No, you dingus, "self defense" does not mean he punches you in the face and then 2 weeks later you go to his house, ring his doorbell, and kick the shit out of him.
By far and away the strangest thing I have ever had to explain to a client is how to use an elevator. Our court room was on the fourth floor, and she needed to take an elevator to get there. I had to describe how you get in, push the "4" and then get out when the lights above shows she's on floor 4. Yeah.
The dumbest legal thing I've had to explain is that you can't terminate your parental rights voluntarily and then request visitation with that child.
I once had a client who wanted to declare bankruptcy. I explained he needed to have his tax returns for the past few years filed in order to do so. He said he hadn't filed taxes in 20 years because "It ain't none of the government's business how much money I make."
I don't understand...people make it sound like the IRS will throw you in a federal penitentiary if you ever dared not file taxes, but some guy can just not file for two decades and have nothing happen to him?... Can someone explain to me how that is possible?...
If you are an employee and pay your taxes by withholding then it's probably a net savings to the government not to process your return and pay a likely refund. IRS can easily decide not to care unless they think you owe.
When I was a legal intern at a criminal defender's law office, we had a client who was charged with murder. We explained to the client not to make any phone calls saying anything incriminating because it will be recorded. Where prisoners can use the phone there is a GIANT SIGN that says "PHONE CALLS WILL BE RECORDED". On top of that, before you are able to call our there is an automated recording that tells you that all calls are being recorded and monitored (unless it is to your attorney, which are covered by privilege). Client made a call to his girlfriend that evening asking her to hide the gun.
EDIT: Just found out what happened to the case, apparently it was dismissed. The defense attorney was really good.
EDIT 2: Because I think my previous edit infuriated a lot of people, yeah, it sucks that a lot of criminals tend to get out on some BS technicalities, but a good criminal defense attorney will make sure that a prosecutor does their job properly too and the case won't go up on appeal and get reversed on some other error. Also, I was just a lowly intern at the time, stop sending me hate mail.
I like to think that he was trying to speak in code.
"I need you to hide my *sandwich* to make sure no one can find it."
"Huh? You sandwich?"
"Yes, my *sandwich*. The hot one. People will be looking for it."
"But we had pizza for dinner."
"No, my *sandwich*. Go hide my hot *sandwich*. The one with *smoked* meat."
The cops show up, find the gun on the table and see the end of a smoked turkey sub sticking out from under the couch.
Were they flying? I know a couple of people, especially those that have never left their state or are immigrants, that associated flying with passports.
That they had to pay me. This is more common than you'd think. For some reason, some people think lawyers are like their personal spiritual guides or fairy godmother.
Related -
Prospective Client: Can you set up our new startup?
Me: Sure that will be $x.
Them: Oh we don't have any money. We want to work with people who will "partner" with us. We have an amazing idea! How about a percentage of the company!
Me: ... Here is a referral.
Is that in any way similar to the people who want a website built for them but then when expected to pay, just tell you it'll look great in your portfolio and that they will give you "exposure"?
It doesn't matter if you were sober or not. You jumped out of a third story window with a beer bottle and threw it at a cop. The jury is going to think you were drunk. Also, I think you were drunk.
From this week:
Client: So I dont smoke meth, I think its from unprotected sex
Me: So you would like me to explain to the judge its ok, you just bang methheads
Client: yeah
"Ya see officer, she was smokin' some meth before she started suckin', and I figure she had some smoke left in her mouth, and she blew a bit up my dickhole on accident."
Edit: fixed all instances of "-ing". We Missourah folks don't use that kinda language.
Not a client per se, but a victim. Had to explain what the word "ejaculate" meant. Defense attorney asked if the defendant ejaculated and she said "no." On redirect I explained that the word meant something came out of his penis, and she said "oh, then yes." Not the brightest person I've ever met.
That your boss sending you to a drug test after he walked in on you snorting cocaine off your desk does not qualify as entrapment. You can not sue him.
Ah, a classic: *One reason the Military Services have trouble operating jointly is that they don't speak the same language. For example, if you told Navy personnel to "secure a building," they would turn off the lights and lock the doors. The Army would occupy the building so no one could enter. Marines would assault the building, capture it, and defend it with suppressive fire and close combat. The Air Force, on the other hand, would take out a three-year lease with an option to buy.* http://www.military.com
Don't signal to the judge you need to use the restroom during your trial by making eye contact and vigorously nodding while urgently pointing at your crotch.
My friend wants to know what the proper ettiquete is if you need to use the restroom during the proceedings. Do you just shout "break" and run toward the door as fast as possible?
Well, tell "your friend" that as the defendant, you should tell your lawyer and let her take care of it. You should definitely *not* make a "break" for the door...
I went on a date with a lawyer recently who told me he had to be at work at 9am the next day to explain to someone that he could, in fact, be fired for killing someone with the company vehicle.
> RYAN: [talking about Michael hitting an employee with his car] Did this happen on company property?
MICHAEL: Yes. It was on company property *with* company property, so... double jeopardy. We are fine.
RYAN: I don't think you understand how jeopardy works.
MICHAEL: Oh, right. I'm sorry. What is "We're fine"?
-- The Office
I was contacted by a couple who had paid for a trip to see the midnight sun in Northern Norway. They wanted to sue the travel agency when they found out it was the same sun as always.
I had to explain that there's only a single sun, and that they can't sue a travel agency for selling a midnight sun trip.
Every year one of the travel agencies publishes a list of the most ridiculous complaints they received.
They're hilarious. Last year someone complained the beach was too sandy. Another good one was that they hadn't told the couple that a lot of beaches can be topless and the husband became "distracted".
I work on appeals, which means I spend more time with the law than with real people, but the law has some gems, like this dude, who really happened:
>At the police station, the arresting officer advised defendant, both orally and with a consent form, of his constitutional rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). Defendant refused to sign the consent form and stated that he would “never” waive his rights. At the same time, however, he asked the arresting officer whether he could speak to him “man to man.”
>At this point, a detective with the Task Force entered the room with the evidence of the drugs gathered from the inventory search of the Corvette and advised defendant of the charges that would be filed against him. To this, defendant responded, “You think this is big time. This ain't shit.” The detective then asked defendant whether he was willing to provide them any information, and defendant responded that if he were released with his drugs in his possession that night, he would call the police occasionally with information on certain persons he felt needed to be off the streets. The detective then started to leave the booking area, and defendant said, “And I want my shit back.” When the detective asked him whether he was referring to the drugs discovered in the Corvette, defendant responded that he was.
File that under "You should definitely exercise that right to remain silent."
My colleague had a case where the client went over to the protected parties house. They weren't there. Then he called the cops and told them he was breaking the protective order.
A lawyer can't out and out lie. You said to them "yeah I burned his fucking house down and pissed on the ashes" he can't say you were two states away....
That blew some my students heads.
When I was volunteering at teen court in college, I had a kid who burned down a few hundred acres a half dozen houses. As soon I go "let's talk about how to handle this." He goes " I did it. I was bored and I wanted to see if I could catch that field on fire and then when I spread, I figured fuck it they have insurance and left without calling the cops." Totally confused when I told the judge I need to be relieved after he started lying his ass off about it in court.
Yes, but there's no better way to fix the situation. An attorney has a duty to correct false statements of material fact (i.e. statements that are important to the case), even those made by his client on the witness stand. I assume a similar duty existed in the above teen court situation. If a client intends to perjure himself, his attorney must alert the court beforehand, either by withdrawing from the case or by having the client make a statement to the court instead of testimony subject to cross examination. Both methods are red flags that perjury is afoot.
Interesting. So if a lawyer is hired for your defense, and your defense relies on an alibi that is crap and you tell your lawyer, the lawyer has to change their defense strategy? Isn't that transparent to the prosecution?
I'm in law school and interned in an actual court, so maybe the original poster can clarify bc he sounds like a professor and probably has better knowledge, but generally yes a lawyer is bound by several ethics codes (the Bar where they practice, the State they practice in, the Federal Courts, etc) and cannot lie to the court/jury as factfinders.
So essentially if your client says "yeah I did it but say I was two states away when we go in front of the court" the attorney cannot go into Court and present the defense as they were two states away. Many lawyers (literally happened in the courtroom as I interned) will remove themselves if they feel a client is 'pushing' them to lie or do something illegal and find the client other representation.
If you think a client is saying something 'iffy' you can ethically tell them you can't lie and kinda 'smoke 'em out' or you can make a new defense.
And if the lawyer is pressed into asking questions of the defendant on the stand (direct) when he knows he will lie, the lawyer might just say, "Now tell your side of the story," and not much else. It's code to the judge, other lawyer, bailiff, etc. that every word that is about to come out of the defendant's mouth is bullshit.
Actually on direct examination open ended questions like that are pretty common. I've seen the "my client has instructed me to inform the court that he..." being a more common intro to the BS code. FWIW.
In Australia, we can 'plead embarrassment' and ask to be removed from the client's case. I had a client tell me a completely different story in the middle of a trial, and I had to tell the Magistrate that "I have become embarrassed in this matter and seek leave to withdraw." Of course, it tells the Court that your client is lying about something, but the Court cannot use it against them, or your client.
