Thread of legal hubbub

mac5155
Posts: 8734
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 12:47 pm

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby mac5155 » Mon Oct 14, 2019 8:12 pm

I really don't think I need anything but to consult with this lawyer for maybe an hour. Then have them do an hour or two of research unless they already know the answer to my questions.

Shyster
Posts: 7780
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Mon Oct 14, 2019 8:40 pm

What's the question?

tifosi77
Posts: 39489
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Home
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby tifosi77 » Wed Oct 23, 2019 4:09 pm

TIL "unlawful tear gas activity" is only a misdemeanor in CA.

dodint
Posts: 44397
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Tue Nov 05, 2019 9:34 am

@Shyster

Any last minute thoughts on Green-Hawkins, McCaffery, King, and Peck? I'm going to do some looking in a bit but I figured you might have an idea.

Green-Hawkins was a Democratic superdelegate in 2016. I know judges are political, particularly in PA which allows them to run on party lines, but that's a bit much for a jurist for me. She's also heavily pro-union. And running for an appellate court seat while never having been a jurist before. I think that's a no for me.
Peck went to Penn State, which is superficial but gross. From Lancaster. Has about 9 years of judicial experience.
McCaffery is a Philadelphia Common Pleas judge, veteran, panders to the blue collar crowd. Has about 8 years of judicial experience.
King has no judicial experience, is the Deputy District Attorney in Chester County. Every single picture of her put out by the campaign has here wearing dark long sleeve tops that would make you think it's a robe at a glance, usually standing in front of a flag inside of a building.

Looks like by default I'm in for Peck and McCaffery as I can't vote for attorneys trying to start their judicial career at the appellate stage. Who am I, Trump? Unless I hear a reason to drop my vote for either of them that's who I'll go with.

What about Zappala and Middleman?
Leaning towards Middleman as she's pro-criminal justice reform. Public defender that wants police accountability and fairness in the process. Vague but it's the opposite of the 'tough on crime' rhetoric. Also, it helps that she's an independent.

dodint
Posts: 44397
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Tue Nov 05, 2019 9:36 am

Unrelated but I just noticed that Brooke Nadonley, for County Controller, tried to impeach Peduto so she has my vote as well. :lol:

Shyster
Posts: 7780
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Tue Nov 05, 2019 3:18 pm

@Shyster

Any last minute thoughts on Green-Hawkins, McCaffery, King, and Peck? I'm going to do some looking in a bit but I figured you might have an idea.
For what it's worth, McCaffery is Highly Recommended by the PA Bar Association, King and Peck are Recommended, and Green-Hawkins is Not Recommended.

I personally voted for King and Peck because they were recommended by Firearms Owners Against Crime, but then again I'm close to being a single-issue voter on the RKBA.

dodint
Posts: 44397
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Tue Nov 05, 2019 3:20 pm

Interesting. As someone railing against the PA Supreme Court age cap and the subsequent need for qualified jurists I'm surprised you'd vote for someone to take their first judgeship at the appellate level.

Shyster
Posts: 7780
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Tue Nov 05, 2019 3:35 pm

Interesting. As someone railing against the PA Supreme Court age cap and the subsequent need for qualified jurists I'm surprised you'd vote for someone to take their first judgeship at the appellate level.

Meh. PA's system of partisan judicial elections means essentially that every judge is also a politician. A lot of Common Pleas judges are less-than-competent hacks who get elected through name recognition, political connections, or other factors other than competence and legal acumen. Moreover, the skills for being an appellate judge are significantly different than being a trial judge. An experienced and competent appellate practitioner might very well have better skills to be an appellate judge than a Common-Pleas judge. So a lack of prior judicial experience does not necessarily bother me.

dodint
Posts: 44397
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Wed Nov 06, 2019 3:46 pm

McCaffery and King, it looks like.

Green-Hawkins got way too many votes. People are so **** dumb.

Shyster
Posts: 7780
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Fri Nov 08, 2019 6:13 pm

Man sentenced to life without parole dies, is resuscitated (allegedly in violation of his do-not-resuscitate order). Man: So now I should be released immediately. I completed my sentence. Iowa appeals court: No.

https://www.iowacourts.gov/courtcases/7 ... alsOpinion

That's a really creative argument, though.

tifosi77
Posts: 39489
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Home
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby tifosi77 » Fri Nov 08, 2019 8:00 pm

I have always wondered what happens in a situation like that; there are potentially multiple 5th Amendment claims, multiple lines to 8th Amendment claims, a 14th Amendment claim....

Shyster
Posts: 7780
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Mon Nov 11, 2019 5:51 pm

Epic benchslap from the Seventh Circuit. A lawyer filed a brief so bad, the court just entered a rule to show cause why he should not be sanctioned.

http://loweringthebar.net/2019/11/seven ... erish.html

If the court's opinion about your case contains the sentence, "Bad writing does not normally warrant sanctions, but we draw the line at gibberish," you are going to have a bad time.

dodint
Posts: 44397
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Sun Feb 02, 2020 4:35 pm

Here is a feel good for Shyster: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/31/us/p ... udges.html
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has sent the American Bar Association into exile, ending the group’s semiofficial role in evaluating candidates for the federal bench.

