evilweasel posted:the world has been busy enough that i have not lacked for distractions https://twitter.com/billfoxla/status/1270200771032694784?s=21 we know
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 05:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 14:07 |
|
|
Another goon law school success story (I assume).
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 07:45
|
|
|
I am insulted you picked that one and not this: https://abovethelaw.com/2020/06/lawyer-charged-in-alleged-molotov-cocktail-firebombing-caught-on-camera-in-controversial-interview/
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 13:40
|
|
|
Was talking with a friend about law school and an LLM (not for me). I know that LLM's are only worth it for tax. But what I wasn't sure about was if they're only worth it (even in tax) if you already have a Master's in Accounting or are already a CPA? The only people I know with an LLM work at PWC in Chicago and all have their CPA. Is there anything else you do with an LLM (other than gaze at your naval?)
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 14:33
|
|
|
It’s a degree, not a yacht.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 15:09
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:Was talking with a friend about law school and an LLM (not for me). Add a few certs for psychology or computers, and you could be a can of alphabet soup
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 15:24
|
|
evilweasel posted:I am insulted you picked that one and not this: https://abovethelaw.com/2020/06/lawyer-charged-in-alleged-molotov-cocktail-firebombing-caught-on-camera-in-controversial-interview/ we both know you're not that cool
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 16:25
|
|
|
GamingHyena posted:What’s the charge? Very good question, looking back there's no hard evidence. Organizers were spooked enough to ask anyone who was arrested to leave during the march for their own safety, but that could just be that they were antsy about what cops are willing to do after getting tear gassed for a few days.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 16:44
|
|
|
During the inauguration protests, anyone that was arrested was charged with any and all property damage that had occurred anywhere during the day. They were trying to give them 20 years. Jury refused to convict, IIRC.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 16:49
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:Was talking with a friend about law school and an LLM (not for me). They're looked at favorably (although not at all required) by IRS Counsel. I think most people working in the DC headquarters writing regs and policy type stuff have them. It also gets you an automatic pay bump upon hiring. Of course, these days there's not much federal hiring to begin with, so good luck with that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 18:12
|
|
|
El_Elegante posted:It’s a degree, not a yacht. Lol Seamen
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 18:14
|
|
|
youll either own a catamaran or be owned as a catamite, either way an LLM will get you somewhere
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 20:17
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:youll either own a catamaran or be owned as a catamite, either way an LLM will get you somewhere Limited Liability Masochism
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 20:33
|
|
|
Look, Look, Morestudentdebt
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 22:48
|
|
|
Good news, everyone! https://twitter.com/jjmacnab/status/1270461916285030400 https://twitter.com/jjmacnab/status/1270464744634253312 http://www.seditionists.com/hovind.pdf
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 23:36
|
|
|
Oh yeah, that's the poo poo I need after a rough day. Right into my veins, ugh...
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 23:54
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Good news, everyone! That's going to be dismissed sua sponte by the judge at least once for being a shotgun pleading. Since he doesn't have counsel, the judge might give him two more stabs at a conforming complaint. They only have to give him one, though, and then can dismiss with prejudice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 00:40
|
|
|
The eleventh circuit is kinda whacky but it’s also hilarious to use their stringent shotgun pleading rules to gently caress with plaintiffs
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 04:28
|
|
|
Sad he can't put a dollar value on the souls lost for eternity to God because he had to pay taxes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 05:44
|
|
|
http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Licensee/Detail/226684 Only 3 suspensions for not paying child support. In "using your government email address for personal business is a bad idea" news: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article243401066.html#storylink=bignews_latest
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 06:05
|
|
|
Here's the sovcit guru on the Hovind filing I've never seen dropping the last letter of your last name before. quote:I, Paul Hansen, get arrested occasionally for standing up against intrusive government. edit: oh I recognize this guy, he's one of the few remaining big sovcit gurus.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 06:27
|
|
|
Hello lawgoons. I am not of your kind but once upon a time was thinking of going to law school and still enjoy occasionally lurking this thread and reading of your doings. Had something I wanted to ask you all about. So I'm currently a social sciences PhD student. I have some experience in polling, statistics, data science type stuff. There's this a temporary employment thing at a law firm that looks like it might be a good summer gig for me that I think I'm qualified for, found out about it through a friend. They want someone for the next couple of months to do stats, analytics,etc. and maybe some survey research for an ongoing project that they have. I can work remotely (obviously), aside from like one or two in person meetings. I interviewed for the position via zoom and think that it went well, they want to talk to me again this week. There are a couple of things that I'm a little confused about. The first is that during the interview they would tell me nothing about the actual specifics of the job that I would be doing. Like I asked the standard interview questions about what the job would entail and was basically stonewalled. It was pretty strange to me. Is this normal, like they can't talk about an ongoing case? If that's the case, why not say that? I think it's clearly a distinct project that they would want me to work on, so it seems really weird and almost a red flag that they wouldn't tell me about what I would be doing. I'm just guessing at what the job involves from what aspects of my experience they asked about. I'm kind of uncomfortable taking a job where I have this little information about what it involves. The second is that in the follow up interview they want to discuss compensation. Any lawgoons have any idea what kind of thing is normal for something like this? I'm not a consulting firm, I'm just some guy whose going to do this from my living room not wearing pants, so I probably won't ask for the top end of what is possible, but I don't want to lowball myself either. They want an hourly rate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 09:38