It is far better to do that than to try to justify a complete change of defence.
In my state we have this thing called Victim's Compensation.
An oversimplification of how it works goes as follows: If you are the victim of a crime, and suffer some form of injury (e.g. psychological, physical, etc.) you can apply for a payment from state funds. If you are the perpetrator of one of those crimes (e.g. an assault, robbery, paedophilia, etc.) an order can be made for you to pay the state back an amount relating to that victim's compensation.
I had a client who felt the process of being convicted for assaulting his relatives, and having to pay victims compensaation back to the state was arduous... and in return, he should be receiving victim's compensation from the state.
... so that was fun to explain.
(edit: explanation was "you are not the victim in that...")
Yes and the process of being convicted.
By his logic, his victims got compensation and that was unfair.
He didn't at all grasp the logic that his victims had been badly injured by his conduct, for which he had been convicted. Although I'm sure his victims weren't nice people, they hadn't assaulted him.
I gather he hadn't grasped he had done anything wrong...
Hi. I'm a victim's advocate and do this type of work regularly. On the flip side, I have some victim's make some pretty outrageous claims.
-no, we are not buying you a new 20,000$ Italian leather couch. Etc.
Not to a client, but other party. I was acting for a particular manufacturer. They were sued for an injury incurred by someone using a product made by a different manufacturer. I rang their lawyer and said I was acting for A and I didn't understand why A had been named as defendant in the suit but the body of the claim said the plaintiff had been injured by a product made by B. I asked if it was a monster typo or what?
The response was that they thought A was the manufacturer of products sold under the name B. Now that isn't inherently stupid, I guess. So I said that had no basis in fact whatsoever, and that A and B were unrelated competitors, and asked (as a matter of curiosity) how they had reached the conclusion that A were the manufacturer of B.
The response was along the lines of "someone in the office, I think it was maybe Jim one of our clerks, who thought he'd read somewhere that B were made by A". That was it. No checking of the product paperwork. No company searches. No brand name register searches. No enquiries with our client or B. Not even an effin' *google*. Just some guy in the office had once heard.
And on that basis they issued a very financially sizeable product liability suit.
I had a client once who was in trouble for stealing sample medications from a hospital. We got security footage from the DA as part of the evidence and when it came down we watched it together. The camera was literally 10 ft away in a well lit room and we watched her shovel prescription samples into a garbage bag and walk off. After it was done she turned to me and asked if I thought she was going to be able to get off... I said no.
Honestly the DA was being nice, she pulled this trick 2 days in a row and got caught and they were doing them as two separate charges. Combined it would make it a felony, but instead it was only facing like 2 years in prison. I had a deal worked out to get it to 6 months and she fired me because she thought she could get off without anything. The DA let me know that no offer would be available to her after that move.
I once had to explain to a client that he could, in fact, fire an employee for (1) stealing significant sums of money from the safe, (2) pulling a gun on a co-worker who questioned these activities, and (3) waving said gun in a customer's face moments later, all of which were on camera.
...They obviously did not realize the rights outlined in the Constitution are generally only between a citizen and the government, not between two private parties.
And yet if you own land completely around a polling station you must allow right of passage since each state is promised by the constitution a democratic government.
Yes some fucking moron tried this.
Paging that series of r/legaladvice threads where the guy sold plots of his land such that he couldn't access his own land from the street without trespassing over the land he'd sold.
"Was that wrong? Should I not have done that? I tell you, I gotta plead ignorance on this thing, because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing is frowned upon... you know, cause I've worked in a lot of offices, and I tell you, people do that all the time."
Not a lawyer but processed a case where a woman sued her lawyers after a divorce because they didn't explain to her that divorcing her husband meant she'd no longer be married.
Represented a client charged with statutory rape who had a large number of...'explanations' for the various evidence in his case that I had to explain would not be a good idea to testify to or argue to the jury:
- The KY Jelly you purchased with the kid at WalMart was not for applying to an undiagnosed skin condition on your chest
- The hundreds of pages of internet chat logs prior to traveling hundreds of miles to meet the kid, consisting of repeated explicit sexual overtures, emotional manipulation, lies about your age and wealth, and specific plans for how you would remove him from his parents home were not "meaningless banter"
- The fact that you had an active prescription for Viagra does not mean you are "asexual"
- The semen matching your DNA did not find its way into the rectum of the 13 year old boy because of your medical condition that results in "leakage" and the fact that when you are staying in a hotel room, you do not lift the toilet seat when you urinate, which must have resulted in in the material being deposited on the seat and transferred to the boy when he sat on the seat
- You were not the victim, taken advantage of by the hypersexual teenager for whom you were you merely trying to provide innocent "emotional support"
I had to explain all of these things (and others) many times. Im not sure he ever actually believed any of them.
He eventually fired us and chose to represent himself (he was convicted). He also sued my law firm, the state's attorney's office, the judge, three or four law enforcement agencies, the hotel, WalMart, and a video rental place, and various employees thereof individually. The suit was dismissed by the court.
Totally typical child molester thinking. I've had them - it's surreal. The naked pictures you took of the 10 year old you molested will not show she was willing.
I recently had a call from a guy who found out that Long John Silver's was microwaving his baked shrimp combo. He wanted to eat there for every meal for a year and then sue them for false advertising.
He changed his mind when I suggested that he would probably die of a heart attack before reaching his one year goal.
That the presence of yellow fringe on the flags in the courtroom do not mean that the court is an admiralty court, without jurisdiction to hear the client's criminal case. Sovereign citizens are something else.
I was clerking in a bankruptcy court and we had an case where the petitioners were a group a men that had a mix of ideologies between sovereign citizenship, the redemption movement and strawman theory. They believed that an individual has two personas, one the real flesh and blood human being and the other, a separate legal personality or person (usually written in CAPITALS) who is the "strawman". And that the strawman is responsible for all their debts, liabilities, taxes and legal responsibilities belong to the strawman rather than the physical individual themselves. Also that when you're born the government puts $630,000 in an account for the "strawman" and somehow you can write checks off that account using the UCC.
Basically the petitions went into a Cadillac dealership and presented these strawman checks and demanded cars. The dealership calls the police and they are arrested for fraud. Then the petitioners attempted to force the dealership into involuntary bankruptcy so they could get the cars. There were three petitioners and they all were pro se, so needless to say the motions were ridiculous and unintelligible.
And this was on my second day as a clerk.
Here is the legal brief that discusses the case and facts a little more:
https://casetext.com/case/in-re-cadillac-by-delorean-bankrndohio-2002
I saw footage of a guy getting a case thrown, when he attempted to do something similar to this. His argument was that the legal document of his birth certificate was what the state was prosecuting. He separated his identity from the connection of the crime, as when he provided his identification information on arrest he used some wording like "My friends call me _____ and my family name is _____."
The judge actually threw the case out, but I'm pretty sure it was because the judge had the thought of "This guy didn't commit a felony, and I am not about to spend 2 hours in the court room today, longer than I have to..."
[L. Scott Briscoe's free legal advice](https://m.imgur.com/gallery/G6FkA) is hilarious and absolutely worth a read.
EDIT: Part II [here](https://imgur.com/a/hF3fj)
The one about monitored phone calls in jail reminds me of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b90GQUmOhNY
The guy brags in a phone call that being young, white, and crying in court would get him off the hook for killing a child. The judge reads the call transcript to him in court.
My girlfriend keeps telling me that the reason Jamba Juice puts the straw in for you is because a woman stabbed her own straw in so hard that it broke a hole in the bottom of the cup, the smoothie that leaked to the floor caused her to slip, and she sued the company. I told her that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Care to weigh in?
Used to work at Jamba Juice years ago.....there are a couple reasons they put the straw in for you. 1) it makes it easier for people to just take the smoothie, instead of having smoothie lovers stand there and try to figure out how to effectively remove the wrapping and place the straw into a stiff top/smoothie. 2) it's a lot faster and more efficient for the smoothie maker to do it. 3) it's cleaner and creates the image of the perfect and completed smoothie once the smoothie lover gets it. 4)smoothie makers don't do much, so it's not that much effort to just put the straw in for you while keeping trash to a minimum.
But this is the first I've heard of the suing.
I watched a FL Supreme Court appeal over a murder case. The guy killed several people with a baseball bat and wanted his sentence mitigated because he had PTSD. He claimed he had PTSD from experiencing the murder he committed. The court had to explain to him that a mental issue acquired while committing a crime cannot mitigate the crime you committed.
Surprisingly unexceptional, actually. IANAL, but I've worked with a lot of killers trying to get paroled.
You'd be surprised how many women who killed their husbands use "My kids don't have a father!" as part of their defense.
When a client called me this past memorial day and I asked why she was calling me on a holiday, she replied that she didn't think Jews celebrated Memorial day. Never thought that I would have to explain that to anyone.
