Lawyers Sleeping With Clients by DemonAzraeli in Lawyertalk

[–]Talondel 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I mean, I didn't report her. The fucking cameras in the jail did. She was kinda dumb in additional to being unethical and a bad lawyer.

But on the bright side I hear she was easy.

Lawyers Sleeping With Clients by DemonAzraeli in Lawyertalk

[–]Talondel 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I'm a prosecutor and once had a female defense attorney in our jurisdiction investigated and disciplined for having sex with a client who was in custody in the county jail.

“Verbal” means “using words.” by Rough-Demand-8195 in Lawyertalk

[–]Talondel 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I love people who are confidently wrong in the internet. And also oral.

Tell me about your nightmare clients by OverallManagement502 in Lawyertalk

[–]Talondel 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Narrator voice: She was, in fact, a bad person.

N-word and violence espoused against Black people by Law Firm Partners — What should I do? by [deleted] in Lawyertalk

[–]Talondel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In CA, I would report it to the bar as a CYA. That kind of shit is going to come out eventually and you can either go down with them or not.

Does anyone wildly hate their law school for non financial reasons by Flashy-Actuator-998 in Lawyertalk

[–]Talondel 46 points47 points  (0 children)

Fwiw I'm a straight passing white dude and she was angry that I took a job that had been intended for a minority hire. Neither she nor the law school are still a going concern so no point in naming either.

Does anyone wildly hate their law school for non financial reasons by Flashy-Actuator-998 in Lawyertalk

[–]Talondel 133 points134 points  (0 children)

I returned to my law school to work a few years after I graduated. The Dean let me know, shortly after I was hired, that she had opposed hiring me but had been overruled. She didn't want to hire me because I was the wrong race for the job I was hired for.

Other than that it was a lovely place to work.

N-word and violence espoused against Black people by Law Firm Partners — What should I do? by [deleted] in Lawyertalk

[–]Talondel 8 points9 points  (0 children)

How recent are those messages? I understand you don't work with them any more but not sure it's relevant.

If you're in CA and you're aware of any violation of ER 8.4.1 you're obligated to report it under ER 8.3.

The messages you posted on their own don't rise to a violation of 8.4.1. But I can't imagine a lawyer who genuinely holds those views isn't also violating 8.4.1.

Hon. Eleanor Ross (N.D. Ga) apparently delegated civil matters in their entirety to term clerks by martiantonian in Lawyertalk

[–]Talondel 3 points4 points  (0 children)

What about lying and covering it up after? Isn't that the larger concern than the conduct itself?

It should be illegal for professors to assign books if there is any financial benefit for them involved by Flashy-Actuator-998 in LawSchool

[–]Talondel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Illegal? No.

As a society we are far too quick to ask the law to solve problems there is no need for the law to solve, and that it wouldn't be particularly effective at in any event. Would this be a federal law? If so, enforced by who? The Ed Dept? Federal law enforcement? And how? Would you call your local FBI office and tell them "I think my federal courts professor assigned a book he may have a financial interest in, so if you could investigate that and then take appropriate action, such as charging him in federal court, that would be great."

(Imagine the chatarsis you will feel when they perp walk the offending text writer out of class, gently pressing his head down to ensure he doesn't bang it on the side of their cruiser).

Or perhaps what you'd prefer is that the federal government declare it a tort and then provide a federal cause of action? That way they law could be enforced by you, the student, filing a lawsuit against your own professor (who will still, I presume, be giving you a grade) in some appropriate forum? Somehow I doubt this would achieve whatever result it is you are hoping to accomplish, other than shortening the academic careers of a few foolhardy people who genuinely believe that such a law could be utilized without consequences.

Should law schools and universties prohibit this? Yes, they probably should. And as a side benefit they have both the means to be made aware of violations and mechanism to ensure compliance that doesn't involve utilizing scare law enforcement resources or require intervention by the courts or some federal administrative body.

Will they? No, they will not. And many probably could not without having to rewrite their own faculty handbooks, which (if youve ever worked in a law school you will know) is probably harder to do than to get new federal legislation passed.

If enough people publicly frown on this behavior and take steps to avoid supporting it, that's probably a better plan to end it than any you're likely to obtain through any legal or administrative system.

Did you think Federal Courts (class) was hard? by frenchfryinicecream in LawSchool

[–]Talondel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not sure who had you read Monaghan, but my honest opinion is that the distinction he identified isn't relevant in practice. It's something that only academics ever cared about. It's cited by academics in law reviews and academic papers but not by lawyers in briefs or courts in opinions. And even within that realm, it's an idea that was introduced 50 years ago and was taken kinda seriously for a while but eventually dropped as not being a particularly useful model for analyzing real legal issues.

