|
Zero VGS posted:Police then told landlord that the tenant has to be the one to get a restraining/no-trespass order, as "the tenant might tell the landlord that the abuser was unwelcome when in fact the tenant keeps inviting the abuser back and is embarrassed to admit it". The landlord should pony up the few hundred dollars for a local attorney to ask them, "will I really get sued if I prohibit this junkie person from coming on the property again? If I file a no-trespass on my own, without the tenant's help, will I have enough evidence to get one from just my testimony about all the problems he's causing? Will I have any recourse other than terminating the tenant's lease if she invites him back? Do I need to find a friendly intervenor to force this young lady to contact some domestic violence assistance programs rather than try to self-help this situation?" Edit: the landlord should also google "Legal Aid [My City/County]" and call them for additional resources.
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 21:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 04:17 |
|
|
Nonexistence posted:I wonder how often criminal defense firms get paid up front by something other than crime money or a concerned relative Middle class DUIs are pretty much the only time that it isn't dirty or family money. I was going to say white collar crime as well, but all of their money is loving dirty, too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 23:23
|
|
|
Ah yes, the mythical "clean" american currency. Just your average Joe working for the government / fortune 500 / whoever, earning an honest buck. The crooked systems that fill my checkbook are beyond reproach!
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 00:14
|
|
|
Nonexistence posted:I wonder how often criminal defense firms get paid up front by something other than crime money or a concerned relative Money from web forums and Patreon? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 01:05
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Middle class DUIs are pretty much the only time that it isn't dirty or family money. I was going to say white collar crime as well, but all of their money is loving dirty, too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 01:12
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Middle class DUIs are pretty much the only time that it isn't dirty or family money. I was going to say white collar crime as well, but all of their money is loving dirty, too. That seems like a gross over estimate of how much criminal defense is paid in “dirty” money or family money I know several people who paid crim lawyers for other crimes from whatever job they were working at the time EwokEntourage fucked around with this message at 04:03 on Dec 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 03:57
|
|
|
Yeah as a criminal defence lawyer most of my non-legal aid clients work construction or some other trade and they are well capable of paying me with what I presume is legit money. Most of them...
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 07:42
|
|
|
There's a lot of mom mortgaging the house for crim too though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 10:35
|
|
|
So do you guys have some extra layer of protection against fraud or money laundering accusations? Of course intent matters, but it seems like there's a fairly obvious connection between "bank robber steals $1m" and "bank robber hires expensive defense lawyer." What if your client is dumb enough to straight up tell you, "I'm using the money I stole to pay you?" Do you have some legal/ethical obligation to say something, or are you protected?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 13:00
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:That seems like a gross over estimate of how much criminal defense is paid in “dirty” money or family money you're right. I was a bit harsh. There's definitely an income band of people that pay out of pocket for offenses where the money isn't necessarily dirty. I was just joking saying that most of the crime committed in that pay range is DUI but I guess I should have included DV as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 14:44
|
|
|
DaveSauce posted:So do you guys have some extra layer of protection against fraud or money laundering accusations? Of course intent matters, but it seems like there's a fairly obvious connection between "bank robber steals $1m" and "bank robber hires expensive defense lawyer." If your client is dumb enough to say that, you're supposed to tell him, "no."
