It was the wrong thread

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

a "friend" is fairly sure that his wife had children with another man and he is saddled with the expense of raising them cuz she claims they're his. This other guy is apparently a very well-paid lawyer. the kids are in private college and the tuition is really strapping my "friend." the real dad is considering buying a ferrari. NWTF? what lawsuit should my friend bring?

unrelated question- can I sue a John Doe and compel an anon webpage to give me a sock's real name?

I don't practice family law, so my advice is worth the usual $0, but in California children born during the course of a valid marriage are irrebuttably presumed to be children of that marriage. As in DNA evidence establishing beyond a shadow of a scientific doubt that they are children of another man is -- wait for it -- irrelevant and inadmissible to disprove the husband's paternity.

This is one of those rules (like the rule against character evidence) that seems harsh, irrational, and otherwise totally fucked up, until you think about it, and realize it probably should be that way everywhere, and probably will be eventually if it isn't already.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

I don't practice family law, so my advice is worth the usual $0, but in California children born during the course of a valid marriage are irrebuttably presumed to be children of that marriage. As in DNA evidence establishing beyond a shadow of a scientific doubt that they are children of another man is -- wait for it -- irrelevant and inadmissible to disprove the husband's paternity.

This is one of those rules (like the rule against character evidence) that seems harsh, irrational, and otherwise totally fucked up, until you think about it, and realize it probably should be that way everywhere, and probably will be eventually if it isn't already.

does "valid marriage" require consummation?

[PresentTense Pirate Penske]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

a "friend" is fairly sure that his wife had children with another man and he is saddled with the expense of raising them cuz she claims they're his. This other guy is apparently a very well-paid lawyer. the kids are in private college and the tuition is really strapping my "friend." the real dad is considering buying a ferrari. NWTF? what lawsuit should my friend bring?

unrelated question- can I sue a John Doe and compel an anon webpage to give me a sock's real name?

nwtf!!??!?!?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

does "valid marriage" require consummation?

So annul the marriage first to escape the presumption? 20 years later?

Have him read this article and consider whether he wants to bother.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/ma...1&ref=magazine

[PresentTense Pirate Penske]

Douche of the decade

To all of the lawyers out there,

Can Tucker Max [sniff] sue for being denied a title that might rightfully be his?

[taxwonk]

Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell. Has anyone heard anything?

[PresentTense Pirate Penske]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell. Has anyone heard anything?

Sounds like a hell hole. what tier are they?

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by PresentTense Pirate Penske

Sounds like a hell hole. what tier are they?

Large enough to hit my radar, small enough to not make thefront page of the Wall Street Journal. Beyond that, who knows? Who cares?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell. Has anyone heard anything?

Worked with them on a case a few years back. My only recollection was they seemed primarily, if not entirely and pathologically, interested in checking every imaginable box. But that could be more a comment on the partner than the firm. Having to sit through meetings with that guy and some ego from a bigger NY firm masturbating strategy (we all had shared interests in case) at same time made me want to find a way to open a conference room window and throw both into the street, from 40 stories or so.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Worked with them on a case a few years back. ... Having to sit through meetings with that guy and some ego from a bigger NY firm masturbating strategy (we all had shared interests in case) at same time made me want to find a way to open a conference room window and throw both into the street, from 40 stories or so.

In other words, they were like just about every other lawyer you've ever dealt with?

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Worked with them on a case a few years back. My only recollection was they seemed primarily, if not entirely and pathologically, interested in checking every imaginable box. But that could be more a comment on the partner than the firm. Having to sit through meetings with that guy and some ego from a bigger NY firm masturbating strategy (we all had shared interests in case) at same time made me want to find a way to open a conference room window and throw both into the street, from 40 stories or so.

They are a Texas firm I worked with once. The mutual client had problems with them and kicked them off the matter. They made deep layoffs several months ago, but I haven't heard anything since.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

They are a Texas firm I worked with once. The mutual client had problems with them and kicked them off the matter. They made deep layoffs several months ago, but I haven't heard anything since.

Locke Liddell was a second tier Texas firm. They merged with a smaller (I think) less recognized firm -- Lord Bissell -- a few years ago. I've had deals with both firms as opposing counsel. Nothing about them really stands out to me (though the Dallas office of Locke Liddell used to be rumored to be a terrible place to work).

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by notcasesensitive

Locke Liddell was a second tier Texas firm. They merged with a smaller (I think) less recognized firm -- Lord Bissell -- a few years ago. I've had deals with both firms as opposing counsel. Nothing about them really stands out to me (though the Dallas office of Locke Liddell used to be rumored to be a terrible place to work).

Lord Bissell was at the top of the game for what they did in Chicago (Insurance/Reinsurance), but otherwise second tier at best. Back before I went to law school I was a brownnoser for the development office of a law school in Chicago and, true to form, there was considerable support from many at that second tier Chicago firm for our second tier Chicago school. But they were all gross scroungers for recognition.

While I have not heard about an impending demise, it would surprise me. Who would these people have to fight with if they broke up?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

They are a Texas firm I worked with once. The mutual client had problems with them and kicked them off the matter. They made deep layoffs several months ago, but I haven't heard anything since.

Why is Reinsurance a specialty apart from Insurance in some firms? Does the guy who can read policies AND treaties get a special medallion or something?

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Why is Reinsurance a specialty apart from Insurance in some firms? Does the guy who can read policies AND treaties get a special medallion or something?

Different billing rates, no?