|
|
|
Tax free status for “religious” organizations is the second stupidest thing on god’s green earth, right behind religion itself. Imagine how weird this guy’s “loving” family life was, so proud of being featured on America’s Funniest Home Videos, everybody working for him and nobody paying taxes, his “church” (i.e. him) “helping build” (i.e. owning) their houses next door, quoting scripture to them and poo poo while also probably abusing them physically and mentally. I’m sure his wife divorced him and his family cut him out of their lives entirely because they were afraid of the government lol.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 13:01
|
|
|
Still Dismal posted:The first is that during the interview they would tell me nothing about the actual specifics of the job that I would be doing. Like I asked the standard interview questions about what the job would entail and was basically stonewalled. It was pretty strange to me. Is this normal, like they can't talk about an ongoing case? 1) If its for active litigation, the project and its details are almost certainly privileged which means they can't talk about the details with someone who's not under a confidentiality agreement or part of the firm. Attorney work product is privileged and confidential, and a special formula or strategy for trial would be considered work product, even if the attorney was having someone else come up with it. Also, sometimes we hire what we call a "consulting expert" which is someone we hire to give us an opinion about a case and help us prepare things like formulas, but we don't ask them to testify; everything they do in the background is privileged and confidential. 2) Hourly rate probably means they will bill your time to the client, but in terms of how much that time is worth and what they're willing to pay, hell if I know. Doc review is tens of dollars per hour for what is a a few steps up from menial labor. Expert witnesses charge hundreds of dollars per hour. This sounds like... somewhere in between? But also it sounds like you may be bidding against other candidates? And I'd be surprised if you weren't asked to keep the interview confidential or at least the details of who you interviewed with and what for? I Don't know.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 14:16
|
|
|
Still Dismal posted:Hello lawgoons. I am not of your kind but once upon a time was thinking of going to law school and still enjoy occasionally lurking this thread and reading of your doings. Had something I wanted to ask you all about.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 15:53
|
|
|
Our group had a call yesterday about what's been going on the last couple of weeks, and I guess I shouldn't be surprised by this, but there were a huge number of people who implied that it took an email from a black colleague describing the difficulty he had talking to his daughter about recent events for them to realize america is still systemically racist. It made me want to scream at them. What a bubble these people have lived in. Anyways, it's not raining today, so I want to go meet my new neighbors in the commune.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 16:12
|
|
|
Meatbag Esq. posted:Our group had a call yesterday about what's been going on the last couple of weeks, and I guess I shouldn't be surprised by this, but there were a huge number of people who implied that it took an email from a black colleague describing the difficulty he had talking to his daughter about recent events for them to realize america is still systemically racist. It made me want to scream at them. What a bubble these people have lived in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 16:18
|
|
|
gvibes posted:Makes we wonder what the white people are telling their white kids about this. Nothing. They are mostly telling them nothing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 16:38
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:Nothing. They are mostly telling them nothing. I think that depends on the kids' access to media. At a certain point they start asking questions and you have to start answering them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 16:46
|
|
|
therobit posted:I think that depends on the kids' access to media. At a certain point they start asking questions and you have to start answering them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHKsM7vMe0g
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 18:21
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/CNNPR/status/1270802155201576962?s=19
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 21:08
|
|
|
the margins on this are personally offensive to me what the hell is the formatting on the last page
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 21:18
|
|
|
mods rename me david vigilante
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 21:21
|
|
|
That’s literally the worst name for a lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 21:28
|
|
|
El_Elegante posted:That’s literally the Fixed
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 21:30
|
|
|
only if you’re actually Matt Murdock
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 21:41
|
|
|
Meatbag Esq. posted:mods rename me david vigilante No me first
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 21:42
|
|
|
Is there a historical individual that is/was considered the bane of the legal profession?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 21:49
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:the margins on this are personally offensive to me what the hell is the formatting on the last page Until Trump justifies his claims CNN won’t justify their margins 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 22:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 14:07 |
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:Is there a historical individual that is/was considered the bane of the legal profession? I mean there are quite a few, but their names were things like "Julius" and "Napoleon"
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 22:22
|
|