid you having to become a US lawyer. Not sure where you're originally qualified, but in any event that's probably a more viable route than having to compete for a US law job (lol) as an immigrant (lol) Edit: I looked through your post history to find where you're qualified, please accept my most sincere condolences for having to practise in this shitshow of a country. However, the suggestion about England and Wales is now even more relevant, because you could have a shot at a City firm if you get through the QLTS and have a business case. Everyone needs Russian speakers because there are a lot of Russian cases, both contentious and transactional (nowhere near as many as 15 years ago, naturally, but there is still enough work of that kind), but no one needs actual Russians because of the visa/immigration restrictions and the near-complete deregulation of the legal profession here. If you pass the QLTS, then (if you aren't already an advocate) pass the Russian advocate exam, you'll be eligible to apply for a solicitor license and, if you have a business case you can offer, you will have a not insignificant shot at securing a decent job in London. Definitely beats the US clusterfuck where even locals can't find a job for years, and you would bypass the English training contract fuckery which serves no purpose except to bottleneck the path into the profession. It's still a huge gamble, but it's a gamble with much better odds nutri_void fucked around with this message at 12:32 on Apr 11, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 10:26
|
|
|
Bushido Brown posted:And some of us don't understand thinking that our lovely two party system necessitates choosing the very marginally better of two bad options. You don’t understand reality?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 13:25
|
|
|
Also it’s not “marginally better,” we are taking about the difference between Donald loving Trump and not Trump. A federal judiciary made up of 40%+ Trump appointed ghouls for the next 40 years, including a 7-2 republican Supreme Court, essentially destroying any chance of progress until after I’m dead (and so is the planet most likely). The continued dismantling of our system of government into autocracy and kleptocracy. Its the difference between looking like Putin’s Russia and looking like ourselves. How is that so hard to get through your head?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 13:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:25 |
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:You don’t understand reality? Reality includes not voting. It's the choice of millions, in fact.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 13:56
|
|