|
Yeah sorry I was off by one multiple.
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 12:32 |
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:That's what the rules say? Am I misunderstanding you? No, you were right; I figured lay people reading this thread didn't understand you were referring to the concept of 'posting a bond.'
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Don't you guys litigate in the state with the Do-a-wheelie attorney?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
Is that the law hawk guy or the "I'm a lawyer get out of my way guy?" Basically, the only lawyer advertisements I actually respect air on NPR. Hey justice court Texas guy, wtf happened?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 03:12
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:In practice, assume you will get hosed. Pretty much this happened. Really was dumb. The case was that I loaned my brothers gf (we'll call her D) one of my cars. She was driving to work and the defendant pulled out from a side street (the defendant had a stop sign, D's street did not) D was able to react fast enough to swerve into the median rather than get hit by the other car. The defendant admitted she 'ran' the stop sign (she said she stopped at it and didn't see D until she was already pulling into the intersection) D was driving in the left hand lane, the defendant said she stopped before entering the left lane. The defendant also stated that there was a black SUV turning that prevented her from seeing D's car. We had letters from people at the scene immediately afterward telling about how the defendant was apologizing for not yielding and then after her father arrived he began changing her story to make it seem like it wasn't her fault. The judge wouldn't allow the letters. I should have asked for to postpone so I could subpoena them but that was my mistake. The thing that really gets me is the defendant's insurance company said she was 70% responsible (maybe I'm dumb for not taking this), but none of that matter because I couldn't bring it up and half my evidence wasn't allowed. We made a claim with D's insurance before and they denied the claim saying it wasn't her fault. My hope is that we can take this judgment to them and get them to cover it now since we have a court ruling saying it isn't the other girls fault. Sorry if this doesn't make sense at the moment, it's been a long day. Edit; I'm also pretty sure the judge was dosing off during testimony. dalstrs fucked around with this message at 03:45 on Jun 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:No, you were right; I figured lay people reading this thread didn't understand you were referring to the concept of 'posting a bond.' Makes sense, sorry if I came off as a dick dalstrs posted:Pretty much this happened. You might want to get an attorney now, since the clock is going to start running on your appeal tomorrow
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:Makes sense, sorry if I came off as a dick You didn't, I don't think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
xxEightxx posted:Don't you guys litigate in the state with the Do-a-wheelie attorney? He had a traffic ticket client in my wife's muni court. He didn't show up, and just sent them in to ask for deferred.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:Makes sense, sorry if I came off as a dick If I can't get attorney fees, I don't know if it is worth it. I was only asking for 6k and an appeal would probably cost at least half that wouldn't it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:He had a traffic ticket client in my wife's muni court. Wait, your wife is a traffic lawyer too?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
nm posted:Wait, your wife is a traffic lawyer too? City Secretary. One douche lawyer in this house is already one too many.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 05:03
|
|
|
dalstrs posted:If I can't get attorney fees, I don't know if it is worth it. I was only asking for 6k and an appeal would probably cost at least half that wouldn't it? Car wreck lawyers work on commission but I don't know if one will take it for only $6k. Sucks that you lost. The American legal system claims another
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
Think of it this way: you've done more jury trials than most lawyers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 11:56
|
|
|
Do they do voir dire in JP court or do they just send in 6 randos and say "here's your jury!" That is just a totally bizarre way to handle small claims. Small claims is supposed to be everyone tells the judge whatever they want and gives whatever evidence they have, and the judge decides what's fair. It's supposed to be simple.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Do they do voir dire in JP court or do they just send in 6 randos and say "here's your jury!" They did a jury selection thing. We had the opportunity to ask questions and get rid of 3.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 15:20
|
|
|
Jesus what is the point of small claims court there? (Nothing you guys say makes me feel any better about an impending move to Texas)
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
dalstrs posted:They did a jury selection thing. We had the opportunity to ask questions and get rid of 3. Dude seriously you have done more trial work than like 2/3 of actual lawyers. How the gently caress are you supposed to know what questions to ask? Half of a jury trial is picking the right jury and warming them up for your case. Voir dire is an art form, you can't just show up and wing it. Did you have any live witnesses? Was there a pretrial conference with the judge? I'm trying to parse your description of what happened---the jury found D 100% at fault and gave you $0? Small claims in Texas seems more procedurally rigid than a bench trial in Louisiana!
