It was the wrong thread

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Penske 2.0

Judge, schmudge,

this week on stern we learned that medicated pete was an eagle scout, but that the Boy Scouts have a special program for special people. did you get your law degree along a similar path? your job?

[Penske 2.0]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

this week on stern we learned that medicated pete was an eagle scout, but that the Boy Scouts have a special program for special people. did you get your law degree along a similar path? your job?

I got an Executive JD. 16 month-weekend program with most of the courses via fax.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Seriously. It may not be privileged if they use their work computer - http://calapp.blogspot.com/2011/01/h...nt-co-cal.html

ETA: The more I think about this, this more wrong it seems. That said, I think diligent representation of my clients now requires me to demand all e-mails between the other side and their counsel, along with the office policy on the use of the computers on which those e-mails were sent or received.

Not exactly. She was using the defendant's computer. Different from someone using a job computer to write their lawyer about a 3p.

[Fugee]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

did you clerk? it sounds like it, and if so where?

p.s. the "numbers of briefs" element can't phase them, can it? I could see who signed the same argument helping- like if Sidd and I signed onto the same position, but not raw numbers.

11TH Circuit. Best job I ever had.

I don't recall ever having more than one amicus brief but suspect judges aren't immune to raw numbers, though you may be correct that who (industry not lawyers) files them is probably more important than just the numbers.

Still think the best help for amicus briefs is the chance that one or more nonparty lawyers manages to lay the case out in a way that rseonates for the judges better than the party briefs.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Fugee

Still think the best help for amicus briefs is the chance that one or more nonparty lawyers manages to lay the case out in a way that rseonates for the judges better than the party briefs.

That's when Penske knows he hired the wrong guy, right?

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by Fugee

Still think the best help for amicus briefs is the chance that one or more nonparty lawyers manages to lay the case out in a way that rseonates for the judges better than the party briefs.

Translation: Getting a brief written by someone who went to Harvard helps one understand what the Cardozo-schooled brief writer meant to say.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Penske 2.0

I got an Executive JD. 16 month-weekend program with most of the courses via fax.

dude, the best thing about Florida Coastal is the exchange of intellects on campus. why remote study?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Fugee

though you may be correct that who (industry not lawyers) files them is probably more important than just the numbers.

by "me and Sidd" i didn't mean any particular lawyers, but we usually represent 1) the well-thought out and ultimately time proven intellectual Harvard educated Mensa eligible position and 2) the knee jerk liberal cartoon spitting and railing raving position, so when we agree then there is certainly a clear answer

[Ty@50]

Originally Posted by Penske 2.0

Actually, it is hard.....its complicated, as these things always are. Otoh, I can't stand the guy. He marries an aggressive narcissistic personality disorder with a martyr complex. He is ill. ILL. Good litigator but impossible to deal with. Exhausting to manage. Dismissive of everyone, including the client. Disparaging of everyone, including the client.

I sent the email tonight. He will come back swinging.

The more satisfying email will be later, after the matter is fully transferred. That one will be to his managing partner. Detailing his psychosis, with email correspondence evidencing it.

All that said, the ultimate negative is, its all a big time suck and does nothing to further my growth strategy.......

if he is worried about making the reduced income go further, give him my younger self's email address- younger ty can give him the names of the better boxed wines.

[Fugee]

Originally Posted by Icky Thump

Translation: Getting a brief written by someone who went to Harvard helps one understand what the Cardozo-schooled brief writer meant to say.

Not necessarily. For me, a well-written brief is one that helps connect the dots to get the reader from the stated argument to the desired conclusion. Too often people know their own position so well that they don't lay out the analysis clearly enough and assume everyone will make the same mental leaps they do.

Some people are better at that than others and I don't think it has a correlation with school or even class rank.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Penske 2.0

Actually, it is hard.....its complicated, as these things always are. Otoh, I can't stand the guy. He marries an aggressive narcissistic personality disorder with a martyr complex. He is ill. ILL. Good litigator but impossible to deal with. Exhausting to manage. Dismissive of everyone, including the client. Disparaging of everyone, including the client.

I sent the email tonight. He will come back swinging.

The more satisfying email will be later, after the matter is fully transferred. That one will be to his managing partner. Detailing his psychosis, with email correspondence evidencing it.

All that said, the ultimate negative is, its all a big time suck and does nothing to further my growth strategy.......

All the client focused traits would take him out of the good litigator category in my book.

I need litigators who, ultimately, at some level, understand they are our clients' tools. I watch way too much litigation increase the damage we're trying to mitigate because a litgator had no perspective.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Fugee

Not necessarily. For me, a well-written brief is one that helps connect the dots to get the reader from the stated argument to the desired conclusion. Too often people know their own position so well that they don't lay out the analysis clearly enough and assume everyone will make the same mental leaps they do.

Some people are better at that than others and I don't think it has a correlation with school or even class rank.

my ex-aunt taught me how would audition for movie roles, and I try to apply those lessons to my brief writing- like I'll often include naked pictures of myself with my cell digits, in the Judges copy only of curse.

[Adder]

Delicious.

[Penske 2.0]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

All the client focused traits would take him out of the good litigator category in my book.

I need litigators who, ultimately, at some level, understand they are our clients' tools. I watch way too much litigation increase the damage we're trying to mitigate because a litgator had no perspective.

Good point, and yes, his psychosis ultimately undercut his ability to win in the courtroom.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Adder

Delicious.

So are you beginning to understand the point of the occassional (e.g., daily) wee dram of the special stuff?