Thread of legal hubbub

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Wed Jul 07, 2021 1:01 pm

There are 4 panels and 17 cases. With some luck the caseload will dwindle through settlements before now and then.

The letter implies that it is one day but then the county website says 'one or two days.'

I'm just annoyed because I keep a very rigid line between my two careers. But this court ordered appearance falls on a day that I am in a training course that was scheduled last year. Now I have to sheepishly get permission to skip one or two days of the three week course, and also request off and explain it to my boss.

Shyster
Posts: 13091
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Wed Jul 07, 2021 4:47 pm

I thought lawyers signed up to serve on arbitration panels. I've never heard of someone just being ordered to serve.

CBear3
Posts: 7663
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2015 10:02 pm
Location: KC, MO

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby CBear3 » Wed Jul 07, 2021 4:50 pm

Can't you get a pass like they give us for jury duty? Delay the service once.

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Wed Jul 07, 2021 8:17 pm

This is, in no uncertain terms, a court order. :lol:

I can substitute, but not defer or delay. The only other attorney in the county that I have a friendship with is serving on another panel. :lol: #NeverTellMeTheOdds.

Shyster
Posts: 13091
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Wed Jul 07, 2021 8:43 pm

This in Westmoreland County? The smaller population of lawyers may make it harder to get people to do the arbitration panels. I think in Allegheny County there might be a waiting list for getting arbitration work.

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Wed Jul 07, 2021 8:56 pm

For free?

Shyster
Posts: 13091
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Wed Jul 07, 2021 10:21 pm

No, I think there's a small amount of money involved, like the $125/day you mentioned. I'm honestly not completely sure how that system works, but I do want to say that lawyers In Allegheny County have to sign up for that job. I've certainly never been called to do it in nearly 20 years of being licensed.

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Wed Jul 07, 2021 10:37 pm

It's your lucky day mate, I happen to have a spot for you. Busy on the 27th...?

Shyster
Posts: 13091
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Wed Jul 07, 2021 10:42 pm

Uh, yes. So, so busy.

Beveridge
Posts: 5357
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:17 pm
Location: 8-8-1

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Beveridge » Mon Oct 11, 2021 8:06 pm

Been wondering so thought this thread was right place...

Why do you have these cases brought to the supreme court on not conducting business? Cake guy in Colorado and something new that I am not remembering.

How can a business be sued for not giving business to something they don't agree with? If they want to lose out on potential business, that's on them. Sounds like bad business to turn away profits, but not something that can be litigated.

Is it because instead of saying, "no I won't make your cake", he said "no I won't make your cake because you're gay."?

@Shyster
@dodint

MalkinIsMyHomeboy
Posts: 29192
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:45 pm
Location: (=^_^=)

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby MalkinIsMyHomeboy » Mon Oct 11, 2021 8:12 pm

didn’t the Supreme Court rule in favor of the bakery? I’m not sure what your issue is

Beveridge
Posts: 5357
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:17 pm
Location: 8-8-1

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Beveridge » Mon Oct 11, 2021 8:16 pm

My issue is why did we even get there or why it's allowed to get there. I don't care who won.

meow
Posts: 30450
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:53 am
Location: I have four degrees and am a moron. Don’t let that fool you

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby meow » Mon Oct 11, 2021 8:34 pm

What would it cost to get a fairly straightforward will done up?

Shyster
Posts: 13091
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Mon Oct 11, 2021 8:38 pm

It's the "because you are gay" part coupled with state and federal non-discrimination statutes. Title II of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, for example, provides that it is illegal to discriminate based on race, color, religion, or national origin when it comes to hotels, motels, restaurants, theaters, and all other "public accommodations" engaged in interstate commerce. The term "public accommodation" has been broadly defined to include pretty much every business that is open to the public. The Masterpiece Cakeshop case specifically involved the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, which applies even more broadly to disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation (including transgender status), marital status, family status, religion, national origin, and ancestry. It would be illegal to refuse to serve anyone for a reason that implicates any of those "protected" statuses.