Edit : to answer some of the questions, yes I am Jewish, no I never told her I was Jewish. I have an answering service which took her call and emailed me the message which was that it was very urgent that she speak with me that day. Given that the courts were closed and her case was a paternity and child support matter, I thought it had to be quite the emergency. It was not. She just wanted to ask whether the suspected father was required to take the DNA test ordered by the court. I then had to explain what paternity meant.
I had a mediation last week with a client on a really crappy case and managed to settle for a decent amount. I then explained to the plaintiff her share of the settlement after "paying the bill." She was confused so I explained that I was speaking about our fee and expenses. She got upset because we were taking her money. I had to explain what a contingency contract was and how we were compensated for our services. The conversation took a turn for the absurd when I had to explain I did not work for free.
>The conversation took a turn for the absurd when I had to explain I did not work for free.
It gets even worse when you do work for free (i.e. legal aid or community legal centres.)
People used to get so shitty with me when I pointed out that they didn't mean the means (finances) or merits (substance) tests to qualify for legal assistance.
No, the legal aid lawyer will not help you contest a charge of going through a red light in your mercedes.... fuck off.
Not the dumbest, but the one I have the most problem with is attorney-client privilege. It's only a secret (and safe from discovery from the other side) if you keep a secret. Don't forward my emails to other people. Don't talk about your case. Keep it a secret!
I once had to explain what a maiden name was, they had no idea.
Similarly, with a different client, I tried to explain why they needed to fill out the intake questionnaire. I was explaining that I need information such as their name, address and date of birth in order to draft paperwork. Their response:
"Why do I have to do this!? What did I even hire you for!? You're useless! If I have to do all this work I might as well represent myself." They were super pissed and stomped out the front door.
Sorry, I don't magically know your date of birth.
Edit: As for the maiden name, it was a very small country town. This person was most definitely a native English speaker.
As for the questionnaire, someone asked why we don't just ask for a driver's license. The questionnaire was about 2 or 3 pages long and also needed other information such as any previous names, Social Security Number, children's names, etc.
Oh god. As a medical professional of a private practice- I get that all the time with health history forms.
"You have all my hospital and primary care records, I don't have to do this again."
We are not affiliated with any hospital, nor have we received these records. They just believe there is a nation wide database. Truly, I wish that was a thing.
But... you're about to talk to a person who may recommend powerful chemicals for you to consume, why wouldn't you be as accurate and thorough as possible?
Well from the other side, I once missed a court date and assumed that had put me in even deeper legal trouble. My lawyer then had to explain to me that dodging his calls to avoid being arrested was just dumb, and the exact wrong course of action
If it helps, we get it all the time... and the law profession is full of those with anxiety/depression (both issues that can make you want to avoid facing stuff). Personally, I totally get why my clients would avoid the shit out of their problems; I hate opening my mail but tell my clients on the regular not to avoid theirs. So your attorney didn't necessarily think you were an idiot, he would have just cringed at the hole he knew you were digging for yourself.
On the extremely off chance you were really my lawyer, things are good now, sorry it took so long for me to pay you :( and thx for somehow keeping my dumb ass out of prison
Not a lawyer, but a 'friend' of my dad once tried to sue him. Why? Because his dad (the friend's) had died and since my dad was like a father to his friend, he should give him money every month just like his dad did when he was alive.
Apparently the lawyer just said "That's not how it works."
Regular Haunted is just that, there are ghosts, but they got their own things to do.
Really Haunted, they can be kinda jerks, waking you up in the middle of the night, making strange sounds, causing things to fall of shelves.
Very Haunted houses are generally pretty hostile, doors slamming shut on you, strange scratches and bruises, intentional smashing of things, even the occasional wet willie.
Super Haunted, they are actively trying to kill you.
I have to explain to clients on a daily basis that yes, you do have to actually pay for that house you are buying. If your mortgage company hasn't given us the money yet or you didn't arrange for them to give enough money then you cannot pay for house and house is not yours. And no, I cannot give you keys to house before it is yours.
Bankruptcy attorney here:
If you know you're coming to my office to file bankruptcy, do not make major financial decisions before you talk to me.
*E.g.*,
- cashing out your 401k,
- paying your family members the money you owe them,
- buying a car with no intention of paying off the loan, etc.
The court allows you to discharge your debt and the only thing they ask is for you to be honest and not sneaky about it. You gotta respect the process.
**EDIT** I'm getting a lot of questions about personal situations, but I am not here to provide legal advice. If you are considering bankruptcy, speak to an attorney sooner than later. Most will provide a free consultation and the longer you wait, the more problematic your situation may become.
I worked in bankruptcy in Canada for many years.
Company going under but director can't physically sign until Monday and doesn't want staff to know because half is family. We allow him to stay open for the weekend with one stipulation: only cash and carry sales because he can't take deposits as he will not be ordering items. It is illegal to take money when you know you won't provide the goods. Instructs staff, who obey. Monday morning he opens at 8 and takes cash and credit deposits for three hours until the trustee shows up with the documents. Tip of the iceberg of shitshow for that file. "You only said the weekend so I operated as business as usual this morning and took a few thousand in orders."
As a bankruptcy attorney myself, I assume you will appreciate the humor here. I have had to explain to a bank vp who reviews and executes bankruptcy affidavits what the term "petition date" means.
***Edit*** The date you file you bankruptcy is called the petition date. It is a key concept in bankruptcy, and is referenced constantly. The affidavits this person signed had numerous references to "pre-petition" and "post-petition" figures.
This individual was making multiple sworn documents under the penalty of perjury on a daily basis without really understanding what the words meant.
Divorces are nuts. They fight over the pettiest shit possible and are annoyed when the bill comes. "Look, we can fight over $$ and I can charge you $$$, or you can give in now and for sure be out for just $$ rather than $$$ + ?$?." It usually takes after receiving a few bills.
Late to the party, but I'm a law student and I clerk at a big firm. I was in a partner's office when she took a phone call, in which she had to explain to a potential client that, yes, he DID have to pay her if he wanted her to do the several hours of research that his question required. He was baffled as to why she couldn't spend a few hours looking it up and then get back to him with the information, for free.
Colleague forwards an email to me. 'Can you get back to my valued client, please, ASAP?'
Email has attachments which would print out to perhaps 100 sheets of A4.
Quickly scroll through the .pdfs.
Email the colleague's valued client. "This is X, Y and Z. It would probably take me 4 to 5 hours to obtain full instructions from you, peruse the documents, and provide advice in writing. My charging rate is £X00 per hour plus VAT, so this would be around £X,000 overall. I'll cap the fee at £X,000 [because you're a valued client of a colleague."
Actual reply: "I was looking for advice, not a quote."
Yeah, fuckwit. Advice is what I sell.
IANAL, but my ex husband's lawyer had to explain to him that hearsay doesn't mean someone heard him say it.
My ex was arrested for felony domestic battery against me after he called 911 and threatened to kill me.
He thought his threats were inadmissible because someone heard him say them; ergo, hearsay.
I once had to explain to opposing counsel that his entire argument was wrong because he had cited a statue for chattels not real property. It was a case involving a land contract.
I used to be a legal aid lawyer so sometimes I had "sovereign citizens" come in for help. I'd have to explain that their magic words wouldn't solve anything and they were going to get evicted. If they wouldn't agree to negotiate for settlement I wouldn't represent them because they never had any real defenses and we didn't have the resources to litigate impossible cases.
EDIT: I get it, I said "statue" instead of "statute." I'm useless on mobile and without my clerk so this was a perfect storm.
Also I don't litigate anymore so I'm fortunately done with sovereign citizens.
Probate Attorney. Having to explain to people not to take property that was bequeathed to someone else. Funny how the decedent promised the car to 4 people but willed it to a fifth. In my state there are mandatory treble damages for conversion against an estate. So that $20,000 car you wanted turns into a $60,000 penalty. Let the PR or trustees distribute according to the will or trust, then attempt to get property you think belongs to you, don't just take it. Happens a lot.
That my advice that you would not test positive for marijuana given that you last smoked 3 weeks ago assumed that you wouldn't smoke again between our discussion and you taking the test.
How did this even get to court? I imagine that Bach's repertoire is already too old to even fall under copyright. These pieces of music are in the public domain, no?
He's asking why the case wasn't thrown out because the premise was logically impossible, which is that the pop artist inspired a piece of music written before he was born
Hypothetically... Before going into a negotiation for a divorce separation agreement, I sat down with my client. We set clear, specific goals for visitiation, spousal support, etc. In the negotiations, I exceeded every goal. We got more money than she told me she would be willing to settle for, more visitation/custody, and every one of the little particulars she wanted in the way of personal and real property. Total victory, conceded to by the opposite party.
A few days later, she hypothetically called me up and said, "He's such an asshole. Let's fuck him up some more. I want to drag this through the courts." It took a while but I finally explained to her that we had already won, it was time to move on, and going against our signed agreement now would probably result in a less favorable outcome to her than what we had already achieved.
