%%USERNAME%%    %%ACCWORDS%% %%ONOFF%% |
 |
Ocassional rants on the justice system and dating by a female litigator |
| Observations from inside and outside the courtroom. |
| So...dating. I don't do it. In fact I actively avoid it. I don't see the point. I've been happily single for over seven years now, and I think I'm in love with the single life. Yup, I'm pretty sure I would marry it if I could. Every once in a while, I meet someone who makes me question my love of solitude. But it tends to be one of two types of guy: either he's insanely busy and I get to see him for five seconds every four or five weeks, and then I end things because I feel neglected; or he's just an a-hole and I probably pursued him because he's an a-hole and my real motivation is becoming single again and affirming my single-loving ways. But the latter is probably also somewhat due to me being a sucker for jerks. But why date anyway? It's work. It's stress. I hate looking at my phone and thinking "he should text me now," only to get a blank stare from my phone. I've got other things to do. Like sit here in my pajama pants and get ready for tomorrow's hearing. |
| It feels like Friday. It should be Friday. Wait...it's not Friday, is it? It's been a very long and busy week. Two big hearings in court. They went ok. But wow, they can wear you out. You spend hours pouring through the law and forming your argument and then you spend an hour or so in court having your argument dissected. And hanging over your head is the possibility of being part of some bad precedent (or losing whatever's at stake in the hearing, or being held in contempt of court, etc). It's a little stressful. But I'm back home, already in my pajama pants. That's the first thing I do when I walk in the door, put on pajama pants. Really, is there anyone in the world that doesn't do that? (Sweat pants count). And if you don't do that (by show of hands), is it because you haven't tried it? It's the best. Well, one more day in the week. Big, deep breath, head down, and forge ahead. Right? It's all we can do. Did anyone note the Oxford comma? I'm a big fan. But I use it sparingly. Not everyone cares for it. I don't know why. It means well, I'm sure. ...ok. onward.... |
| I often wonder how many judges actually answer "No." I'm sure it happens. It has to. I've seen more and more YouTube videos lately showing judges...we'll call it "pushing the envelope." One judge in Florida leaves the bench to fight with an attorney. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJ_Z6UYH33s. In Las Vegas, a judge had a public defender handcuffed in court for interrupting him. http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/las-vegas-judge-handcuffs-public-def... And just look at this judge order this sweet little 80 year old woman to be on the ankle bracelet! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEQp33kr2O8. This one is pretty hilarious. The funny thing is that these moments probably happen every day in courthouses across the country. But very few are preserved and posted. Just think of all the un-mined YouTube gold there is. And courthouses usually don't allow people to bring cell phones inside, so the recordings are only caught by the security cameras. All I can do as an attorney is ask that the court consider my argument and be fair. I can hope that it may please the court, but really, there is a chance that it won't. At least I have not been placed in handcuffs. But then again, when the judge indicates that you are not going to change their mind on something, I don't continue to argue the matter. |
| One day this week, I walked into the courtroom about five minutes before my hearing was scheduled to start. I'm pretty punctual in general. There was a hearing still in progress before mine, so I took a seat and watched. A man was there, pro se (representing himself), and apparently he was not convincing the court to rule in his favor. The court was, in fact, not happy with him at all. He was arguing with the judge and raising his voice--not a good idea. The judge eventually got him to quiet down by saying that every time he interrupted, the court would find him in contempt and fine him $100. Oddly enough, that only kept him quiet for a minute. He began arguing again, raising his voice and speaking over the judge. He was given a fine, and it grew. Eventually it became clear that even the monetary sanction was not having its desired effect, and the judge ordered the man removed from the court. As he was escorted out, he continued to argue, and his fine continued to increase as he yelled back in from the hallway. It reached nearly $1,000. Representing yourself is not always the cheapest way to go. It occurred to me that this particular guy could have probably even saved himself some money if he had just gotten a lawyer. |
| People sometimes make bad wardrobe decisions on the day they have court. They wear tennis shoes and platform stiletto heels. Skin-tight miniskirt dresses. Torn jeans. T-shirts with questionable comments, pictures and brand names. Flip flops. I wonder why they selected such attire. They can't think it'll help their case. Me personally, I would love nothing more than to stroll into court in jeans and a comfy shirt. Maybe a sweater--some judges keep their courtroom very cold. But that wouldn't fly. As I write this, I'm sitting at home in my pajama pants and a t-shirt. That's what I always change into the minute I get home. And thinking back, I know I've seen someone walk into court wearing pajama pants and a t-shirt. Oh, to be that comfortable in there! So, while I don't envy their situation which brought them before the court, I do sometimes envy their level of comfiness. But not the girls in the super high heels, not even a little bit. |
| Your lawyer is a pitbull. A ruthless, heartless killing machine who does not settle, and who does not back down. Your lawyer picks up a sword and charges into the arena to battle on your behalf. Your lawyer takes the blows, and bleeds and continues to fight. A dedicated, dauntless soldier. And all your lawyer seeks is approval from the judge... Your lawyer perhaps was not held enough as a child. Perhaps not given the "Hey, I'm proud of you," from daddy. Sure, your lawyer went to law school, but unless it was Harvard Law School, or maybe, MAYBE Yale, your lawyer has deep-seated insecurities that drive the antagonistim. (And as the daughter of an HLS alum, I can tell you that even they are not immune). So tell your lawyer "good job," "I appreciate the hard work," and "hey, you look really hot in that suit." Because they really want to hear it. Give them a hug, or a hand shake/arm pat combo, when you give them a retainer check. It keeps them motivated and it thirsty for blood. Be nice to your lawyer, and they will be brutal and merciless for you. |