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 15:50
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:If your client is dumb enough to say that, you're supposed to tell him, "no." Yeah, when you're talking $1M in stolen funds, you have to cut the lawyer in as an equity partner to the crime, it's not fee for service any more
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 16:10
|
|
|
Devor posted:Yeah, when you're talking $1M in stolen funds, you have to cut the lawyer in as an equity partner to the crime, it's not fee for service any more I came across a lawyer on a case once who had a 12 year gap in his employment history.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 18:16
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:I came across a lawyer on a case once who had a 12 year gap in his employment history. I hope you kept his contact information.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 19:02
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:I came across a lawyer on a case once who had a 12 year gap in his employment history. I didn't have a full time job between March 2011 and December 2018.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 19:52
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:I came across a lawyer on a case once who had a 12 year gap in his employment history. I know a lawyer that did federal time for some union shenanigans
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 19:59
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:I came across a lawyer on a case once who had a 12 year gap in his employment history. 'Client outreach and networking'
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 20:17
|
|
|
DaveSauce posted:So do you guys have some extra layer of protection against fraud or money laundering accusations? Of course intent matters, but it seems like there's a fairly obvious connection between "bank robber steals $1m" and "bank robber hires expensive defense lawyer." No, and in fact the DOJ has been known to be total dicks to lawyers fighting crimes with what the DOJ asserts is dirty money. https://www.natlawreview.com/article/use-tainted-assets-to-pay-attorney-fees-primer-pitfalls
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
ulmont posted:No, and in fact the DOJ has been known to be total dicks to lawyers fighting crimes with what the DOJ asserts is dirty money. So that's the exact answer to my question, and it's shittier than I thought. Looks like the intent was there, but if I'm reading that right then the amendment was worded poorly and didn't offer any meaningful protection? Seems like this would have a chilling effect on the willingness of lawyers to take on clients where this would be a risk. Is there any effort to find a solution, or is this not a big enough problem? I mean, the obvious counterpoint here is that any legal protection could be exploited by a lawyer who was willingly laundering money via legal fees, but I feel like that could be addressed without putting someone's livelihood on the line just for doing their job.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 22:04
|
|
|
Would it be lovely of me to post a link to the opinion from his reinstatement proceedings?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 23:03
|
|
|
Please do?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 23:23
|
|
|
How about just the good stuff:quote:Background (I guess anyone who wants to can just google some of this and figure him out, and even though this is public record and he's actually a pretty bad lawyer, he was a very nice guy, so everybody be cool, ok?)
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 23:37
|
|
|
For the benefit of goons who aren't hot poo poo lawyers, could you dumb that down so Particularly the bit where his attorney died. Was that something other than natural causes?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 06:53
|
|
|
I'm interested in this bit: "Because appellant agreed to assist the federal government in its prosecution of appellant's former client," I realize attorney/client privilege isn't absolute, but I would have thought it at least extended far enough to not permit this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 07:17
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I'm interested in this bit: "Because appellant agreed to assist the federal government in its prosecution of appellant's former client," https://www.justia.com/criminal/working-with-a-criminal-lawyer/the-crime-fraud-exception/
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 07:25
|
|
|
quote:Appellant was licensed to practice law in Texas Wars have been waged for less, not a bad plan exactly. quote:Due to the death of his trial attorney, appellant was required to obtain new counsel to represent him in a second trial on the criminal charges. Appellant's new counsel reviewed the conspiracy laws with appellant and appellant, for the first time, realized he might have violated those laws This is the funniest poo poo. It took 2 lawyers to properly convince a lawyer he broke the law.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 07:36
|
|
|
On stories of evidencing intent to supply: https://twitter.com/WillardFoxton/status/1339501338997235722
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 11:57
|
|
|
Lmao loving bulk discount. What did he go to the Costco of coke? Cokestco? There's only one group of people I know that get "bulk discounts" for illegal drugs and those people are organized drug dealers. E: loving juries. Glad we got rid of them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 12:10
|
|
|
Could someone explain why they seized the guy's cutlery and coffee mugs?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 14:29
|
|
|
Costcoke
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 14:34
|
|
|
They were probably nice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 14:35
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:Lmao loving bulk discount. What did he go to the Costco of coke? Cokestco? If you're not buying your non-perishable drugs in bulk, then you're just throwing money away. Glad you can afford to do that, but some people have to find ways to save money in this economy!
