Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Mainboard' started by Jax Teller, Apr 8, 2015.
Yes, if you have landlord tenant issues, please don’t.
That played out the difference in how different types of lawyers look at cases pretty hilariously. The plaintiffs’ lawyers saw it as a turn down immediately. Those who get paid by the hour had to prove why it was.
I look at it as finding a claim or defense that won’t necessarily be a winner at trial, but one that will survive motions and force a trial. You aren’t trying to win as much as you are using the prospect of litigation cost to force a settlement.
If the goal is a new lease so he doesn’t have to move, then the issue is whether the landlord faced with the prospect of the claim/defense views the new lease as a graceful exit that can benefit both instead of spending money to litigate.
The problem is Washington statute of frauds appears to kill this on a Rule 12 motion out of the gate.
I’d turn it down even if it was a great case. My worst memories in practice of law have been from landlord tenant.
On one, I have a client that rents out lots on river. No structures just the land. And people usually put rvs or things there. She’s an absentee landlord not paying much attention to what’s going on. Guy actually builds a permanent structure on the lot. So of course thank you, that is now my lady’s house. Guy then turns around and “sells” his house to one of the most insane women I’ve ever met. Cops start getting called, so in order to get the police to physically remove her, we actually file an unlawful detainer. Should’ve been an easy, no problem default. Legal Services of Alabama steps in and actually represents her. I have to have a full on trial where they argue that my client should somehow be forced to have a rental agreement with this woman simply because she didn’t understand the property laws of Alabama. Lawyer also tried to introduce a letter from the man she bought the house from. I of course object, and her response is what do you mean it’s hearsay, it’s notarized.
After that experience, I’m avoiding landlord-tenant if at all possible.
I'd rather wrestle a Nile Crocodile than deal with landlord tenant disputes.
All that’s fine, but in what world do you think a court would enjoin a landlord from selling a property so that a tenant could remain in it without a lease?
And when they had agreed that the lease would only be two years?
False. I am paid but the hour but said hard pass. Don't out that evil on me.
As am I. I guess it was just Herb.
Not seeking a injunction, I think his goal is a new lease. The owner of the property isn’t important. If he gets a new lease and the landlord sells, the new landlord assumes the lease.
Maybe I’m dealing with the wrong judges, but that’s a complete and total loser 100 out of 100 times. Chances of a new lease would be 0%
We were proceeding on the assumption that was not a valid contract and that the statute of frauds would not kill the promissory estoppel claim.
Again, the goal is not to win the case through trial on the merits, but to allege a colorable claim/defense that forces the issue to be litigated.
At that point, it’s easier for the landlord to settle by entering a new lease and continue to receive rent from this guy instead of paying the cost of litigation.
The landlord is looking at a sale of the property compared to litigation costs, whereas the tenant is looking at paying movers now rather than a year from now compared to litigation costs.
Yeah, if a landlord is set on selling the home, unless it’s in a bad area for real estate, a few thousand dollars in litigation costs isn’t going to be a deterrent. These aren’t super complicated issues, and generally landlord tenant issues can be resolved quickly compared to other litigation.
It’s all academic at this point because there is no estoppel defense, but we’re really talking about finding counsel to draft a simple complaint, pay a filing fee, and then settle it.
The threat of litigation is really mutual assured destruction on cost where the landlord should realize its much easier and cheaper just to keep him under contract with a new lease.
That’s an incredibly huge assumption that the owner/seller will have any desire to settle.
The house has appreciated nearly $100k in the four years they’ve owned it. Real estate is cool
I figured I was dead in the water from the start but I appreciated herb’s attempt
Something about Gretzky missing shots you don’t take.
Why do you think that?
I'm at a plaintiff's lawyer's office for the download of my client's driver's phone. I'm hoping this is the first one of these I've been to where he wasn't looking at porn within an hour of the accident.
Until its not and you are stuck holding the bag.
Yep, precisely why we didn't buy.
It takes a long ass time to download a phone. Like 2 hours minimum.
I’m sitting in car dealership waiting on service to be done. I need some entertainment.
I probably won't get the results today.
In the late 1990’s, Cincinnati enacted a zoning ordinance which restricted the areas in which adult themed businesses could operate.