| If you're going to sue someone, you have to have a legal basis--an argument grounded in law with a remedy provided for in law. You cannot go whining to a judge: "But it's not fair!" This is not a legal argument. "But that asshole started it." Also not. "Because, well, duh." Nope. But I learned a handy little trick in law school: take any argument you want to make before the court and translate it into Latin and voila, you have a bona fide legal argument. Also, italicize anything you write in Latin for extra legal points. And therefore: Arguing to the court, "Plaintiff is prohibited from benefiting from this action under the doctrine of equitable estoppel," means, not only is what he is doing unfair, but he's also a lying liar who lies. Informing the court that your client was wronged by a defendant "animus nocendi" will be better regarded than "asshole who started it." And... "Res Ipsa Loquitor" quite literally means the thing speaks for itself. Just look at it, your honor. Duh. I'll say this again, because a lawyer cannot ever give this disclaimer enough: this is not legal advice, do not construe it as such. It's just an observation. I believe that eventually lawyers will be able to object on the bases of "that's bullshit," "I find the witness's testimony really boring," and other sentiments which are grounded in logic but not in law, as soon as we figure out how to say them in Latin. |
| I am actually taking classes all this week. To maintain the license to practice law, we have to take continuing legal education credits every year. And one of those credits must be on "ethics." Let me back up...before taking the state bar, we had to take another board exam, known among us as the "ethics bar." So first we had to learn all about ethics, then we had to take a big test on it and pass, and now we have to take classes on it each year...in case we forget?? There are lawyers who violate rules of ethics. Lawyers are human. It happens. But those who do violate do not do so because of a lack of understanding or a need for refreshing. They do so because what they want happens to be at odds with ethical rules of conduct. This is mainly true for the more well-known rules: Don't co-mingle funds from client trust accounts with your own personal funds Don't reveal attorney-client communications Don't sleep with clients Don't lie in court Easy to remember. Easy to comply with. Then again...the Model Rules of Professional Conduct are grouped into eight sections with a number of rules in each section, and they are tweaked from time to time. So there actually is value to the continuing education requirement. But it's still amusing to me that lawyers are required to take a class on ethics every year. Like we needed more fodder for lawyer jokes. |
| People have questions, and they want answers. That's why we have civil court. There is a decider of fact, a maker of decisions who determines which side is right. In law school, the correct answer to almost any question is "It depends." But in practice, you have to give your client an answer and you have to be able to back it up with legal argument. But are you right? Maybe. I used to explain both possible sides to my colleagues when I was the go-to legal research person in the division at the office. And they would ask me which answer was right. I would tell them that the right answer is the last answer that you get from the highest court that you ask. It's true. The trial judge will rule one way on a question, so you appeal it to a higher court. The trial judge's decision is overturned, so the other party takes it to an even higher court. That court might overturn it again... and so it goes until you run out of courts or the courts decline to hear it. So there you go. The right answer, legally speaking, is the last answer you get. |
| It was another in-office day. Riding the pine and pushing the paper. It was a productive day, at least. I finished some orders to submit to judges to memorialize their rulings. Good times. And so I bring to you (and thank you for stopping in!) another flashback to the old days--this one about a judge who has a way with the words. I walk into the courtroom in my little pants suit. There are two male attorneys in there, one my co-counsel, one opposing counsel. It’s the first time I’ve ever met this particular opposing attorney. He opens his mouth and after about ten words, I'm already deeply offended. He's misogynistic, arrogant and just an all-around asshole. His words alone make my skin crawl so I’m super relieved when he doesn’t offer his hand for a polite shake. Co-counsel and I take our seats at the table. “All rise.” The bailiff opens the door for the judge. The judge, (his name omitted to give me plausible deniability in any later contempt proceedings) breezes in (they usually breeze in, although some march in with verve, yet others saunter) and takes the bench. The judge looks us over, guessing to himself who the attorneys are and who the witnesses are. “Ok, we are here on case number…” Oh. My. God. My heartbeat actually slows a little. I know it’s silly, not to mention cliché, but my knees go a little weak. The judge, his voice is so…so…smooth. It’s low. Quite low. But not too low. Not Barry White, at all, but it’s got that vibrato that bass voices have that resonate and penetrate the cutaneous and subcutaneous layers and get into the deep-visceral parts of a bystander’s body. And he doesn’t speak too fast or too slow. He’s confident and commanding, yet comfortable and calming. I do my best to maintain my poker face. After five years working on criminal cases, my poker face is, well, it’s getting better. Holy shit, if this guy was on the radio, I would listen to him for hours. I would record it and listen to it as I drifted off to sleep. But alas… I had to focus on the case I was there to present that day. I had to put a filter on everything he said, so I could hear the words but not the voice. It wasn’t easy, but I did it. At the end of the trial, he took the matter under advisement. He would give us his ruling in writing at a later date after he gave it some consideration. Honestly, I think it’s a waste that he would put anything in writing when he could speak the words out loud. I don’t really have an ending to this short musing. It was just an attribute I found rather intriguing at the time. |
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
As an owner-operator in the trucking business, I'd like to see people have to retest to renew their driver's licenses, and I think people who drive RV's should have a similar licence to my CDL, after all some of their vehicles are larger than mine!
Somehow this makes sense that focusing on a budget crisis would cause them to spend an extra $250,000. Politics and me are not friends either. I try not to touch it with a ten-foot pole pretty much. 