|
NJ Deac posted:As a 2008 grad, it definitely felt like the legal jobs dried up before the bottom fell out of the economy in 2009. Most of my (lovely T2 evening program) graduating class is long out of law practice at this point - though those of us with tech degrees have done alright thanks to the IP angle. I was thinking about this the other day. There’s a definitely a gap. I don’t work with anyone who graduated in the mid/late aughts. I would have been 2012 if I went straight through but was advised to wait a few years.
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 04:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 15:59 |
|
|
tau posted:Been a couple years since I checked in on the thread. Is 2011 still the worst graduation year in terms of employment and prospects at the time of graduation? How are my fellow 2011ers doing? I have been in a government job for going on 10 years and it's pretty good. I got lucky to get in in the first place and I don't have many complaints.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 16:05
|
|
|
NJ Deac posted:As a 2008 grad, it definitely felt like the legal jobs dried up before the bottom fell out of the economy in 2009. Most of my (lovely T2 evening program) graduating class is long out of law practice at this point - though those of us with tech degrees have done alright thanks to the IP angle. I hadn't really though about this but yeah there's a noticeably weird age distribution at my current public defender's office. Everyone is either exactly my age and older, or at least ten years younger than I am. That decade gap in the age distribution pretty much exactly maps over the age ranges of people who would've hit the legal job market between 2008 and 2018 or so -- I got my first non-clerkship legal job in 2007.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 21:20
|
|
|
tau posted:Been a couple years since I checked in on the thread. Is 2011 still the worst graduation year in terms of employment and prospects at the time of graduation? How are my fellow 2011ers doing? Still doing the same thing at the same place, basically self-employed crim defence. Have a very cool opportunity for something else non-legal but it would require regular moving around and a pay cut and with a family and mortgage that's unlikely to happen. Objectively what I have is better work with better conditions than most but after a decade it's old and I'm really wishing I had an out so it looks like I'm gonna be stuck here til I die like everyone else in the defence bar.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 12:45
|
|
|
Anyone else shifted over to compliance? Taking up a bigger portion of my practice every month.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 15:37
|
|
|
Beyond ReTarTed. posted:finally finished filling out the papers to charge SomethingAwful in federal court. Approximately 80 counts of 1st amendment and civil rights violations. Can't wait for the judge's ruling Well this post aged well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 04:03
|
|
|
Whitlam posted:I want to believe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 04:07
|
|
|
From what I heard, he moved all the money out of his own name and info wars so he can declare bankruptcy and get away scott free. Is this true?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2022 15:30
|
|
|
Covok posted:From what I heard, he moved all the money out of his own name and info wars so he can declare bankruptcy and get away scott free. Is this true? Not exactly, but he did attempt to take a couple of broke entities into bankruptcy to delay the case. A bunch of lawyers are yelling at his lawyers in front of a bankruptcy judge right now saying it’s a sham and the case should go back to state court for trial. His odds aren’t great.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2022 15:43
|
|
|
Covok posted:From what I heard, he moved all the money out of his own name and info wars so he can declare bankruptcy and get away scott free. Is this true? very much so, this is a very blatant improper use of bankruptcy his idiot lawyers did not help him one bit by explaining the intended improper use (to gain a litigation advantage in forcing the plaintiffs to settle) on the record to a newspaper ulmont posted:Not exactly, but he did attempt to take a couple of broke entities into bankruptcy to delay the case. A bunch of lawyers are yelling at his lawyers in front of a bankruptcy judge right now saying it’s a sham and the case should go back to state court for trial. His odds aren’t great. he has also reportedly conducted a lot of fraudulent transfers to move all his assets from the companies sued into different companies evilweasel fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Apr 22, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2022 15:57
|
|
|
Is it at all likely a prosecutor would pick that up as a fraud case?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2022 16:15
|
|
|
therobit posted:Is it at all likely a prosecutor would pick that up as a fraud case? fraudulent transfers are basically a tort, a creditor can sue to undo them and return the money to where it ought to be in order to pay the creditor it is not a crime itself
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2022 16:29
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:very much so, this is a very blatant improper use of bankruptcy More stupid, he's also claiming the assets of his recording studio itself is $50k or less. Many AV nerds have pointed out that the cameras and mixing boards alone are worth substantially more than that. He can't even fraud right.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2022 19:02
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:More stupid, he's also claiming the assets of his recording studio itself is $50k or less. Many AV nerds have pointed out that the cameras and mixing boards alone are worth substantially more than that. He can't even fraud right. None of the bankrupt entities hold any assets. His studio isn’t owned by any of those. Likewise, Jones personally isn’t bankrupt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2022 19:52
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:None of the bankrupt entities hold any assets. His studio isn’t owned by any of those. Likewise, Jones personally isn’t bankrupt. yeah basically jones tossed some no-asset subsidiaries into bankruptcy, and is going to propose to fund those subsidiaries settling the cases against them with money from his real money-holding entities...in exchange for a full release of those entities in the bankruptcy plan which will not work of course because he doesn't have enough money (unlike the sacklers) to pay enough people accept it
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2022 19:57
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:yeah basically jones tossed some no-asset subsidiaries into bankruptcy, and is going to propose to fund those subsidiaries settling the cases against them with money from his real money-holding entities...in exchange for a full release of those entities in the bankruptcy plan The fund was set up less than three weeks and has already spent $200k of the paltry $10m pledged over the next five years on trustee fees and overhead. Alex Jones has brought in roughly half a billion in revenue since 2012. Also, Jones’ lawyer repeatedly emphasized that they were only there to force settlement.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2022 22:00