In a statement on Friday announcing the development, Linda A. Klein, the group’s president, said it had provided prenomination evaluations of potential judicial candidates to every administration since that of Dwight D. Eisenhower, with the sole exception of that of George W. Bush.
I don't see how this is much different than GWB not using the recommendations. Either way it's a positive.

MrKennethTKangaroo
Posts: 8583
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 3:50 pm

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby MrKennethTKangaroo » Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:39 pm

Can I get some legal takes on the following current events/legal morass (morasses)?

-The tainted witnesses in the Wilkinsburg mass shooting case

-Whatever the f is happening with the prosecution for Roger Stone

tjand72
Posts: 693
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 8:24 pm

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby tjand72 » Sat Mar 14, 2020 12:22 am

ELI5: Why am I legally obliged to answer questions regarding the census? I can't be forced to say/admit to anything I don't want to, so why would I have to answer any questions about my household's living situation?

I'm not against it or anything, but I'm surprised there aren't 1A issues.

tifosi77
Posts: 39489
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Home
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby tifosi77 » Sat Mar 14, 2020 7:34 pm

If your address is selected, it's federal law that you have to answer (honestly). But it has been something like 50 years since anyone has been prosecuted for failing to do so.

Shyster
Posts: 7780
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Sat Mar 14, 2020 7:38 pm

I refuse to answer anything other than how many people live at my house. The only constitutionally authorized purpose for the census is to determine how many people are in the United States. Asking whether I own or rent or what race I am is none of their damn business and is not authorized by Article I.

Freddy Rumsen
Posts: 34108
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Freddy Rumsen » Sat Mar 14, 2020 7:47 pm

Yeah and amen

Freddy Rumsen
Posts: 34108
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Freddy Rumsen » Sat Mar 14, 2020 7:51 pm

Though I did put "West Virginian" on the ethnicity line.

dodint
Posts: 44397
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Tue Mar 31, 2020 3:07 pm

Unsurprisingly, law students who planned to sit for the July exam are asking if they can just go ahead and skip it and start practicing right away. I agree the July administration of the bar exam shouldn't continue. I don't agree that it should just be waived entirely. NCBE is looking at doing a fall sitting, and then there is always February. Student loan payments are suspended until October so that's not a valid concern. With most law firms and court systems in lock down/suspended mode there isn't as much legal work to be done.

When I read these petitions they come across as self-centered to me. As if the national emergency is happening just to them. The whole country is on hold, get over it. Here's one article: https://www.courthousenews.com/californ ... -pandemic/
“As the state adapts to a new normal, so must law students. We must acknowledge the disproportionate impact Covid-19 has on certain populations of law students: immunocompromised students, low-income students, students who have contracted the virus, and students with significant family obligations. Enactment of diploma privilege, or the automatic admission to the bar, for recent graduates and the class of 2020 would ensure fairness and equity to all law students,” their letter says.
If you're too distracted or vulnerable to study for the bar, how are you able to practice law?

This is dumb. With all the resources law students have it's a really hard sell for me to agree that diploma privilege is the answer.

MalkinIsMyHomeboy
Posts: 16866
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:45 pm
Location: (=^_^=)

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby MalkinIsMyHomeboy » Tue Mar 31, 2020 3:33 pm

What governing laws grant states the powers of enacting stay at home instead of the federal government? Is it purely the 10th amendment or is there a specific statute in place?

Shyster
Posts: 7780
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:31 pm

Pretty much the 10th Amendment. The federal government has never been considered to hold a general police power. That power is held by states and local governments.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_po ... ional_law)

Shyster
Posts: 7780
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Fri Apr 10, 2020 8:57 pm

Responsibility of China for the Spread of Covid-19: Can China Be Asked to Make Reparations?

https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2020/ ... parations/

tifosi77
Posts: 39489
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Home
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby tifosi77 » Wed May 06, 2020 7:05 pm

Supreme embarrassment: The flush heard around the country
The Supreme Court was making history Wednesday afternoon, holding arguments over the phone because of Covid-19, when all of a sudden there was the distinct sound of a toilet flushing.

Across the country, the public that has never before this week been able to listen in real time to oral arguments held remotely was treated not only to deep questions related to the First Amendment and robocalls but also to someone's apparent bathroom break.
The errant flush from an unknown source comes as the justices, lawyers and the country are dealing with the new realities -- and hazards -- of conducting their business over teleconference lines.

The case at issue concerned the Telephone Consumer Protection Act that prohibits unwanted calls to cellphones by use of an automated system. Challengers say one provision violates the Constitution. Lawyer Roman Martinez, representing political groups challenging the law, was pressing his point when the offending flush occurred.

Martinez did not seem fazed or publicly notice the interruption.
I find it amusing that the case at hand centered on the very portable communication devices that facilitated the broadcast of the flush.

dodint
Posts: 44397
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Mon May 11, 2020 11:19 am

Anyone have anything good or bad to say about these firms:

Abes Baumann
Rudberg Law Offices, LLC
Fingeret Law
Mansmann and Moore

Looking for a Veterans attorney to handle a small issue. Lots of place list Veterans services in their long list of services, but these seem to at least have a focus on it.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dickie Dunn, Lemon Berry Lobster, LeopardLetang, MrKennethTKangaroo and 40 guests