« March 2007 | Main | May 2007 »

Saturday, April 28, 2007

The Land of MILF and Honey

Last night, I received the the following text message from another Rogue Barrister. This Barrister will remain nameless (even though, they will be instantly recognizable).

I'm st [sic] this bar called [removed] in [a Chicago suburb]... and it is wall-to-wall MILF action! I might not come back tonight... or ever  for that matter:)  Sell everything and send me the money... Vanilla Thunder's in the HOUSE!!!!


Well, we may never again see "Vanilla Thunder" as he has left for that magic land...  that's right... the land where the beer flows like honey, and the MILFs flock to "Thunder" like song birds to Capistrano.

*Prophet

Friday, April 20, 2007

Why don't you just die?

Crane4
Dear Opposing Counsel,

You are a punk-ass little bitch.  I wonder which state bar you first duped into admitting you.  It's hard at times to tell which is more horrendous, your circa-1990 toupee or the outfits your harlot of a client wears to court.  You blew two dates.  You file frivolous motions.  You have lied on the record at least once; our 137 motion is forthcoming.  You are apparently unable to comply with everyday procedure, or fill out even simple, pre-printed forms.  The depth of your oafishness astounds even my jaded worldview.

You make jokes about someone actually liking you---and no one laughs.  Your dandruff is so large it could injure a small child; and with your legal skills you'd get life in prison.  You file subpoenas with compliance dates that have already passed, then send me letters telling me that you guess the keeper of records will just show up on the deposition date.  You demand that we comply with discovery requests that we answered a month ago.  You seem confused when I look at you with an obvious air of disdain.  Let me clear it up for you, super-genius:  I HOPE YOU F*CKING DIE!!!

Love,

J.D. Crane

High Theater

Many clients get upset when you, as their attorney, don't treat the other attorney as the Great Satan.  This is somewhat understandable, as most client's have never been involved in the legal process, have no idea about the procedures of law, and are depending on you for everything.  In short, they have given up control of their life to you; a hard thing.  They don't know that you may have gone to law school with opposing counsel, see opposing counsel at social events regularly, serve on boards or committees with opposing counsel, or know that opposing counsel is a reasonable person.  Most of us are familiar with this concept.

A less-discussed area is the above concept in relation to the attorney-judge relationship.  Even in a court system as big as Cook County, Illinois, over time one can get to know certain judges pretty well.  In the collar counties and surrounding areas, this can happen even more quickly.  Your area of law may only have four judges (or less!) in the division, and you may see them every day.  It's not unusual to have a hearing in front of a judge in the morning, sit next to that judge at a CLE or committee meeting in the afternoon, and then schmooze with the judge that evening at a bar association or social event.  You might wind up knowing the Judge much better than you know opposing counsel.  And the client has no way of knowing this.  The flipside of this relationship is that sometimes the judge will do things to you that he would never do to another lawyer, because he or she knows that you won't take it personally and that they will be able to explain the "why" of what they did later on at some social function.  That leads me to this tale, a typical example I offer for your reading pleasure, which occured in Basura Blanca County:

PART ONE:  9:00 am

I was in front of Judge Trigger, arguing for slightly more time to respond to a motion, on the basis that counsel had filed it two weeks before a hearing, hoping to shaft me by giving me insufficient time to respond (the nature of the motion is that it would have to be heard concurrently at the hearing).

Judge:  "Why would I give you more time?  The hearing's in two weeks."

Me:  "Your honor, we all know what opposing counsel's doing.  I'm entitled to 21 days, at a minimum, to respond.  If counsel wanted it for the hearing, he should have filed it earlier."

Counsel:  "Your honor, I have always zealously advocated for my client..."

Judge:  "I don't need your commentary, counsel." 
Judge:  (to me)  "what's the problem? You could get this done before the hearing date."

Me:  "That's not the point, your honor.  Theoretically I could clear my caseload, to the detriment of my other clients, for any reason under the sun.  The point is that you shouldn't reward opposing counsel's lack of planning, poor behavior, and blatant gamesmanship by hamstringing me in the interests of 'judicial economy' ."

Counsel:  "How dare you..."

Judge:  "Counsel, I don't need your input."
Judge:  (to me)  "Mr. Crane, I'm going to make you respond to this motion within seven days, no more."

Me:  "FINE."

Judge: "You don't seem happy, Mr. Crane."

Me:  "Your honor's powers of perception are, as always, beyond compare."

Judge:  "I don't want you leaving this room thinking you've been slighted."