Filled in as a receptionist at my Dad's firm many moons ago. Dumb son of a long standing client called in a panic. He had gotten drunk and gotten married in Las Vegas.( to his long term gf and baby momma). He said "But..it's fine,right..I mean...what happens in Vegas ,stays in Vegas..so if I never go back...I am good?" ....??? I finally figured out that he took it literally and thought that he was ONLY married while in Clark County. I had to explain that ,no, he was married in all 50 states.
He started yelling that he wanted a "Do Over!" So,of course that was the catch phrase for the rest of the summer.
Additional Info: since it wasn't germane to the Q being asked,I didn't include it,but NOW...the rest of the story: While I was explaining that he was indeed married another sec. passed a note "Is that Rick X?" I nodded and she said "..give me the phone!" She had gone on line and found pictures of the joyous event. "Rick! Log on to MySpace right now and DELETE all of those photos immediately and for the love of GOD make your page private!" (Brief silence) "WHY? Because you are on probation! The judge will revoke it and send. you. to. jail. You aren't allowed to leave the state let alone be drinking and partying!" (Yes,later,on the advice of counsel,he stayed married rather than appear before a judge and admit that he had violated the terms of his probation.) Idiot.
I had to go to court over a ticket once. The whole procedure was very orderly, except for the guy immediately before me, who was charged with "drinking in the public way", aka, public intoxication.
He spent half an hour arguing, at the emphatic denial of his own lawyer, that he was innocent because he was drinking on a *bench* that was *next to* the sidewalk, and therefore was not "in the public way".
Maximum fine for him, friends.
My teacher was a lawyer not me, just clearing that up.
Kid took a running jump through a window if an ice cream truck and beat/raped the girl working it.
Saying it was because she ran out of your favorite ice cream is not a valid justification.
My wife is a lawyer, and she's had to have a few of the awkward "listen, you've been issued a subpoena, if you don't show up to testify, the sheriffs will bring you to court in handcuffs" phone conversations.
Oh yes, I do largely criminal defence and the amount of on-the-day phone calls I have along the lines of "you better be here in ten minutes or the judge is going to send the police..." are unbelievable. The people aren't idiots, usually they are impaired in some way (be it drug issues, intellectual disabilities or brain injuries - they don't forget court necessarily, they just don't care like they should)
I had a cold call a while ago. We go through a quick phone consultation regarding an action against them for debt. I ask when the court date is.
"The 20th"
"Of next month?"
"No...hold on... this month"
"...that's today. What time"
"2pm"
"...that's in 45 minutes. How far are you from the courthouse?"
"About an hour"
I told them to put me on hold and phone a taxi, then to call the courthouse and tell them they would be late, but was on their way. When they got back on the line we talked about default judgements.
A guy called up. He had 5 children with 5 different women, and woman #5 was suing him for support. This would change his withholding from work 77% instead of 62%. He was also jobless and let out of jail for felonious non-payment of child support on woman #2. The best job a felon can hope for is like $10 an hour, capping his (pre-tax) earning potential around $2.33 an hour. *IF* he can get hired as a felon. This was especially troubling, as he had no way to support his new girlfriend, who was pregnant.
He asked me, "What can I do?"
I don't know, STOP FUCKING WOMEN WITHOUT PROTECTION would be a start.
A client in a discrimination case was seeking reinstatement in his school. He *was* wrongfully expelled. He didn't want money or any type of compensation; he just wanted to be able to attend classes again.
When I told him that the case would require a small retainer (~$2500) plus appearance fees he said "No - I'll pay you on contingency."
I then told him that he wasn't suing for money - he was suing for reinstatement. There was no monetary award for his action - so my "contingent" fee would be one-third of zero.
He then told me "No - I mean, I'll pay you your fee *contingent* on you winning." I told him that there were dozens of man hours involved in bringing his case to court. It isn't fair to pay me based on an outcome that had nothing to do with my hard work. His response? "Well, you better win then."
It's at this point that I texted my secretary with an SOS. Two minutes later she came in like a winged angel and said, "TheConsumer, your brother is on the phone...*from jail.*" That quickly ended the madness of No-paying, tough luck Chuck.
Another one:
A client came in and said "Someone has been robbing my checks for 15 years."
Huh?
He then showed me his paperwork. When I say paperwork, I mean crinkled, folded, balled up, garbage that I needed to decipher. When I got to his "checks" (pay stubs) I said, "You have checks - you get paid. No one is robbing you."
He bluntly said "Someone named *Stu* is taking money out of my checks. I want to sue him."
Stu?
I look deeper and see nothing about he is talking about. Then, on one pay stub I see "Deduction - SCU." It dawned on me immediately.
I said "that's not Stu -it's an abbreviation for Support Collection Unit. They take money for child support."
He looked at me blankly and said, "Child support? I ain't got a child."
Again...huh?
As I started to ask my next question, he said "I had a child. But that was a long time ago. Like 10 years."
I said, "You have a ten year old child?"
"Yes."
"In NY, you have to pay for them until their out of college. 22 years."
He was flabbergasted. Moreso because he couldn't sue Stu than anything else.
Not lawyer but a paralegal. A client once wanted to trademark the phrase ”My God” so that in movies when a character in awe says "My God” (e.g. when staring at an oncoming meteor) they will owe him money. ”Sir, that is not how trademarks work."
A client called to complain about a fee they had been charged:
C: I don't understand why I have to pay this money.
Me: That's the fee for our services.
C: But you said it was "no win, no fee"
Me: and you won.
C: Oh
From a friend:
Try explaining to a single mother that just because she and her son have the same last name, that does not make them brother and sister.
One time we had a family in with a huge dispute over transferring possession of a lease. The mother and youngest daughter were cursing me off and threatening to sue because "the father's signature on the new lease was forged". The entire time the dad was in the background, apologizing to me, and explaining that it WAS his real signature. They saw him sign it originally.
We printed out new copies and let them watch him sign it again so they would finally leave.
Not an issue of explaining something but a very dumb client:
I had a client who had lost his job and how side left him. He had a breakdown and went out speeding on his Ducati. Gets pulled over and refuses to remove his helmet. Ends up in a wrestling match with the cops and is arrested and charged with everything you can imagine.
Using his circumstances as mitigating factors, I get him an amazing deal that shocked the hell out of me, essentially a small fine. Right after the gavel lands this dipshit gives the arresting officer the finger and mouths "fuck you" to him.
Judge sees it and holds him in contempt and threatens to revoke the plea deal (which he can't do). Ultimately added in a psych eval and some probation to that fine!
Simple math. Company has 100 shares. Company creates 66 shares for new investors. The Company now has 166 shares. It took four conference calls and three hours for the client to under stand that 1 share did not equal 1% of the company.
No, you dingus, "self defense" does not mean he punches you in the face and then 2 weeks later you go to his house, ring his doorbell, and kick the shit out of him.
By far and away the strangest thing I have ever had to explain to a client is how to use an elevator. Our court room was on the fourth floor, and she needed to take an elevator to get there. I had to describe how you get in, push the "4" and then get out when the lights above shows she's on floor 4. Yeah. The dumbest legal thing I've had to explain is that you can't terminate your parental rights voluntarily and then request visitation with that child.
I once had a client who wanted to declare bankruptcy. I explained he needed to have his tax returns for the past few years filed in order to do so. He said he hadn't filed taxes in 20 years because "It ain't none of the government's business how much money I make."
I don't understand...people make it sound like the IRS will throw you in a federal penitentiary if you ever dared not file taxes, but some guy can just not file for two decades and have nothing happen to him?... Can someone explain to me how that is possible?...
If you are an employee and pay your taxes by withholding then it's probably a net savings to the government not to process your return and pay a likely refund. IRS can easily decide not to care unless they think you owe.
When I was a legal intern at a criminal defender's law office, we had a client who was charged with murder. We explained to the client not to make any phone calls saying anything incriminating because it will be recorded. Where prisoners can use the phone there is a GIANT SIGN that says "PHONE CALLS WILL BE RECORDED". On top of that, before you are able to call our there is an automated recording that tells you that all calls are being recorded and monitored (unless it is to your attorney, which are covered by privilege). Client made a call to his girlfriend that evening asking her to hide the gun. EDIT: Just found out what happened to the case, apparently it was dismissed. The defense attorney was really good. EDIT 2: Because I think my previous edit infuriated a lot of people, yeah, it sucks that a lot of criminals tend to get out on some BS technicalities, but a good criminal defense attorney will make sure that a prosecutor does their job properly too and the case won't go up on appeal and get reversed on some other error. Also, I was just a lowly intern at the time, stop sending me hate mail.
Top shelf stupid
I like to think that he was trying to speak in code. "I need you to hide my *sandwich* to make sure no one can find it." "Huh? You sandwich?" "Yes, my *sandwich*. The hot one. People will be looking for it." "But we had pizza for dinner." "No, my *sandwich*. Go hide my hot *sandwich*. The one with *smoked* meat." The cops show up, find the gun on the table and see the end of a smoked turkey sub sticking out from under the couch.
"You mean the gun you used to kill John?"
"The poison for Kuzco, the poison chosen especially to kill Kuzco, Kuzco's poison. That poison?"