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:Jesus what is the point of small claims court there? It shouldn't. Phil Moscowitz posted:Dude seriously you have done more trial work than like 2/3 of actual lawyers. How the gently caress are you supposed to know what questions to ask? Half of a jury trial is picking the right jury and warming them up for your case. Voir dire is an art form, you can't just show up and wing it. I had my bro's gf who was driving, then also him and I who showed up a few (5) minutes after it happened. I really regret not pushing for a new date since he wouldn't let me use the letters. Before everything started the judge pulled the lawyer and me into a side room and made me show him all the evidence I was going to present. That was when he told me I couldn't use the letters or mention anything about an insurance company or him even being a representative of the insurance company. Unless he told the jury when we were not in the room I don't know that they knew they could do anything other than just find for the defendant or the plaintiff.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
Not mentioning to the jury that the defense lawyer is from the insurance company is standard, because they think people will just automatically decide against insurance companies. The letters issue is knowing how to get evidence submitted, which actual lawyers gently caress up all the time. This is all standard for courts. But it shouldn't be standard for JP courts, who's explicit purpose is to allow people to solve problems without lawyers. This is Texas' improved JP system Also this is a weird question, but what did you wear to court? Working on my math proof related to pro se proceedings and amount of vests worn EwokEntourage fucked around with this message at 16:40 on Jun 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 16:33
|
|
|
Famous last words : "I'm going to defend myself at this jury trial pro se".
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:Not mentioning to the jury that the defense lawyer is from the insurance company is standard, because they think people will just automatically decide against insurance companies. The letters issue is knowing how to get evidence submitted, which actual lawyers gently caress up all the time. Slacks and a button up. No vests. euphronius posted:Famous last words : "I'm going to defend myself at this jury trial pro se". I was the plaintiff and it is really hard to find a lawyer that will take a case with only $6k in damages.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Apparently when I wasn't paying attention Texas JP courts just decided to become procedurally identical to Municipal Courts of Record except for the "of record" part, which is the entire loving point of having tight procedural guidelines. If an appeal is de novo then who loving cares?euphronius posted:Famous last words : "I'm going to defend myself at this jury trial pro se". And if I had a dollar for every angry threatened appeal. In five years we had one appeal from municipal court and it wasn't from an ordinary citizen. And that person and their lawyer failed to perfect the appeal. Court is really loving stupid and hard if you're not essentially practicing it every day until every part of the process is obvious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
Voire dire against a Pro Se is like a Six Flags Express Pass to arguing the entire case before it even starts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Recent events have made me curious. How easy is it to take away someone's guns against their wishes? Let's assume they have a decent-length criminal history (no felony convictions), but nothing in the past twenty-five years. They are also bipolar and have threatened to harm themselves and others in the past, but there is no immediate threat to anyone's life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
Its really easy if you have a key to their house and they aren't home.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
Brennanite posted:Recent events have made me curious. How easy is it to take away someone's guns against their wishes? Let's assume they have a decent-length criminal history (no felony convictions), but nothing in the past twenty-five years. They are also bipolar and have threatened to harm themselves and others in the past, but there is no immediate threat to anyone's life. If they have a misdemeanor domestic violence conviction they can't have guns. If they've been 'adjudged a mental defective' they can't have guns. If they've been 'committed to a mental institution' they can't have guns. If he's in California, they're trying a new trick by analogizing to protective orders; if you can articulate that you feel he's scary, police will come and take his guns away (but he can try to get them back, weeks later)
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
Just going to say: I called this outcome for our pro se jury litigator. And that other lawyer knew exactly what he was doing when he demanded a jury trial.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
Brennanite posted:Recent events have made me curious. How easy is it to take away someone's guns against their wishes? Let's assume they have a decent-length criminal history (no felony convictions), but nothing in the past twenty-five years. They are also bipolar and have threatened to harm themselves and others in the past, but there is no immediate threat to anyone's life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Just going to say: I called this outcome for our pro se jury litigator. And that other lawyer knew exactly what he was doing when he demanded a jury trial. So what is the solution in the future for things like this?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
dalstrs posted:So what is the solution in the future for things like this? Honestly: your dispute is over too small an amount of money for the legal system to really care. I know it's a lot to you. I know the injustice of It seems crushing. I know it seems unfair. It sucks, but there's not really a good way in Texas for you to recover. Too small for lawyers to take. And you just saw how our small claims courts aren't helpful. If we banned lawyers and juries from small claims, maybe that would help. But that's not what the law says.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
Whats the point of having a small claims court if it's exactly like a regular trial, jury, evidence rules and everything. Might as well not even have it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
So the lesson is Texas is terrible?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
doverhog posted:So the lesson is Texas is terrible? That is always the lesson. Or at least an aside.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
The judge literally told me the insurance companies spend a ton on lobbying.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
dalstrs posted:The judge literally told me the insurance companies spend a ton on lobbying. Did you need a judge to tell you that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
Come to Louisiana, it's the exact opposite. Small claims is the wild west, city/parish courts are judge only and have caps ranging from $15,000 to $25,000 most places ($30,000 and even $50,000 in select cities) or you can file in big boy court anywhere in the state, without a jury, and get up to $50,000 plus cost and interest. Also the plaintiff attorneys spend wayyyy more than insurance companies on lobbying and judge elections so you will basically never get hosed, even as a pro se.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
dalstrs posted:So what is the solution in the future for things like this? Take the 70%
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Take the 70%
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 04:00
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Dehumanize yourself and face to bloodshed
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 22:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 12:32 |
|
|
Can a US public university legally tell an expelled student that they cannot be in any public location, even if it's not campus-owned property, if a university club or certain people from the university are there, and take action against the student if an incident does occur?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 07:37
|
|