The bakery argued that it's own right to religious freedom means that it has the right to refuse to bake cakes that would violate the beliefs of its owners. The Supreme Court didn't really rule in favor of the bakery. Rather, the Court mostly punted on the issue based on findings that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had been hostile and biased. Whether (and in what situations) a business owner's First Amendment rights can override a non-discrimination statute is still to be determined. And the Masterpiece Cakeshop is still being sued. A transgender lawyer went in, asked for a birthday cake that was blue on the outside and pink on the inside and told the bakery that it was specifically to celebrate their trans status. The idea was to create another suit, and the shop obliged by refused to bake it, so the lawyer sued for $100,000 in damages. That suit is still pending and could end up back at the SCOTUS.

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Mon Oct 11, 2021 9:46 pm

What would it cost to get a fairly straightforward will done up?
$200 to $400.

$600 to $750 for a couple. Towards the higher end if you are doing advance healthcare directives at the same time.

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Wed Oct 13, 2021 11:58 am

My law firm sues debt collectors.

I wonder if my phone's spam filter is blocking out calls from opposing counsel. :lol:

tifosi77
Posts: 51511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby tifosi77 » Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:12 pm

FTC Puts Hundreds of Businesses on Notice about Fake Reviews and Other Misleading Endorsements (pdf)

Yikes, that's like..... all of the companies.

I am not surprised to see just about every video game studio and First Party on the list. However, I much am surprised to see Land O'Lakes on there. If you can't have faith in butter advertising, what hope is there.

MalkinIsMyHomeboy
Posts: 29192
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:45 pm
Location: (=^_^=)

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby MalkinIsMyHomeboy » Wed Oct 13, 2021 7:32 pm

If this goes to court, this seems like it'd be a very interesting case. I would be curious how they define art from a legal standpoint


A museum says they gave an artist $84,000 in cash to use in artwork. He delivered blank canvases and titled them "Take the Money and Run."


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jens-haani ... %20Run.%22

Shyster
Posts: 13091
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Wed Oct 13, 2021 8:50 pm

I think it's a pretty straightforward case. The museum didn't ask Haaning to create new art; they asked him to make copies of two prior works, which were apparently just paper money glued to big canvases (whether that it "art" is a question by itself, but one that doesn't really have to be answered here). The paper money handed over was supposed to be the money that Haaning would glue down to make the new copies. The blank canvases Haaning delivered were not the copies of those two specific works as requested. Hence, Haaning did not deliver the items as contracted for. Simple case: one cause of action for breach of contract.

MalkinIsMyHomeboy
Posts: 29192
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:45 pm
Location: (=^_^=)

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby MalkinIsMyHomeboy » Wed Oct 13, 2021 9:29 pm

ahh, I didn't realize they asked for copies of previous work

tifosi77
Posts: 51511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby tifosi77 » Thu Oct 14, 2021 12:08 pm

I was going to assert a 'derivative work' argument, then I saw he was asked to copy his own prior works. So yeah, I'm out.

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Wed Oct 20, 2021 8:30 pm

Shyster, have you seen this one? Figured it would be up our alley two ways; qualified immunity and gun rights.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksibill ... id-permit/

Motorist is questioned by cop. Motorist declares he has a pistol and a permit. Cop freaks out. Cop says he doesn't know if the permit is valid. Cop conducts search. Cops find Rx drugs prescribed to motorist. Cop conducts complete search on vehicle because the motorist is "dangerous" for having a gun. Motorist sues. Cop claims qualified immunity. Court laughs, and laughs, and laughs.

MalkinIsMyHomeboy
Posts: 29192
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:45 pm
Location: (=^_^=)

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby MalkinIsMyHomeboy » Wed Oct 20, 2021 8:42 pm

I cant imagine how appeals courts would side with the cop in that

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Wed Oct 20, 2021 8:53 pm

Qualified Immunity is a very high hurdle to get over. In short, if there is not a case with the exact same facts on the record, in the federal district the action happened, prior to 1982 then the government official has qualified immunity. The idea being that the government employee would not know the action is wrong unless it had already been litigated. And since no new actions can be brought no new situations can be litigated.

It is well intentioned awfulness created by SCOTUS.

Shyster
Posts: 13091
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Wed Oct 20, 2021 8:55 pm

The argument was also silly because, logically extended, it would mean that a cop could pull anyone out of a car and search them and the car on the basis that the cop doesn't know if their license is valid. Or even stop any car at any time because, hey, you need a license to legally drive a car, and how do I know that the guy who just drove past me has a valid license?

I know the defense had to argue something in response, but that's one of those arguments that's so stupid, you (should) feel shame just making it.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dickie Dunn, meow, skullman80 and 102 guests