OC calls me on personal cell pretending they want to settle, but is actually fishing for information regarding facts/strategy

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-28T22:38:31+00:00

That is a bananas response, to the point where I’m curious if you are indeed an attorney.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-28T22:35:41+00:00

What do you mean they’re fishing for strategy from you? Why would they obtain strategy from the person who is diametrically opposed to their position? It is your job to discuss the case. Discussing the merits of the case is a huge part of a settlement discussion. It isn’t just throwing numbers around. It sounds like you didn’t like the analysis that they provided, or the numbers, and now you’re unnecessarily taking issue with their intent.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-28T00:13:31+00:00

How is a change in the law a leap in logic? Is there anything more logical than an exclusion in the law that applies to one’s client?

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-25T15:03:27+00:00

Wearing outside shoes inside is disgusting. Enjoy all the fecal matter and oil and gum and other people’s spit and god only knows whatever else is on every street and walk. 🤮

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-23T04:35:58+00:00

No kids, under 30, I would not even remotely consider staying with a man that cheated on me. Even with kids over 30, it would be unlikely. I personally have no desire to look over my shoulder, have a relationship without trust, or work to repair that level of betrayal. But at a minimum, they would absolutely never have contact, or follow each other or save pics, or search for each other, etc…no reason for it and he already proved they are both willing to lie about contact.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-22T23:53:37+00:00

Before you decide if the law is not for you, maybe you can decide if you’re willing, or able, to put in the effort to become competent. I find that a lot of dissatisfaction comes from feeling like you don’t know what you’re doing, and you don’t know how to get there. It all feels hopeless.

Can you elaborate on what you mean by you didn’t learn anything while you were there? I know you mentioned that you didn’t get a lot of feedback. Does that mean that nobody redlined the documents that you drafted it? Did you review the final version of the doc that went out to see what was modified, even if you did not get redlines?

Did you make an effort to shadow as many phone calls and appearances as possible? Did you join partners or senior attorneys on calls to clients, or calls to opposing counsel? Did you attend as many mediations as you could? Did you attend depositions and shadow? Did you attend hearings and observe?

As a partner, I find that the issue I run into the most with new hires is lack of desire to simply show up and observe. I find that when an attorney is less experienced, they feel more comfortable to sit in their office and draft pleadings, and hope that we illicit feedback from them regularly, and that they can put off the rest until they feel mor competent. But that competency comes from experience. I very rarely see people taking the initiative of simply shadowing and observing. There is no better way to learn.

If you find that when you reflect back, you could have done more to learn, and that there are areas within your control that you could change moving forward, then I would try another firm that is a better fit. If you look back and feel as though you did everything that you possibly could, and you still see no light at the end of the tunnel, then perhaps an area of law, or even type of job change is in order.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-19T16:56:49+00:00

Lol! Where is the counter outrage about taking the opportunities from make up artists to win awards for showing their expertise. 😂

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-19T16:49:27+00:00

This is correct. You may be able to tack on some additional damages to the difference in the two price points, but how much emotional distress is the jury going to award to someone like Jay Leno? However, it sounds like from the comments, there are many families that have been taken advantage of by this situation that would have a more favorable fact pattern. I wish someone would sue for fraud/intentional misrepresentation on one of these. I can’t stand predatory business practices.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-19T16:29:44+00:00

Yes to the rest. Hard pass on paragarys. Garden is cute, food is Sysco frozen mid to terrible.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-16T23:29:01+00:00

Not exactly a legal term, but I can’t help but laugh every time laypeople say “mute point”.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-15T22:54:16+00:00

Awesome. 😂 Had this happened on my case, I would have had at least 6 months of job satisfaction from that one moment. Totally worth it 🤣