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 14:35
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:Lmao loving bulk discount. What did he go to the Costco of coke? Cokestco? Exactly how much experience do you have purchasing large quantities of illegal drugs?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 15:29
|
|
|
Outrail posted:For the benefit of goons who aren't hot poo poo lawyers, could you dumb that down so He used his client trust account to help launder money for some undisclosed, large-scale criminal enterprise. He maintained his innocence throughout the initial trial because he thought maybe he could hide behind the attorney-client relationship to protect him, legally. Once he got a new lawyer, they talked him out of it, and told him he was an idiot and he needed to take the plea deal. His first lawyer dying was likely nothing more than a convenient way to frame his reversal of position. Leperflesh posted:I'm interested in this bit: "Because appellant agreed to assist the federal government in its prosecution of appellant's former client," Any information exchanged between a lawyer and a client as part of, or in anticipation of the lawyer's representation of the client in a legal matter is privileged. A lawyer may reveal attorney-client privileged information to defend themselves in a malpractice case, or to prevent the commission of a future crime. Information obtained by the lawyer, during the commission of a crime in which they participated is not, "part of, or in anticipation of the lawyer's representation of the client" so its not even privileged to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 15:32
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:He used his client trust account to help launder money for some undisclosed, large-scale criminal enterprise. He maintained his innocence throughout the initial trial because he thought maybe he could hide behind the attorney-client relationship to protect him, legally. drat, his first lawyer was really dedicated to his client's case.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 16:11
|
|
|
HisMajestyBOB posted:drat, his first lawyer was really dedicated to his client's case. No kidding. I wouldn't even answer my phone on a Saturday for my clients, let alone go and die for them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 16:19
|
|
|
Time has no meaning, so i'm pretty sure this may have come up but can't recall: Unless specifically made part of a new contract, the new contract doesn't include any terms made to the old one, right? IE: You cant own a house, lease the house to bob for 99 years for $1, then sell the house and automatically the buyer has to honor the lease to bob In my head/logic, the lease is with you, not the property, so if bob wants to stay there the next 98 ears, he'll need to get a new lease with the new owner right? Unless you sold the property with "already has a lease terms, please accept these as part of the sale" at which point a buyer could see the lease and go "gently caress no i ain't buying with that attached"
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 17:16
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:Exactly how much experience do you have purchasing large quantities of illegal drugs? Nice try, officer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 17:18
|
|
|
toplitzin posted:Time has no meaning, so i'm pretty sure this may have come up but can't recall: The answer is, as always, “it depends.” Locally, a lease doesn’t run with the sale of a piece of property unless the lease has been recorded with the Land Records Division against the property. Costs $100 for 1-5 pages, $200 for 6-25, $300 for 26-50, and then $5 for every page after 50 you want recorded. Most residential renters don’t bother to record a lease, but it is definitely something that can be done. This is exactly the same as how a bank records a mortgage so it doesn’t get screwed when the house is sold.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 17:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 04:17 |
|
|
toplitzin posted:In my head/logic, the lease is with you, not the property, so if bob wants to stay there the next 98 ears, he'll need to get a new lease with the new owner right? So a lease is a contract where the owner sells the right to possess the premises, temporarily, to the tenant. The right to possess real property is one of the parts of ownership of real property. Other such rights include alienation (the right to sell), modification, use and enjoyment, etc. If I, the seller, fail to disclose that I have temporarily sold one of my rights to someone else, then at closing of the sale I have not brought the entirety of the property to the table. I brought the truck to the dealership to sell it, but I took the engine out and left it at home. So, I would not be tendering the bargained-for property, in full. I would be in breach of my sales contract to the buyer, because I sold them a truck that was represented as having 100% of its parts, but was in fact missing its engine, which I've temporarily rented to someone else. The responsibility to record this lease agreement varies from state to state, and is a prophylactic measure against these circumstances. Every state has plenty of rules that deal with this situation in different ways, but if you addressed the issue from a pure old-timey common law perspective, the tenant would still own the right to possess the property for the extent of the lease (so long as the tenant continued to perform, i.e. pay rent), even after the sale. If the new buyer did not like this, they could sue to unwind the sales contract for the property, since the "engine" of the truck is currently out on loan, even though they paid for it to be delivered immediately. The buyer would lose a suit to evict the tenant because the legal question in an eviction case (forcible entry and detainer) is, "who owns the legal right to possess the premises." which, here, would still be the tenant, having previously purchased that right, temporarily.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 17:53
|
|