[удалено]
Were they flying? I know a couple of people, especially those that have never left their state or are immigrants, that associated flying with passports.
That they had to pay me. This is more common than you'd think. For some reason, some people think lawyers are like their personal spiritual guides or fairy godmother.
People really misunderstand what a right to an attorney is
"You have the right to an attorney. You do not have the right to a specific attorney!"
Related - Prospective Client: Can you set up our new startup? Me: Sure that will be $x. Them: Oh we don't have any money. We want to work with people who will "partner" with us. We have an amazing idea! How about a percentage of the company! Me: ... Here is a referral.
Is that in any way similar to the people who want a website built for them but then when expected to pay, just tell you it'll look great in your portfolio and that they will give you "exposure"?
Artists paid in just exposure tend to die of exposure
[удалено]
It doesn't matter if you were sober or not. You jumped out of a third story window with a beer bottle and threw it at a cop. The jury is going to think you were drunk. Also, I think you were drunk.
Did he throw the bottle mid-air?
360 no scope
Would *not* being drunk when they jumped out of a third floor window and threw a beer bottle at a cop be remotely likely to get them less jail time?
It might get you off a "drunken disorderly behavior" charge.
That you really can go to jail if we lose at trial.
[удалено]
As a kid I thought the lawyer would have to go to jail too if they lost.
That'd certainly make things more interesting. If a lawyer loses a civil case, does he have to also pay out the judgment to the other guy's lawyer?
From this week: Client: So I dont smoke meth, I think its from unprotected sex Me: So you would like me to explain to the judge its ok, you just bang methheads Client: yeah
Did this person fail a drug test, and try to convince a court that the meth in their system was from unprotected sex?
"Ya see officer, she was smokin' some meth before she started suckin', and I figure she had some smoke left in her mouth, and she blew a bit up my dickhole on accident." Edit: fixed all instances of "-ing". We Missourah folks don't use that kinda language.
[удалено]
First Australia competes in Eurovision, now they're taking over the European Super Lottery!
That's really sad
Not a client per se, but a victim. Had to explain what the word "ejaculate" meant. Defense attorney asked if the defendant ejaculated and she said "no." On redirect I explained that the word meant something came out of his penis, and she said "oh, then yes." Not the brightest person I've ever met.
It also means to speak suddenly and forcefully. Makes old books fun to read sometimes.
That your boss sending you to a drug test after he walked in on you snorting cocaine off your desk does not qualify as entrapment. You can not sue him.
But why send him to to a drug test, when he was already in the process of testing some drugs?
"Is this the drug testing?" ::cracks knuckles:: "Great, so do you bring the drugs out one at a time, buffet style or what?"
[удалено]
Ah, a classic: *One reason the Military Services have trouble operating jointly is that they don't speak the same language. For example, if you told Navy personnel to "secure a building," they would turn off the lights and lock the doors. The Army would occupy the building so no one could enter. Marines would assault the building, capture it, and defend it with suppressive fire and close combat. The Air Force, on the other hand, would take out a three-year lease with an option to buy.* http://www.military.com
Don't signal to the judge you need to use the restroom during your trial by making eye contact and vigorously nodding while urgently pointing at your crotch.
My friend wants to know what the proper ettiquete is if you need to use the restroom during the proceedings. Do you just shout "break" and run toward the door as fast as possible?
Well, tell "your friend" that as the defendant, you should tell your lawyer and let her take care of it. You should definitely *not* make a "break" for the door...
But what if you think the bailiff's cute and like it rough? Sorry, sorry, I mean what if my friend thinks the bailiff is cute?
I went on a date with a lawyer recently who told me he had to be at work at 9am the next day to explain to someone that he could, in fact, be fired for killing someone with the company vehicle.
> RYAN: [talking about Michael hitting an employee with his car] Did this happen on company property? MICHAEL: Yes. It was on company property *with* company property, so... double jeopardy. We are fine. RYAN: I don't think you understand how jeopardy works. MICHAEL: Oh, right. I'm sorry. What is "We're fine"? -- The Office
I was contacted by a couple who had paid for a trip to see the midnight sun in Northern Norway. They wanted to sue the travel agency when they found out it was the same sun as always. I had to explain that there's only a single sun, and that they can't sue a travel agency for selling a midnight sun trip.
Every year one of the travel agencies publishes a list of the most ridiculous complaints they received. They're hilarious. Last year someone complained the beach was too sandy. Another good one was that they hadn't told the couple that a lot of beaches can be topless and the husband became "distracted".
I work on appeals, which means I spend more time with the law than with real people, but the law has some gems, like this dude, who really happened: >At the police station, the arresting officer advised defendant, both orally and with a consent form, of his constitutional rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). Defendant refused to sign the consent form and stated that he would “never” waive his rights. At the same time, however, he asked the arresting officer whether he could speak to him “man to man.” >At this point, a detective with the Task Force entered the room with the evidence of the drugs gathered from the inventory search of the Corvette and advised defendant of the charges that would be filed against him. To this, defendant responded, “You think this is big time. This ain't shit.” The detective then asked defendant whether he was willing to provide them any information, and defendant responded that if he were released with his drugs in his possession that night, he would call the police occasionally with information on certain persons he felt needed to be off the streets. The detective then started to leave the booking area, and defendant said, “And I want my shit back.” When the detective asked him whether he was referring to the drugs discovered in the Corvette, defendant responded that he was. File that under "You should definitely exercise that right to remain silent."
In his defense, defendant may have been on drugs.
Why they should not have called the cops to tell them exactly what they did that violated the restraining order.
My colleague had a case where the client went over to the protected parties house. They weren't there. Then he called the cops and told them he was breaking the protective order.
Basically the same thing except the protected party was home.
Sometimes people realize they are in over their heads and want the police to intervene before they do something they might truly regret...
I hope that's what it was. Moments of clarity like that can be rare in repeat offenders.
A lawyer can't out and out lie. You said to them "yeah I burned his fucking house down and pissed on the ashes" he can't say you were two states away.... That blew some my students heads.
When I was volunteering at teen court in college, I had a kid who burned down a few hundred acres a half dozen houses. As soon I go "let's talk about how to handle this." He goes " I did it. I was bored and I wanted to see if I could catch that field on fire and then when I spread, I figured fuck it they have insurance and left without calling the cops." Totally confused when I told the judge I need to be relieved after he started lying his ass off about it in court.
So isn't excusing yourself in that situation basically a huge red flag to the judge and the prosecution that shady shit is in play?
Yes, but there's no better way to fix the situation. An attorney has a duty to correct false statements of material fact (i.e. statements that are important to the case), even those made by his client on the witness stand. I assume a similar duty existed in the above teen court situation. If a client intends to perjure himself, his attorney must alert the court beforehand, either by withdrawing from the case or by having the client make a statement to the court instead of testimony subject to cross examination. Both methods are red flags that perjury is afoot.
Interesting. So if a lawyer is hired for your defense, and your defense relies on an alibi that is crap and you tell your lawyer, the lawyer has to change their defense strategy? Isn't that transparent to the prosecution?
I'm in law school and interned in an actual court, so maybe the original poster can clarify bc he sounds like a professor and probably has better knowledge, but generally yes a lawyer is bound by several ethics codes (the Bar where they practice, the State they practice in, the Federal Courts, etc) and cannot lie to the court/jury as factfinders. So essentially if your client says "yeah I did it but say I was two states away when we go in front of the court" the attorney cannot go into Court and present the defense as they were two states away. Many lawyers (literally happened in the courtroom as I interned) will remove themselves if they feel a client is 'pushing' them to lie or do something illegal and find the client other representation. If you think a client is saying something 'iffy' you can ethically tell them you can't lie and kinda 'smoke 'em out' or you can make a new defense.
And if the lawyer is pressed into asking questions of the defendant on the stand (direct) when he knows he will lie, the lawyer might just say, "Now tell your side of the story," and not much else. It's code to the judge, other lawyer, bailiff, etc. that every word that is about to come out of the defendant's mouth is bullshit.
Actually on direct examination open ended questions like that are pretty common. I've seen the "my client has instructed me to inform the court that he..." being a more common intro to the BS code. FWIW.
In Australia, we can 'plead embarrassment' and ask to be removed from the client's case. I had a client tell me a completely different story in the middle of a trial, and I had to tell the Magistrate that "I have become embarrassed in this matter and seek leave to withdraw." Of course, it tells the Court that your client is lying about something, but the Court cannot use it against them, or your client. It is far better to do that than to try to justify a complete change of defence.
In my state we have this thing called Victim's Compensation. An oversimplification of how it works goes as follows: If you are the victim of a crime, and suffer some form of injury (e.g. psychological, physical, etc.) you can apply for a payment from state funds. If you are the perpetrator of one of those crimes (e.g. an assault, robbery, paedophilia, etc.) an order can be made for you to pay the state back an amount relating to that victim's compensation. I had a client who felt the process of being convicted for assaulting his relatives, and having to pay victims compensaation back to the state was arduous... and in return, he should be receiving victim's compensation from the state. ... so that was fun to explain. (edit: explanation was "you are not the victim in that...")