A group of porn shops and Hustler brought suit to enjoin enforcement, arguing that the statutory definitions were vague.
The city authorized one of my partners to send a paralegal into each porn shop/store and buy merchandise that was defined as adult themed by statute.
The paralegal then spent a week creating dildo exhibits and poster boards of prohibited material for the injunction hearing.
Success on the merits.
I once attended a CLE which had an ethics component. One of the speakers told us he faced sanctions in the divorce case for the majority owner of the 84 Lumber chain because one of the papers he filed proposed to change the name to 42 Lumber.
Counselor, it appears your client was viewing the "Thick Bitches" thread on a website called the-mainboard.com at the time of the accident. Have you ever heard of that before?
Fuck you pen
was in mediation all day today but got it settled for $345,000.
So in my case today the driver of the dump truck that wrecked into my client stated in his interrogatory answers that he had never been arrested. I had a background check done on him before his deposition. I knew he had been arrested for meth possession with intent to distribute. At his deposition he finally admitted to the meth arrest but said that was it. Then I got a bunch of subpoenas out and he's been arrested a bunch of times with some of them being violent felonies (smashed a guy's head with a tire iron). Also he had a meth pipe in his shoe and 14 xanax pills on him at the time of the meth arrest. He's also been arrested for drug/pill possession and his mom called the cops one month before the wreck happened because he was threatening to take enough suboxone to kill himself and the ambulance had to get him and take him to the hospital. Additionally he claimed he didn't remember anything from the wreck at all. Has no recollection. Also the trucking company didn't do a pre employment drug screen on him pursuant to the FMCSR. Also had some moving violations he never fessed up to , including 2 speeding tickets while going 15 mph+ over speed limit. Do you think a judge would've let any of that in? They admitted to liability and vicarious liability. I wanted to use it for impeachment purposes at the very least. But I was worried the judge was going to say the prejudicial effect outweighed the probative value. Had a pretty conservative judge and the mediator thought he wasn't going to let any of it in. Defendant was pretty confident they were going to get punitives tossed on summary judgment.
If he lied under oath and you impeached him correctly, I'd say so. If you have a negligent hiring claim then I'd say you have a good chance at the other stuff, too.
In MS and a lot of other states direct negligence claims like negligent hiring, negligent supervision, negligent maintenance are out if they stipulate to vicarious liability. Once they've stipulated to vicarious liability, evidence on these claims can only come in for punitive damages purposes. They felt good about getting a MSJ granted on punitives. If that happened then the only other avenue for getting it in front of a jury is impeachment. And a judge could still find a way to exclude it.
RJF do you ever get worried about posting so many details of your cases on this public website? I enjoy reading them for sure but wonder if that might blow back on you at some point.
I don't think anything I posted above is confidential or not in a public record. Btw I'm not the only one that talks about their cases or work on here. Yah I've definitely thought about it before. It is good to run ideas past people and discuss stuff on here. I guess I'm just counting on people not being assholes and reporting me to the Bar. Not sure I've posted anything that would be actionable or a breach of any ethical duty. TLDR: to answer your question: yes.
Hell the "velvet hammer" did a live trial blog posting her inner most thoughts for all of the Ride the Ducks multi month trial , all of which was leaked to defense counsel, which she was constantly dogging on the blog, and not only did she not get in trouble for it, she seems to somehow have leveraged it . Not that I'd want to be like her.
This is why you should buy_dont_lease
Fly to Dallas tomorrow for the Keenan Trial Institute on March 2-3. Hopefully this is worth it.
Enjoy your corona virus
Been spending many hours practicing my diagramming for Logic Games. Incredibly helpful.
Can any IP (trademark/copyright) attorneys please PM me. Have a question about potential liability.
Gonna quit my job and launch my own firm next month so I can be more like my hero Gallant Knight
Wish me luck
awesome. please let me know if i can be of any assistance.
best advice i can give you is to set yourself up as an s corp and pay yourself some small salary. i didn't my first year and i got blasted by payroll taxes
that's what we are. the k-1 draw helps with taxes.
This is exactly what we do as well. At least half of my income, if not more, comes from draws.
i had a little $17k surprise my first year which sucked considering i had $0 in revenue for the first five months
Do you pay any income tax during the year as you take draws or just hold it back and pay when filing?