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:The fund was set up less than three weeks and has already spent $200k of the paltry $10m pledged over the next five years on trustee fees and overhead. yeah but again "your honor my client really doesn't liiiiiiiiike having to defend himself in court" isn't a valid bankruptcy purpose which is why his lawyers are such idiots except, actually, maybe in new jersey but again you gotta be able to write checks with ten digits to qualify
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2022 22:12
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:fraudulent transfers are basically a tort, a creditor can sue to undo them and return the money to where it ought to be in order to pay the creditor bankruptcy fraud is a real crime tho, so if he knowingly lied on his bankruptcy paperwork a sufficiently motivated federal prosecutor could pay him a visit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2022 14:38
|
|
|
sullat posted:bankruptcy fraud is a real crime tho, so if he knowingly lied on his bankruptcy paperwork a sufficiently motivated federal prosecutor could pay him a visit. yeah but i don't think it's bankruptcy fraud not to list assets on your bankruptcy paperwork you no longer own (because you fraudulently transferred them away) perhaps in some very extreme circumstances it might be but here - where he transferred them to assets owned by non-debtors who are presumably owned by jones (also a non-debtor) - i don't see it
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2022 16:16
|
|
|
RIP Roe.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:44
|
|
|
Is this the first scotus leak of a draft opinion? Assuming that's what this actually is. https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000180-874f-dd36-a38c-c74f98520000
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 05:35
|
|
|
Isn't that bad? Why leak a draft, is it to prep and/or dissipate the uproar? Because of the election? So they can backpedal if the capital burns?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 06:03
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:Isn't that bad? because someone went "holy poo poo the crazy bastards are going to do it"
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 06:17
|
|
|
Aye caramba an Alito opinion on abortion E: this opinion is a Daily Caller article so far
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 06:23
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:Isn't that bad? My conspiracy brain would say, assuming this is an actual scotus leak, it would be done to give a preview of the outrage it would cause in an effort to make the court reconsider. Shageletic posted:Aye caramba an Alito opinion on abortion Not that it's a high bar but yeah if this isn't real someone does a very good Alito impression.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 06:31
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:Isn't that bad? It's because our shithole nation is falling apart and even someone with a Yale Law Free Lifetime Supremacy ticket is willing to sacrifice that to sound the loving alarm. This has never happened before. There are already some fairly compelling theories as to who may have leaked but I won't be sharing that. Vox Nihili fucked around with this message at 07:22 on May 3, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 07:20
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:Aye caramba an Alito opinion on abortion The entire draft decision was leaked to the media, which is unprecedented. Pundits are already expressing outrage at to the severe breach of decorum this represents.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 07:34
|
|
|
Read as: "Holy poo poo the court needs to be brought in line by whatever means necessary." -The Leaker.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 07:35
|
|
|
Jesus Christ calm down https://twitter.com/pnjaban/status/...ingawful.com%2F
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 12:21
|
|
|
I'm assuming this was Roberts, is that in line with general speculation?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 14:22
|
|
|
Baron von Eevl posted:I'm assuming this was Roberts, is that in line with general speculation? Well Roberts is the most concerned with appearances of the group and they're about to list this decision in the same breath with Dred Scott and Plessy v. Ferguson, so it's a reasonable conjecture. That said, who really knows. I'm 50/50 that they ever find the person.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 14:29
|
|
|
Baron von Eevl posted:I'm assuming this was Roberts, is that in line with general speculation? The Opening Arguments takes were: 1. Liberal justice/clerk to wave a red flag 2. Ginny Thomas privately, but escaped to the media wild, as a "look at the cool poo poo we're about to get done"
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 14:31
|
|
|
Comedy option Breyer
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 14:37
|
|
|
RBG’s Ghost
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 14:48
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/akapczynski/status/1521494553877962754
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 16:02
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Comedy option Breyer This is the superior option.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 19:59
|
|
|
I saw this thread but I don't buy it at all. The theoretical political damage from the leak is being done to conservatives. There is no actual reason to put their win at risk by committing an enormous, career-destroying violation. No way in hell a true believer conservative clerk would taint the process and their own career with their victory at hand. I award this theory zero points and am filing it under "cope."
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 20:35
|
|
|
Roberts has confirmed the leak is legit. If it was done intentionally for political reasons I agree there’s no way a conservative did it. It seems entirely possible the original source was just careless and the person who leaked it to the press got it themselves second hand. I think they said this happened in the 70s with a guy who worked at the print shop the court used. Will be fascinating to see it play out. I can’t even imagine how furious they must be.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 20:49
|
|
|
I actually was an intern at the Clerk's Office in the SupCt, trying to scroll through my memories of my long ago time there, but I remember it being pretty hard to get your hands on an opinion, especially in the circulation stage. There was a lot of secrecy protocols and stuff. The only people that should be seeing this stuff is Justices and clerks. I'm guessing it's a Justice. e: you had the Marshalls moving things around too
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 21:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 15:59 |
|
|
Shageletic posted:I actually was an intern at the Clerk's Office in the SupCt, trying to scroll through my memories of my long ago time there, but I remember it being pretty hard to get your hands on an opinion, especially in the circulation stage. There was a lot of secrecy protocols and stuff. The only people that should be seeing this stuff is Justices and clerks. I'm guessing it's a Justice. It definitely game from Ginny bragging to her friends.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 21:04
|
|