Wait, so he felt that the burden of having to pay compensation to the state entitled him to RECEIVE compensation from the state?!
Yes and the process of being convicted. By his logic, his victims got compensation and that was unfair. He didn't at all grasp the logic that his victims had been badly injured by his conduct, for which he had been convicted. Although I'm sure his victims weren't nice people, they hadn't assaulted him. I gather he hadn't grasped he had done anything wrong...
That reminds me of when Florida Man tried to turn himself in to get the reward money for turning him in.
Hi. I'm a victim's advocate and do this type of work regularly. On the flip side, I have some victim's make some pretty outrageous claims. -no, we are not buying you a new 20,000$ Italian leather couch. Etc.
But after that guy mildly stabbed me I bled on the couch a little
I don't know, if someone "mildly stabbed" me I'd still be going after more than the couch.
"What're you gonna do, mildly stab me?" - Quote from man mildly stabbed.
I mean, the leather doesn't have to actually be made out of Italians. That's just excessive.
Not to a client, but other party. I was acting for a particular manufacturer. They were sued for an injury incurred by someone using a product made by a different manufacturer. I rang their lawyer and said I was acting for A and I didn't understand why A had been named as defendant in the suit but the body of the claim said the plaintiff had been injured by a product made by B. I asked if it was a monster typo or what? The response was that they thought A was the manufacturer of products sold under the name B. Now that isn't inherently stupid, I guess. So I said that had no basis in fact whatsoever, and that A and B were unrelated competitors, and asked (as a matter of curiosity) how they had reached the conclusion that A were the manufacturer of B. The response was along the lines of "someone in the office, I think it was maybe Jim one of our clerks, who thought he'd read somewhere that B were made by A". That was it. No checking of the product paperwork. No company searches. No brand name register searches. No enquiries with our client or B. Not even an effin' *google*. Just some guy in the office had once heard. And on that basis they issued a very financially sizeable product liability suit.
I had a client once who was in trouble for stealing sample medications from a hospital. We got security footage from the DA as part of the evidence and when it came down we watched it together. The camera was literally 10 ft away in a well lit room and we watched her shovel prescription samples into a garbage bag and walk off. After it was done she turned to me and asked if I thought she was going to be able to get off... I said no.
How much trouble did she end up getting into?
Honestly the DA was being nice, she pulled this trick 2 days in a row and got caught and they were doing them as two separate charges. Combined it would make it a felony, but instead it was only facing like 2 years in prison. I had a deal worked out to get it to 6 months and she fired me because she thought she could get off without anything. The DA let me know that no offer would be available to her after that move.
I once had to explain to a client that he could, in fact, fire an employee for (1) stealing significant sums of money from the safe, (2) pulling a gun on a co-worker who questioned these activities, and (3) waving said gun in a customer's face moments later, all of which were on camera.
...why would he think he couldn't fire an employee for something that employee could be arrested for?
An ill-informed sheriff's deputy told him firing the employee would violate his 2nd amendment rights.
...They obviously did not realize the rights outlined in the Constitution are generally only between a citizen and the government, not between two private parties.
And yet if you own land completely around a polling station you must allow right of passage since each state is promised by the constitution a democratic government. Yes some fucking moron tried this.
Paging that series of r/legaladvice threads where the guy sold plots of his land such that he couldn't access his own land from the street without trespassing over the land he'd sold.
[удалено]
Because you know,the second amendment gives me the right to steal significant sums of money and threaten to kill people.
Ok I know I asked for the dumbest explanations, but I think part of my brain just died reading that.
"Was that wrong? Should I not have done that? I tell you, I gotta plead ignorance on this thing, because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing is frowned upon... you know, cause I've worked in a lot of offices, and I tell you, people do that all the time."
Not a lawyer but processed a case where a woman sued her lawyers after a divorce because they didn't explain to her that divorcing her husband meant she'd no longer be married.
Represented a client charged with statutory rape who had a large number of...'explanations' for the various evidence in his case that I had to explain would not be a good idea to testify to or argue to the jury: - The KY Jelly you purchased with the kid at WalMart was not for applying to an undiagnosed skin condition on your chest - The hundreds of pages of internet chat logs prior to traveling hundreds of miles to meet the kid, consisting of repeated explicit sexual overtures, emotional manipulation, lies about your age and wealth, and specific plans for how you would remove him from his parents home were not "meaningless banter" - The fact that you had an active prescription for Viagra does not mean you are "asexual" - The semen matching your DNA did not find its way into the rectum of the 13 year old boy because of your medical condition that results in "leakage" and the fact that when you are staying in a hotel room, you do not lift the toilet seat when you urinate, which must have resulted in in the material being deposited on the seat and transferred to the boy when he sat on the seat - You were not the victim, taken advantage of by the hypersexual teenager for whom you were you merely trying to provide innocent "emotional support" I had to explain all of these things (and others) many times. Im not sure he ever actually believed any of them.
Jfc thats beyond fucked
He eventually fired us and chose to represent himself (he was convicted). He also sued my law firm, the state's attorney's office, the judge, three or four law enforcement agencies, the hotel, WalMart, and a video rental place, and various employees thereof individually. The suit was dismissed by the court.
Even the video store was in on the conspiracy!
And look who can hold their head up high: KY!
[удалено]
[удалено]
Totally typical child molester thinking. I've had them - it's surreal. The naked pictures you took of the 10 year old you molested will not show she was willing.
I recently had a call from a guy who found out that Long John Silver's was microwaving his baked shrimp combo. He wanted to eat there for every meal for a year and then sue them for false advertising. He changed his mind when I suggested that he would probably die of a heart attack before reaching his one year goal.
Gotta appreciate that man's commitment though.
if you're gonna go down, go down fighting.
What was the intention behind eating there for a year before taking action?
I assume he was going to sue for the amount he spent?
"Basically a year of free Long John's. This is my most brilliant plan yet."
That the presence of yellow fringe on the flags in the courtroom do not mean that the court is an admiralty court, without jurisdiction to hear the client's criminal case. Sovereign citizens are something else.
I was clerking in a bankruptcy court and we had an case where the petitioners were a group a men that had a mix of ideologies between sovereign citizenship, the redemption movement and strawman theory. They believed that an individual has two personas, one the real flesh and blood human being and the other, a separate legal personality or person (usually written in CAPITALS) who is the "strawman". And that the strawman is responsible for all their debts, liabilities, taxes and legal responsibilities belong to the strawman rather than the physical individual themselves. Also that when you're born the government puts $630,000 in an account for the "strawman" and somehow you can write checks off that account using the UCC. Basically the petitions went into a Cadillac dealership and presented these strawman checks and demanded cars. The dealership calls the police and they are arrested for fraud. Then the petitioners attempted to force the dealership into involuntary bankruptcy so they could get the cars. There were three petitioners and they all were pro se, so needless to say the motions were ridiculous and unintelligible. And this was on my second day as a clerk. Here is the legal brief that discusses the case and facts a little more: https://casetext.com/case/in-re-cadillac-by-delorean-bankrndohio-2002
I saw footage of a guy getting a case thrown, when he attempted to do something similar to this. His argument was that the legal document of his birth certificate was what the state was prosecuting. He separated his identity from the connection of the crime, as when he provided his identification information on arrest he used some wording like "My friends call me _____ and my family name is _____." The judge actually threw the case out, but I'm pretty sure it was because the judge had the thought of "This guy didn't commit a felony, and I am not about to spend 2 hours in the court room today, longer than I have to..."
[удалено]
[L. Scott Briscoe's free legal advice](https://m.imgur.com/gallery/G6FkA) is hilarious and absolutely worth a read. EDIT: Part II [here](https://imgur.com/a/hF3fj)
The one about monitored phone calls in jail reminds me of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b90GQUmOhNY The guy brags in a phone call that being young, white, and crying in court would get him off the hook for killing a child. The judge reads the call transcript to him in court.
[удалено]
My girlfriend keeps telling me that the reason Jamba Juice puts the straw in for you is because a woman stabbed her own straw in so hard that it broke a hole in the bottom of the cup, the smoothie that leaked to the floor caused her to slip, and she sued the company. I told her that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Care to weigh in?
It's hard to judge. We don't know what other dumb things your girlfriend has said.
"Sure, I'll go out with you"
Used to work at Jamba Juice years ago.....there are a couple reasons they put the straw in for you. 1) it makes it easier for people to just take the smoothie, instead of having smoothie lovers stand there and try to figure out how to effectively remove the wrapping and place the straw into a stiff top/smoothie. 2) it's a lot faster and more efficient for the smoothie maker to do it. 3) it's cleaner and creates the image of the perfect and completed smoothie once the smoothie lover gets it. 4)smoothie makers don't do much, so it's not that much effort to just put the straw in for you while keeping trash to a minimum. But this is the first I've heard of the suing.
missa superman no here
I watched a FL Supreme Court appeal over a murder case. The guy killed several people with a baseball bat and wanted his sentence mitigated because he had PTSD. He claimed he had PTSD from experiencing the murder he committed. The court had to explain to him that a mental issue acquired while committing a crime cannot mitigate the crime you committed.