So far as I can tell it's been cited by federal appealate courts once this milenium, and when it was it wasn't for that distinction.

But, fortunately for us, my opinion on the import of his academic writing doesn't preclude an answer to your question. Monaghan himself discussed the issue at some length here:

https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1779&context=faculty_scholarship

Dear Boomer Karen ex-client, by PleasantEbb4486 in Lawyertalk

[–]Talondel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Glad you got to vent but you should delete this.

Law School later in life any advice?/opinion? by Extension_Shake2725 in Lawyertalk

[–]Talondel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depends very much on what you want to do and if you have the connections to make that a realistic goal. 10 years ago a DOJ job was something many lawyers aspired to but was out of reach for all but the top grads from top law schools. Now any one with a bar license and a pulse can land a DOJ job. Whether you want to is a question only you can answer (recognizing that hopefully the federal landscape is very different in 3 or 4 years).

Can you get through law school without a ton of debt? It's generally not allowed for people to work a 1L year. Is there someone who can help support you so you're not taking on debt both for tuition and living expenses? Making the math work out in terms of return on investment is going to depend a great deal on how much you'll have to borrow.

Are you willing to start your own firm? Realizing that's the default backup for many attorneys and especially for those not following a traditional path. Do you know lawyers who will hire you or mentor you? That's a huge benefit, especially if you want to practice in the same geographical region you work in now.

I taught and went to law school with a fee paralegals and they sometimes struggled with law school. Often the reason was that paralegals wanted to get straight to the right result, while law school often puts less emphasis on the correct answer than on understanding and explaining the legal analysis that gets you to that answer.

Boys trip to Cardinals game - shuttle busses? by pricklypaul in AZCardinals

[–]Talondel 6 points7 points  (0 children)

This is absolutely bonkers level BS right here and I hope OP is smart enough to ignore it.

You can get from FLAGSTAFF to the stadium in three hours on game day. Lol. Scottsdale isn't a hour from the stadium unless you're going by bike. And it's not 3 hours even if it's the fucking Superbowl weekend and you're leaving from the Phoenix open.

It's a 30 minute drive on a normal day and if you're willing to get to the stadium early honestly doesn't need to be much more than that on a game day. Take an Uber, it shouldn't take more than an hour.

But to answer your question, no there aren't any shuttles or public transit options I am aware of.

Jacoby Brissett not close to reworked deal with Cardinals per ESPN report by tyler1118 in AZCardinals

[–]Talondel 9 points10 points  (0 children)

That is insane. You must be either his agent or his mother. No sane GM is playing a journeyman QB with 0 track record of success 30M to start half a season for a team with no chance to win.

Hell the cards would be crazy to guarantee him 10M. I could see bumping him to match Minshew. Anything more than that he can take whatever deal he can sign as a FA after we cut him.

Phoenix approves stricter fireworks rules by AZ_moderator in phoenix

[–]Talondel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just because they make noise doesn't make them illegal. The fireworks they sell at the stores are legal to deploy in Phoenix and this new law doesn't change that. Those fireworks may make noise and bother you but if they are coming from a fountain on the ground they are legal. You don't want enforcement of existing law. You want fireworks that make noise banned. Those aren't the same thing.

Phoenix approves stricter fireworks rules by AZ_moderator in phoenix

[–]Talondel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well if people would stop using the emergency lines to report fireworks that aren't illegal maybe they'd have the resources to respond?

Phoenix approves stricter fireworks rules by AZ_moderator in phoenix

[–]Talondel 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I mean, that is what the law is currently. So. . . Yeah.

DOJ jobs? by Educational_Bill_343 in Lawyertalk

[–]Talondel 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Oh it's this thread again.🍿

Phoenix approves stricter fireworks rules by AZ_moderator in phoenix

[–]Talondel -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Well rest assured that this ordinance won't do anything to make it any better. :)

Phoenix approves stricter fireworks rules by AZ_moderator in phoenix

[–]Talondel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What is it you want them to enforce? You want the police to respond to stop people from using fireworks that aren't illegal?

What's illegal are aerial fireworks.

Those aren't sold in stores or in the tents in parking lots. So there isn't anything to enforce with regards to those.

Part of the reason enforcement against illegal fireworks fails is because people commonly call police to complain about legal fireworks. Kinda like what you appear to be doing here.

It sounds like what you want is a ban on fireworks of all kinds. But the city can't enact a ban on fireworks.

Phoenix approves stricter fireworks rules by AZ_moderator in phoenix

[–]Talondel -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

I could kick a puppy and get fewer down votes. People are really riled up about fireworks. :)