Settlement negotiations are just like international waters. Anything goes and I can’t be held accountable for calling you a pencil dick
And that kids is why you don’t send emails at 4:30 am. Jeez, I’ve gotten into some fairly heated e-mail discussions with defense counsel on a case I’m in now, but that is bizarre. Those guys handled it well.
I’m talking about sanctions. Agreed he shouldn’t lose his license. Typically only lose your license when you intentionally fuck over a client.
They should give him the opposite punishment and force him to litigate homeowners claims against Allstate for the rest of time
So truck driver in a truck accident case lies about his past arrest history in his interrogatories and deposition. Turns out he has a long history of arrests leading all the way up to the crash. My trucking expert tells me that the FMCSR don't really speak to arrests in terms of hiring a driver so doesn't help me on negligent hiring/retention. None of his arrests are related to operating a motor vehicle. You think the judge will allow me to get the arrests in front of the jury as impeachment evidence to show he lied? If I was representing the trucking company I'd file a MIL on it and say it is too prejudicial.
Dude came extremely close to, possibly even crossed, the line on committing a felony - I don’t think revocation of his license should be off the table
403 is all about balancing probative value and prejudice. Credibility is always at issue, so you’ve got that in your favor as something to argue, but unless the driver’s credibility is a major issue —e.g., in a liability dispute, the judge may still keep it out. If I were you, I’d concede bringing up all arrests individually and push to be able time ask a quick series of questions going to the point that he gave false answers under oath. Here, there’s a great jury charge about how you can disregard a witnesses’s entire testimony if you find he willfully testified untruthfully about any fact. I take a blowup of it to every trial:
Take a look at Rule 608, also. I think you should put everything in front of the judge and ask him to let you get into it, but offer as an alternative what wes tegg suggests. I think if there is a liability dispute you should be able to at least inform this jury that this guy is dishonest. If his reputation for truthfulness and his credibility is ultimately immaterial to the issues, I think you’re out of luck, however.
“Mr. Hook, the long dick of the law is indeed long. And girthy. Here is your punishment.” Later that night:
Oh they’re very lucrative if you’re taking home all the fees and have volume. If you’re the foot soldier out there grinding them I’m not sure there’s much worse
Before I finally hung up my litigator's hat and jumped into the exciting world of tax and corporate transactions, I had a client (who happened to be a family member with some psychological conditions), send about 20 threatening and arguably anti-Semitic emails to opposing counsel between midnight and 5 AM. Man, that made for a fun next day at work.
Sanctions could mean anything But if this case is dismissed he could be on the hook for an assload of attorney fees I was at a hearing two weeks ago and a plaintiff brought a suit against a home builder and then ultimately decided not to pursue it and the judge ordered them to pay $70k in fees
Such a dumb comment to bring politics into this. There's a very small likelihood that a plaintiff's lawyer in California "has a MAGA hat."
Well, I couldn't figure out how to cut the MAGA tweet out of it. It's just some guy commenting on the brief.
I work for an engineering firm as a planner. Currently, most of what I do is reading code and determining the development standards and processes for our clients in jurisdictions all over the country. There may be some opportunities coming up where we would write the zoning ordinance and/or comprehensive plan for some jurisdictions. If we get one of these jurisdictions as a client, there might be a couple of "inventive" ideas rolling around in my noggin that I'd need ensure are legal before proceeding.
Sure. It’s pretty unlikely the Plaintiffs are intimately involved and knowledgeable about the facts and strategy.
At a mediation and defense lawyer is saying my client should’ve got surgery instead of an injection for a compression fracture in her back .....what? If she gets cut on you would owe us 5x what we want?
Your stories are wild. It's a whole different world out there. If a defense lawyer tells me my client should have had surgery, I'm adding another 0 to my demand.
I would imagine that's in response to a claim for future pain and suffering. If the source of the pain could be fixed with a surgery, why not get the surgery rather than treat the pain?
This is true. Just thinking, in my neck of the woods, surgery usually equals policy limits unless we've got a massive amount of coverage.
Yep. I had a case once where the plaintiff was a pilot and didn’t want to have a cervical fusion done because he believed it would prevent him from continuing to fly.
Yeah, a surgical recommendation should mean the same thing. Generally, a surgical recommendation and no surgery raises red flags.
Had a mediation last week guy is rear ended by someone going 70mph he is at a dead stop. Lucky to be alive really: he tore his bicep and rotator cuff. He didn’t complain about shoulder for a month because his entire body was black and blue Got $100k third party limits he has 500k underinsured the underinsured carrier offers 20k at mediation because gap in treatment
he got his appointment and was sent to surgery in two days. their doc said well if he tore up his shoulder he wouldn't have been able to raise it above his head!!! but also that people are walking around with torn rotator cuffs and don't even know it. ok buddy
he also claimed in his report and on his website that he was team doc for the dallas mavericks. i looked into it and that ended in 2017. so i started out the deposition about that and showed him on my phone and on his report. well his website said it made it clear he wasn't still the team doc--even though it said "Team Physicians for the 2011 NBA Champion Dallas Mavericks" and his report said he still was. well i don't type that section of my report... you don't type your whole report? well not the section about my background. ok well it looks like you're being misleading at best and lying at work and i'm trying to figure out if you lie about the little things if you'll lie about the big things too. that depo was fun
they all pay to be 'team doc' i know the former team docs for the razorbacks and they did it basically where they didn't charge the hogs for forever and then 5-7 years ago they called and said if you want to keep being team docs you have to pay us 15k a month. they loled
Anyone have experience moving from big law to in house? My wife is getting tired of the hours and thinking about looking around. I’m not super familiar with the space and she’s hesitant to bring it up with any of her colleagues for the time being.