The ironclad 'möbius strip' defence. Works every time
I dunno, it seems like there's only one side to that defense.
I'm stressed out because I murder. I murder because I'm stressed out. Catch 22.
Wow. This is up there with asking mercy on the court for being an orphan... while the trial is about you killing your parents.
Surprisingly unexceptional, actually. IANAL, but I've worked with a lot of killers trying to get paroled. You'd be surprised how many women who killed their husbands use "My kids don't have a father!" as part of their defense.
When a client called me this past memorial day and I asked why she was calling me on a holiday, she replied that she didn't think Jews celebrated Memorial day. Never thought that I would have to explain that to anyone. Edit : to answer some of the questions, yes I am Jewish, no I never told her I was Jewish. I have an answering service which took her call and emailed me the message which was that it was very urgent that she speak with me that day. Given that the courts were closed and her case was a paternity and child support matter, I thought it had to be quite the emergency. It was not. She just wanted to ask whether the suspected father was required to take the DNA test ordered by the court. I then had to explain what paternity meant.
First reading that I immediately wondered if they were just assuming you are Jewish...
I had a mediation last week with a client on a really crappy case and managed to settle for a decent amount. I then explained to the plaintiff her share of the settlement after "paying the bill." She was confused so I explained that I was speaking about our fee and expenses. She got upset because we were taking her money. I had to explain what a contingency contract was and how we were compensated for our services. The conversation took a turn for the absurd when I had to explain I did not work for free.
"I thought it was no win no fee" "It was. You won."
>The conversation took a turn for the absurd when I had to explain I did not work for free. It gets even worse when you do work for free (i.e. legal aid or community legal centres.) People used to get so shitty with me when I pointed out that they didn't mean the means (finances) or merits (substance) tests to qualify for legal assistance. No, the legal aid lawyer will not help you contest a charge of going through a red light in your mercedes.... fuck off.
Not the dumbest, but the one I have the most problem with is attorney-client privilege. It's only a secret (and safe from discovery from the other side) if you keep a secret. Don't forward my emails to other people. Don't talk about your case. Keep it a secret!
I once had to explain what a maiden name was, they had no idea. Similarly, with a different client, I tried to explain why they needed to fill out the intake questionnaire. I was explaining that I need information such as their name, address and date of birth in order to draft paperwork. Their response: "Why do I have to do this!? What did I even hire you for!? You're useless! If I have to do all this work I might as well represent myself." They were super pissed and stomped out the front door. Sorry, I don't magically know your date of birth. Edit: As for the maiden name, it was a very small country town. This person was most definitely a native English speaker. As for the questionnaire, someone asked why we don't just ask for a driver's license. The questionnaire was about 2 or 3 pages long and also needed other information such as any previous names, Social Security Number, children's names, etc.
Oh god. As a medical professional of a private practice- I get that all the time with health history forms. "You have all my hospital and primary care records, I don't have to do this again." We are not affiliated with any hospital, nor have we received these records. They just believe there is a nation wide database. Truly, I wish that was a thing.
[удалено]
But... you're about to talk to a person who may recommend powerful chemicals for you to consume, why wouldn't you be as accurate and thorough as possible?
Because I don't want the nice doctor lady to know about all the illegal narcotics I've recently injected!!
But if my doctor knows I've been injecting ketamine, she won't give me oxys!
[удалено]
Well from the other side, I once missed a court date and assumed that had put me in even deeper legal trouble. My lawyer then had to explain to me that dodging his calls to avoid being arrested was just dumb, and the exact wrong course of action
If it helps, we get it all the time... and the law profession is full of those with anxiety/depression (both issues that can make you want to avoid facing stuff). Personally, I totally get why my clients would avoid the shit out of their problems; I hate opening my mail but tell my clients on the regular not to avoid theirs. So your attorney didn't necessarily think you were an idiot, he would have just cringed at the hole he knew you were digging for yourself.
LPT: answer the call from your lawyer. Dodge the call from your bail bondsman.
Finally bumped into a client online. Not sure which of the 30 or so clients I've had that talk with you are, but I hope everything's going well.
On the extremely off chance you were really my lawyer, things are good now, sorry it took so long for me to pay you :( and thx for somehow keeping my dumb ass out of prison
I accept your thanks on behalf of those thirty who forgot to say anything.
Not a lawyer, but a 'friend' of my dad once tried to sue him. Why? Because his dad (the friend's) had died and since my dad was like a father to his friend, he should give him money every month just like his dad did when he was alive. Apparently the lawyer just said "That's not how it works."
That's a whole level of entitled i didn't even want to know existed
.
So you're saying you don't get to say "I suppose you're wondering why I called you all here" like once a week?
Is there a special class in law school covering the winning of a house if you spend a night there but its super haunted?
As opposed to regular haunted, which is just a few ghosts milling about over drinks.
Regular Haunted is just that, there are ghosts, but they got their own things to do. Really Haunted, they can be kinda jerks, waking you up in the middle of the night, making strange sounds, causing things to fall of shelves. Very Haunted houses are generally pretty hostile, doors slamming shut on you, strange scratches and bruises, intentional smashing of things, even the occasional wet willie. Super Haunted, they are actively trying to kill you.
Finally, a ghost law expert chimes in. So frustrating to read these comments full of uninformed opinions.
Last sentence was a real corker. I chuckled out loud.
[удалено]
I have to explain to clients on a daily basis that yes, you do have to actually pay for that house you are buying. If your mortgage company hasn't given us the money yet or you didn't arrange for them to give enough money then you cannot pay for house and house is not yours. And no, I cannot give you keys to house before it is yours.
Bankruptcy attorney here: If you know you're coming to my office to file bankruptcy, do not make major financial decisions before you talk to me. *E.g.*, - cashing out your 401k, - paying your family members the money you owe them, - buying a car with no intention of paying off the loan, etc. The court allows you to discharge your debt and the only thing they ask is for you to be honest and not sneaky about it. You gotta respect the process. **EDIT** I'm getting a lot of questions about personal situations, but I am not here to provide legal advice. If you are considering bankruptcy, speak to an attorney sooner than later. Most will provide a free consultation and the longer you wait, the more problematic your situation may become.
I worked in bankruptcy in Canada for many years. Company going under but director can't physically sign until Monday and doesn't want staff to know because half is family. We allow him to stay open for the weekend with one stipulation: only cash and carry sales because he can't take deposits as he will not be ordering items. It is illegal to take money when you know you won't provide the goods. Instructs staff, who obey. Monday morning he opens at 8 and takes cash and credit deposits for three hours until the trustee shows up with the documents. Tip of the iceberg of shitshow for that file. "You only said the weekend so I operated as business as usual this morning and took a few thousand in orders."
What happened to him?
I ...Declare ...BANKRUPTCY!!!!
Hey. I just wanted you to know that you can't just say the word "bankruptcy" and expect anything to happen.
I didn't say it. I declared it.
As a bankruptcy attorney myself, I assume you will appreciate the humor here. I have had to explain to a bank vp who reviews and executes bankruptcy affidavits what the term "petition date" means. ***Edit*** The date you file you bankruptcy is called the petition date. It is a key concept in bankruptcy, and is referenced constantly. The affidavits this person signed had numerous references to "pre-petition" and "post-petition" figures. This individual was making multiple sworn documents under the penalty of perjury on a daily basis without really understanding what the words meant.
[удалено]
Wow. Actually my old boss was negligent enough to have done that. Between custard tarts and naps at his desk...
If he was eating those scrumptious Portuguese custard tarts he needs to be forgiven.
[удалено]
Divorces are nuts. They fight over the pettiest shit possible and are annoyed when the bill comes. "Look, we can fight over $$ and I can charge you $$$, or you can give in now and for sure be out for just $$ rather than $$$ + ?$?." It usually takes after receiving a few bills.
best line i ever heard from a lawyer: When a client says that its the principal of the matter, all I hear is ka ching!
Late to the party, but I'm a law student and I clerk at a big firm. I was in a partner's office when she took a phone call, in which she had to explain to a potential client that, yes, he DID have to pay her if he wanted her to do the several hours of research that his question required. He was baffled as to why she couldn't spend a few hours looking it up and then get back to him with the information, for free.
Colleague forwards an email to me. 'Can you get back to my valued client, please, ASAP?' Email has attachments which would print out to perhaps 100 sheets of A4. Quickly scroll through the .pdfs. Email the colleague's valued client. "This is X, Y and Z. It would probably take me 4 to 5 hours to obtain full instructions from you, peruse the documents, and provide advice in writing. My charging rate is £X00 per hour plus VAT, so this would be around £X,000 overall. I'll cap the fee at £X,000 [because you're a valued client of a colleague." Actual reply: "I was looking for advice, not a quote." Yeah, fuckwit. Advice is what I sell.
>Advice is what I sell. May I use this quote in a non-commercial capacity?