Me:  "However, mind control is not in your arsenal."

Judge: "Mr. Crane, the court doesn't appreciate commentary."

Me:  "I'll file my response within seven days."

Judge:    "Mr. Crane, have you ever seen the inside of the county jail?"

Me:  "Only when we had to bail Judge Twerp out of his DUI."  (a VERY sensitive issue among this circuit)

Judge:  "Mr. Crane, the court is not going to put up with this."

Me:  "Thank you, your honor, I'll file my response within seven days; order to come."

Judge:  "Mr. Crane, I'm serious."

Me:  (nothing) (staring at judge)

Judge: (nothing) (staring at me)

Counsel:  (nothing) (looking back and forth between Judge and me)

Judge:  "Order to come."

PART TWO: 1:00 pm

The Judge and I are at a committee meeting, in line getting food.

Judge:  "That chicken sure looks good."

Me:   "yep."

Judge:  "I wonder if there's any dark meat left, I'm a 'thigh man'."

Me:  "That's funny, I always heard you were a tit man."

Judge:  "Very funny counselor."

(we're now at the end of the line)

Judge:  "why don't you come sit with me and (court reporters)?"

Me:  "Sorry your honor, I'm already sitting with people who won't send me to jail."

Judge:  "Oh, come on."

Me:  "See ya later."

PART THREE:  6:00 pm

We are now at a bar association social function at a local pub, with about 70 people in attendance.

Judge:  "Hey there, what's new?"

Me:  "What was that all about this morning?"

Judge:  "Don't get all bent out of shape, I can't have counsel thinking that he's getting home-teamed."

Me:  "What?  He was clearly playing dirty pool.  I should have won that, easily."

Judge:  "Maybe;  I know you'll get it done though, you always do.  I don't think you've ever blown a date in your life."

Me:  "What was with the jail stuff?"

Judge:  "Oh I was having fun with that, you should have seen the look on your face!"

Me:  "Oh thanks, glad I was able to entertain you."

Judge:  "Hey, the other two hearings I had scheduled both settled....I was bored."

Me:  (muttering)

Judge:  "I'll make it up to you, what are you drinking? Bourbon?"

Me:  "Maker's Mark---make it a tall one."

Judge: (on way to bar)  "If the waitress ever comes back, get us some food."

Me:  "mozzarell sticks?

Judge:  "Naw, get those awesome potato skins...all that cheese would plug me up for days."

Why Scalia is One of My Favorite Supreme Court Judges

In MCI v. AT&T, 512 U.S. 218 (1994), the Supreme Court was faced with the task of construing the term “modify” as it appeared in the 47 U.S.C. sec 203(b). The section granted the FCC the ability to “modify” filed rates requirements for long distance carriers. The FCC, however, decided to eliminate the requirements for all carriers, except AT&T.

Writing for the court, Scalia explained his interpretation of the term “modify” with this quip: 

“Modify,” in our view, connotes moderate change. It might be good English to say that the French Revolution “modified” the status of the French nobility — but only because there is a figure of speech called understatement and a literary device known as sarcasm.

 

* Prophet

 

Thursday, April 19, 2007

Why John McCain Should Be President

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm

Thursday, April 12, 2007

Wisdom and a Wish

I am officially older. I’ve always been of the opinion that at your birthday you should share some wisdom and at least one birthday wish. 

While I am technically older, I am not wiser.

So, I thought I would blatantly steal some words:  

“To be young in America now is to be constantly told to buckle up, wear a bike helmet, wear a condom, avoid risk, watch your intake, show your ID at all times, and respect the world of political correctness and safe sex that curmudgeons have left…” and “Scotch wards off boredom, which presses in on me from every side in a country increasingly run by idiots.”  

--Christopher Hitchens

 

 

As for my wish…

Silverrightrear

 

 









Silverleftside








I can dream can't I.

* Prophet

If you run out of toilet paper, just use the constitution!

Denny_crane Greetings, my little minions!  I have for your reading pleasure an amusing tale from the Courtroom of the Chief Judge of Calavatra County.  I was there because opposing counsel (who resembles Vincent Price from "House of Wax", especially the part when his face starts falling off in pieces) had filed a ridiculous emergency motion to enter an Order for Witholding (for support).  Before I go any further, let me let you in on a few things:


1.  In Calavatra County, they hate emergency motions.  HATE THEM, even legitimate ones.
2.  In Calavatra County, if the parties can't agree on a payment schedule, the court will automatically issue an Order for witholding.