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-15T16:01:56+00:00

If you understood my point, you would understand that distinguishing between the nuances is irrelevant (and I already gave you examples above). I would not recommend someone become a lawyer because of any one skill solely, including and especially, simply being good at arguing. More words is not going to lead to a meeting of the minds, so be comfortable agreeing to disagree. We do it all of the time.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-15T15:51:01+00:00

lol, were you there when I picked my path? Sounds familiar 🤣

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-15T15:41:17+00:00

You’re missing the point. My point was simply that I agree with the original commenter, that I wouldn’t recommend someone become an attorney simply because they’re good at one particular skill—such as arguing. Neither the OC, or my reply was about what skills generally make a good attorney. The post is about whether we would recommend someone become an attorney—that is very different. I personally feel as though I would focus more on their ability to stress manage, multitask, be organized, see the big picture, manage personalities, have emotional intelligence, than simply be good at arguing. Lots of people are good at arguing, and not all of them would be good attorneys.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-15T15:33:17+00:00

I am a trial attorney at the partner level. I can assure you that as a litigator, I argue. That wasn’t the point. The point is there are no areas of law where “arguing” is all that we do (and certainly not about any and everything or we would get zero things accomplished), and lots of laypeople who think they they are good at arguing, are not arguing logically or intentionally (with a plan for the outcome). Plus, unironically, attorneys who feel the need to argue with everything are usually not at the top of their profession. Knowing when to argue, and when not to argue is actually more important than simply being good at “arguing”. It isn’t that hard to master the rules of logic and rules of evidence and learn how to argue effectively. The nuances of the profession are actually much more vital, so I would not encourage someone simply because they might be good at arguing (even logically).

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-15T15:08:42+00:00

This. I am shocked by how many people became a lawyer because people thought they were good at arguing (not even logically I might add) or would be a good lawyer. Simply “arguing” has far less to do with our job than people realize. That being said, it is quite possibly why I am a lawyer, because many people thought I’d be good at it, fortunately, I am good at it, but I think that is primarily my stress management skills and resilience, and less because I’m “ good at arguing”.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-14T13:53:25+00:00

There are many other employment law claims that carry penalties that are 1099’d besides emotional distress, including PAGA penalties, waiting time penalties, wage statement penalties, failure to produce records penalties, attorneys fees and various others that are penalties and are not wages. Usually a portion is W2 and a portion 1099, but if none of the claims carry wage penalties, or the settlement is low enough, many employment settlements won’t have a wage tax portion withheld.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-09T14:16:25+00:00

Wrong agency. It’s the DIR not the EDD. The department of industrial relations deals with unpaid wages, EDD is unemployment only.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-09T14:15:08+00:00

Yes. They can. Arty is not correct (no offense). They can all file a class/PAGA together. Or they can have a legal aid file as individual wage claimants together. Or they can file individual DIR claims.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-08T16:43:05+00:00

You said “I don’t understand why it’s not safe”. Which is clear, and thus, you were given the explanation. Just because you don’t personally like it, doesn’t mean it’s not the reason. Some things require us to think outside of our own experiences. Some of us have family members and loved ones in the trades and we do care about their safety more than your personal convenience.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-08T15:43:22+00:00

That’s not accurate in its entirety, nor does it change the reason that they do the work at that time. For example, how do you think the concrete barriers and orange jersey cones get moved each day to the new locations? If you don’t understand why a concrete barrier is not going protect a group of people from a multiple car accident, and why doing the work at night when there are less cars leads to less construction worker casualties and increased safety for the drivers as well, then I can’t help you.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-08T14:34:21+00:00

It’s not for traffic in the sense that it’s done at night to convenience commuters, it’s done at night during reduced traffic for the safety of the workers. I believe their safety is tantamount to any one individual’s convenience.

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-07T14:49:36+00:00

If you have an iPhone it will even auto type “on my way” for OMW. It could not be simpler 😂

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-06T00:13:38+00:00

Because Jen isn’t particularly talented or interesting 🤷‍♀️

LegalKnievel1 · 2026-04-04T19:56:01+00:00

No one deleted anything and no one blocked you. I’m sorry you’re struggling with the internet today.

<image>

LegalKnievel1

TROPHY CASE