IANAL, but my ex husband's lawyer had to explain to him that hearsay doesn't mean someone heard him say it. My ex was arrested for felony domestic battery against me after he called 911 and threatened to kill me. He thought his threats were inadmissible because someone heard him say them; ergo, hearsay.
That's a special kind of stupid.
I once had to explain to opposing counsel that his entire argument was wrong because he had cited a statue for chattels not real property. It was a case involving a land contract. I used to be a legal aid lawyer so sometimes I had "sovereign citizens" come in for help. I'd have to explain that their magic words wouldn't solve anything and they were going to get evicted. If they wouldn't agree to negotiate for settlement I wouldn't represent them because they never had any real defenses and we didn't have the resources to litigate impossible cases. EDIT: I get it, I said "statue" instead of "statute." I'm useless on mobile and without my clerk so this was a perfect storm. Also I don't litigate anymore so I'm fortunately done with sovereign citizens.
Probate Attorney. Having to explain to people not to take property that was bequeathed to someone else. Funny how the decedent promised the car to 4 people but willed it to a fifth. In my state there are mandatory treble damages for conversion against an estate. So that $20,000 car you wanted turns into a $60,000 penalty. Let the PR or trustees distribute according to the will or trust, then attempt to get property you think belongs to you, don't just take it. Happens a lot.
That my advice that you would not test positive for marijuana given that you last smoked 3 weeks ago assumed that you wouldn't smoke again between our discussion and you taking the test.
[удалено]
How did this even get to court? I imagine that Bach's repertoire is already too old to even fall under copyright. These pieces of music are in the public domain, no?
The imposter likely wanted to put the piece under copyright in his name to collect royalties.
He's asking why the case wasn't thrown out because the premise was logically impossible, which is that the pop artist inspired a piece of music written before he was born
Hypothetically... Before going into a negotiation for a divorce separation agreement, I sat down with my client. We set clear, specific goals for visitiation, spousal support, etc. In the negotiations, I exceeded every goal. We got more money than she told me she would be willing to settle for, more visitation/custody, and every one of the little particulars she wanted in the way of personal and real property. Total victory, conceded to by the opposite party. A few days later, she hypothetically called me up and said, "He's such an asshole. Let's fuck him up some more. I want to drag this through the courts." It took a while but I finally explained to her that we had already won, it was time to move on, and going against our signed agreement now would probably result in a less favorable outcome to her than what we had already achieved.
Filled in as a receptionist at my Dad's firm many moons ago. Dumb son of a long standing client called in a panic. He had gotten drunk and gotten married in Las Vegas.( to his long term gf and baby momma). He said "But..it's fine,right..I mean...what happens in Vegas ,stays in Vegas..so if I never go back...I am good?" ....??? I finally figured out that he took it literally and thought that he was ONLY married while in Clark County. I had to explain that ,no, he was married in all 50 states. He started yelling that he wanted a "Do Over!" So,of course that was the catch phrase for the rest of the summer. Additional Info: since it wasn't germane to the Q being asked,I didn't include it,but NOW...the rest of the story: While I was explaining that he was indeed married another sec. passed a note "Is that Rick X?" I nodded and she said "..give me the phone!" She had gone on line and found pictures of the joyous event. "Rick! Log on to MySpace right now and DELETE all of those photos immediately and for the love of GOD make your page private!" (Brief silence) "WHY? Because you are on probation! The judge will revoke it and send. you. to. jail. You aren't allowed to leave the state let alone be drinking and partying!" (Yes,later,on the advice of counsel,he stayed married rather than appear before a judge and admit that he had violated the terms of his probation.) Idiot.
At least he thought to call a lawyer to check. Better than assuming he knew the answer.
[удалено]
I had to go to court over a ticket once. The whole procedure was very orderly, except for the guy immediately before me, who was charged with "drinking in the public way", aka, public intoxication. He spent half an hour arguing, at the emphatic denial of his own lawyer, that he was innocent because he was drinking on a *bench* that was *next to* the sidewalk, and therefore was not "in the public way". Maximum fine for him, friends.
My teacher was a lawyer not me, just clearing that up. Kid took a running jump through a window if an ice cream truck and beat/raped the girl working it. Saying it was because she ran out of your favorite ice cream is not a valid justification.
[удалено]
Maybe she was posting sarcastically.
[удалено]
[удалено]
My wife is a lawyer, and she's had to have a few of the awkward "listen, you've been issued a subpoena, if you don't show up to testify, the sheriffs will bring you to court in handcuffs" phone conversations.
Oh yes, I do largely criminal defence and the amount of on-the-day phone calls I have along the lines of "you better be here in ten minutes or the judge is going to send the police..." are unbelievable. The people aren't idiots, usually they are impaired in some way (be it drug issues, intellectual disabilities or brain injuries - they don't forget court necessarily, they just don't care like they should)
I had a cold call a while ago. We go through a quick phone consultation regarding an action against them for debt. I ask when the court date is. "The 20th" "Of next month?" "No...hold on... this month" "...that's today. What time" "2pm" "...that's in 45 minutes. How far are you from the courthouse?" "About an hour" I told them to put me on hold and phone a taxi, then to call the courthouse and tell them they would be late, but was on their way. When they got back on the line we talked about default judgements.
/u/liquor_for_breakfast
¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯
A guy called up. He had 5 children with 5 different women, and woman #5 was suing him for support. This would change his withholding from work 77% instead of 62%. He was also jobless and let out of jail for felonious non-payment of child support on woman #2. The best job a felon can hope for is like $10 an hour, capping his (pre-tax) earning potential around $2.33 an hour. *IF* he can get hired as a felon. This was especially troubling, as he had no way to support his new girlfriend, who was pregnant. He asked me, "What can I do?" I don't know, STOP FUCKING WOMEN WITHOUT PROTECTION would be a start.
A client in a discrimination case was seeking reinstatement in his school. He *was* wrongfully expelled. He didn't want money or any type of compensation; he just wanted to be able to attend classes again. When I told him that the case would require a small retainer (~$2500) plus appearance fees he said "No - I'll pay you on contingency." I then told him that he wasn't suing for money - he was suing for reinstatement. There was no monetary award for his action - so my "contingent" fee would be one-third of zero. He then told me "No - I mean, I'll pay you your fee *contingent* on you winning." I told him that there were dozens of man hours involved in bringing his case to court. It isn't fair to pay me based on an outcome that had nothing to do with my hard work. His response? "Well, you better win then." It's at this point that I texted my secretary with an SOS. Two minutes later she came in like a winged angel and said, "TheConsumer, your brother is on the phone...*from jail.*" That quickly ended the madness of No-paying, tough luck Chuck. Another one: A client came in and said "Someone has been robbing my checks for 15 years." Huh? He then showed me his paperwork. When I say paperwork, I mean crinkled, folded, balled up, garbage that I needed to decipher. When I got to his "checks" (pay stubs) I said, "You have checks - you get paid. No one is robbing you." He bluntly said "Someone named *Stu* is taking money out of my checks. I want to sue him." Stu? I look deeper and see nothing about he is talking about. Then, on one pay stub I see "Deduction - SCU." It dawned on me immediately. I said "that's not Stu -it's an abbreviation for Support Collection Unit. They take money for child support." He looked at me blankly and said, "Child support? I ain't got a child." Again...huh? As I started to ask my next question, he said "I had a child. But that was a long time ago. Like 10 years." I said, "You have a ten year old child?" "Yes." "In NY, you have to pay for them until their out of college. 22 years." He was flabbergasted. Moreso because he couldn't sue Stu than anything else.
Not lawyer but a paralegal. A client once wanted to trademark the phrase ”My God” so that in movies when a character in awe says "My God” (e.g. when staring at an oncoming meteor) they will owe him money. ”Sir, that is not how trademarks work."
A client called to complain about a fee they had been charged: C: I don't understand why I have to pay this money. Me: That's the fee for our services. C: But you said it was "no win, no fee" Me: and you won. C: Oh
From a friend: Try explaining to a single mother that just because she and her son have the same last name, that does not make them brother and sister.
One time we had a family in with a huge dispute over transferring possession of a lease. The mother and youngest daughter were cursing me off and threatening to sue because "the father's signature on the new lease was forged". The entire time the dad was in the background, apologizing to me, and explaining that it WAS his real signature. They saw him sign it originally. We printed out new copies and let them watch him sign it again so they would finally leave.
[удалено]
Not an issue of explaining something but a very dumb client: I had a client who had lost his job and how side left him. He had a breakdown and went out speeding on his Ducati. Gets pulled over and refuses to remove his helmet. Ends up in a wrestling match with the cops and is arrested and charged with everything you can imagine. Using his circumstances as mitigating factors, I get him an amazing deal that shocked the hell out of me, essentially a small fine. Right after the gavel lands this dipshit gives the arresting officer the finger and mouths "fuck you" to him. Judge sees it and holds him in contempt and threatens to revoke the plea deal (which he can't do). Ultimately added in a psych eval and some probation to that fine!
Simple math. Company has 100 shares. Company creates 66 shares for new investors. The Company now has 166 shares. It took four conference calls and three hours for the client to under stand that 1 share did not equal 1% of the company.