Now on with our story.  I talk to opposing counsel and tell him I have no problem entering the order, and I mention to him that I don't think this is an emergency.  He then hands me a Petition for Rule to Show Cause (his second such Petition), which he hasn't filed yet.  When I ask what the hell this is, he says that he'll file it after court.  So we step up:

Me:  Your honor, we're here today on opposing counsel's...

OC:    My emergency motion to enter an Order for Support, your honor.

Me:    We're agreeing to it your honor, so there's no need for a hearing.

Chief Judge:  Well, first of all, I don't know why this would be an emergency basis, counsel.

OC:  Well, you're honor, he's not paying...

Chief Judge:  So he's not paying.  Why is this an emergency?  You haven't put anything in this motion that indicates to me there's any emergency.  And it wasn't properly notice up.

OC:    Well, your honor...

Chief Judge (pointing at me):  Why did it even have to come to this?  Why couldn't you work this out between yourselves?

Me:     Your honor, we are in agreement.  I don't know why they filed it, either.

OC:    Your honor, I also have a petition for rule to show cause that I'd like to give counsel time to respond to. (hands it to the Chief Judge)

Chief Judge:  You haven't even filed this, counselor.  Have you ever heard of due process? 

OC:  I was going to file it after, your hon..

Chief Judge:  (Looking at the Petition)  You didn't even notice this up for today!  Did you get notice? (pointing at me)

Me:  Nope.

Chief Judge: (something unintelligible)

OC:  I'll file a notice right after....

Chief Judge:  After?  After?!  Counsel, I can't even begin to count how many constitutional rights we're trampling all over today.  Maybe you should attend the CLE on civil procedure I'm giving next week.  I'll send you the info AFTER it's over.

Me: (desperately trying not to laugh out loud)

Chief Judge:  Gimme the Order for withholding.

OC:  (hands it up)

Chief Judge:  What is this?  We have a specific form for this counselor, I'm not accepting your "draft" of one. (hands it back)  Order to come.....

OC:  Your honor, could we put in there that, until the withholding starts, he'll pay her directly?

Chief Judge:  Counsel, there's already an order in place stating that.  That's what you're alleging in your improperly-noticed, non-filed, repetitive Petition.  You remember that Petition, right?  The one you just handed up to me?  I'm not used to issuing orders that I've already issued counsel!  What do you think this is?  Burger King?  You can't have it your way!  Order to come...

Me:  Here's the form, you need to fill this out and then hand it up.

OC:  Why don't you fill it out, I have something in another court.

Me:   (looking at him like he just said he's Elvis Presley) "I don't think so." (I leave)

Epilogue:  Another associate at our firm had a hearing that afternoon in front of the same Judge.  After this hearing, the Judge hands an Order for Withholding to him, and tells him to give it to me.  When the associate asks why, the Judge says he's not signing it because the other attorney didn't fill it out right.

Running tally:

Constitutional rights violated: 4
Possible malpractice claims opposing counsel's client has against him: 3
Odds that I'll alert opposing counsel of his mistake and mail the form to him before monday: 0

J.D. Crane!

Thursday, April 05, 2007

UK attempts to overtake Thailand as the new sex offender haven

If you ever find yourself in a sticky situation in the UK, remember these words: Your honor, just look at her, there's no way I'd know she was 10.

Tuesday, April 03, 2007

This reminds me of someone...

I just can't put my finger on who...

Woman dropped on head alleges 'negligent dancing'

CHICAGO, Illinois (AP) -- A woman is suing her dance partner, claiming he dropped her on her head after flipping her into the air at an office party.

Lacey Hindman, 22, was a victim of "negligent dancing," says her lawyer, David M. Baum.

In the suit, Hindman claims that during a party at a Chicago bar and restaurant in April 2006, David Prange grabbed her by the forearms and tossed her in the air, and then she crashed to the wood floor.

"I was in the air, over him," Hindman said. "I fell hard enough you could hear the impact of me hitting the floor over the sound from the jukebox."

Hindman said in the suit, filed in Cook County Circuit Court, that she suffered a fractured skull and brain injuries. She is seeking damages for medical bills and lost wages for time missed from work.

Hindman worked for Prange's wife, Kate Prange, at Shop Girl, a women's boutique.

There was no immediate response to a call seeking comment from David Prange on Tuesday.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

 
 

Recent Comments

Archives


Syndicate


Disclaimer:
These posts are not legal advice. This is a personal site. As such, views expressed should not be attributed to any law firm. The views of one author do not necessarily represent the views of the others. Copyright 2005-2007.