Fashionistas you have arrived 3-25-03 - 10-3-03

[bilmore]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Though if there is crap on your desk it would appear that he's been talking in your office, so maybe that makes it harder to put him on ignore.

Deep breaths.

Happy thoughts.

All things must pass.

(At least, we all hope so.)

Jesus, I thought I'd never catch up.

The strangest thing I have seen lately was a funeral procession parked neatly on the shoulder of a major freeway in rushhour. The hearse had turtled and was laying there upside down with the doors open - no other cars appeared to be involved in the accident. The only thing I could think was - damn, someone must have really had it in for that guy.

-TL

[robustpuppy]

Originally posted by bilmore
Deep breaths.

Happy thoughts.

All things must pass.

(At least, we all hope so.)

This reads like advice for dealing with kidney stones.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by robustpuppy
This reads like advice for dealing with kidney stones.

The symptoms are much the same.

Gigantic pains on the dorsal side.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by TexLex

The strangest thing I have seen lately was a funeral procession parked neatly on the shoulder of a major freeway in rushhour. The hearse had turtled and was laying there upside down with the doors open - no other cars appeared to be involved in the accident. The only thing I could think was - damn, someone must have really had it in for that guy.

-TL

When did RT start driving a hearse?

Originally posted by robustpuppy
This reads like advice for dealing with kidney stones.

Addendum. This is the Bilmore of the Day. I didn't have to edit it either. Penske, please hand the Golden Benny over to RP.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by robustpuppy
This reads like advice for dealing with kidney stones.

I was thinking constipation.

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
When did RT start driving a hearse?

Wait, THIS is the Bilmore of the day. SOrry RP, I gave it some thought and yours was not quite as corny and bilmore in fifteen years esque, plus it didnt have the extra bonus credit of flaming a poster.

hand the Golden Benny to Burger.

I apologize folks. THis has been an unprecendented day for would be Bilmores.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by paigowprincess
I apologize folks. THis has been an unprecendented day for would be Bilmores.

ALL days are unprecedented days for the Bilmores.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I was thinking constipation.

We could tell.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Not Bob
But I have never been involved in a case where a GA was forced against her will to make an argument that she felt was a violation of Rule 11 or whatever. Never. Nor have I heard of such a thing (and I am one of those kindly, avuncular GPs who always hear about these kind of problems from GAs).

I distinguished a "Rule 11 sanctionable" argument, which I, consistent with your observations, have never agreed to advance on a client's behalf. I was talking about the times in which we make arguments that are not Rule 11 sanctionable, but which cause us to be treated scornfully by judges and which diminish our individual reputations for intelligence and good sense. There's miles of no man's land between Rule 11 and plausible argument.

As to arguments that don't violate Rule 11 or whatever, but which are loser arguments, there is always a way to articulate the client's position without impacting your credibility too much. Judges are not idiots. Many of them actually used to be practicing lawyers. With pain in the ass clients.

Of course. It's our job to think of them, and to advise the client when they shouldn't be made. But I think you're overgeneralizing about judges and their reactions when they think their time is being wasted. Out here, many of them are former career deputy DAs, who were never ever forced to litigate cases they didn't believe had merit surpassing a BARD standard of proof. These esteemed persons are not equipped to sympathize with my plight. They think lawyers decide which cases to settle, and which to litigate, and how.

Most of the other state court judges were not in high-stakes civil litigation, because all the lawyers who were could not afford to take the steep pay cut involved in taking the bench at the same time one's kids are reaching college age. They, too, are not equipped to know what it's like to have a GP tell you that hundreds of thousands of dollars in firm business relies on your maintaining that confident, "can do" attitude, even in the face of a judicial order, the spirit of which cannot be mistaken even if the language of which can be loopholed.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
But I think you're overgeneralizing about judges and their reactions when they think their time is being wasted. Out here, many of them are former career deputy DAs, who were never ever forced to litigate cases they didn't believe had merit surpassing a BARD standard of proof. These esteemed persons are not equipped to sympathize with my plight. They think lawyers decide which cases to settle, and which to litigate, and how.

If you are dealing with former federal DAs, Ashcroft's new "never plea bargain, take everything to court" policy should cause a shift in this attitude. In a few decades.

Originally posted by paigowprincess
...plus it didnt have the extra bonus credit of flaming a poster.

But does it still count as a flame if the intended recipient does not perceive it as such?

And Atticus, enough on the law stuff, huh? If I have to read that, someone needs to be paying me by the hour.

-TL

[Theres and Thats]

Originally posted by robustpuppy
Come out and play!

Here and ready to play!

Puppy, should we play fetch? Here, you go, get the ball! :rolf2:

Originally posted by Theres and Thats
Here and ready to play!

Puppy, should we play fetch? Here, you go, get the ball! :rolf2:

Ladies and Gents

I bring you a new genre of sock. Well, its been around a long time, but has never really been named. I dub this The Dead Fish Sock. It lies there, it does nothing, but it stinks up the joint.