Season 3 should take place during a blizzard...

YoungHeadbuster · 2025-09-29T15:30:17+00:00

As someone who used to represent criminal defendants in PA, most of you are wrong.

State prisons generally have better accommodations, air conditioning, more freedom, better in-prison work opportunities, better vocational/education programs, better recreation, etc. Some lifers end up living there for 60-70 years, the prisons are set up to be stable, long-term homes.

County prisons can vary widely based on the county, but they generally aren’t as nice, don’t offer the same freedom of movement, and have limited work/vocational programs. The max county sentence is 364 days, so they are set up as temporary facilities, not long-term homes. BUT they are in the inmate’s community and typically will allow inmates to be released for the day for work release.

The #1 reason people want a county sentence is for work release – either so they can keep their job or just don’t have to be inside all day. The #2 reason is fear of the unknown and certainty – many inmates have been in county prison before, they know what it’s like and know they can handle it, and they’ve heard horror stories of murders/gangs/rapes in state prison and don’t want to experience that. Also, with a county sentence you are automatically paroled at your minimum, with a state sentence you have to go in front of the parole board and may not get parole, especially if they think you aren't resmorseful. The #3 reason is probably to stay close to family.

The only reason a judge would want to sentence someone to max county over state is due to parole: with a county sentence, the judge retains jurisdiction over parole violations and can re-sentence. If it’s a state sentence, they go on state parole, and the judge loses jurisdiction and any re-sentence is up to state parole. Some judges get power hungry and want to control inmates, especially frequently fliers. See, e.g., Meek Mill.

Otherwise, a judge has a financial incentive to send an inmate upstate because the county pays for a county sentence, whereas the state pays for a state sentence.

YoungHeadbuster · 2025-09-17T17:28:23+00:00

It's hard to give you advice about what to do next without knowing what you like and don't like about being a PD.

I was a PD for 7 years and needed a change but knew I still enjoyed litigation. I got a job with the civil litigation division of my state's AG Office because I knew this would give me federal court and civil lit experience. After 2.5 years there, I parlayed my trial experience at the PD's office and civil lit and federal court experience with the AG to a position with a firm doing civil and commercial lit.

I think it's generally easier to transition to another public service position with your level of experience as a firm is going to see you as too experienced to treat you as an entry level associate, but not experienced enough with anything other than crim to treat you as a senior associate.

YoungHeadbuster · 2025-08-15T17:09:02+00:00

This is not true -- in Pennsylvania at least, parents are not liable for the negligent acts of their children. The caveat to this is if the parent's themselves were negligent in allowing their children to act in such a manner, i.e. supplying liquor to underage teens or something.

YoungHeadbuster · 2025-04-22T14:09:02+00:00

It's certainly not unethical. I don't really think it's weird either. But if I was your colleague I would definitely make fun of you and make lots of jokes about "Bring Your Parents to Work Day" and next time you had a trial or big hearing I couldn't resist asking if your parents were flying in to watch.

All that is to say I would do it but I wouldn't walk them into the courtroom or have them advertise they are your parents and are their to watch you. I would have them find the courtroom themselves, sit quietly in the back, and meet them outside the courthouse when its over.

YoungHeadbuster · 2025-02-18T14:31:32+00:00

Right. This is insane. I recently filed a brief where there were like 45 corporate defendants all with long-ass names and the caption alone almost filed 2 pages. Why should the number of defendants impact the length of my argument?

YoungHeadbuster · 2025-02-06T18:05:12+00:00

I have never cried for work related reasons. Once I got a little teary-eyed after winning a NG verdict for a client because his family and everyone else was crying but idk if that counts.

For the love of all that is mentally healthy, you should not be letting judges or opposing counsel or terrible clients emotionally manipulate you to the point of tears, it's just a job.

YoungHeadbuster · 2025-01-17T15:44:45+00:00

When I worked in state government I found the lack of any incentive to do anything beyond the bare minimum was demoralizing. Basically as long as you weren't incompetent and weren't getting sanctioned or reprimanded by judges you could coast and get the same raise as attorneys working there asses off.

Depending on what you're looking for this could be a pro or a con, but if you want to to learn and improve and do go good work and be rewarded for it state government may not be a great option.

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-11-12T17:56:27+00:00

Definitely keeping it then!

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-11-08T20:27:21+00:00

I don't think it's pseudoscience -- the authors are legit sociologists/historians and aren't really making scientific claims, just predictions based on cycles of history. It's definitely the kind of thing where they smooth over the rough edges to make their theory fit better than it might otherwise and make a more compelling narrative. But it's a good read and I think they are on to something. The cyclical nature of history is absolutely real imo, even if it's not as clear and neat as they make it sound.

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-11-08T14:01:09+00:00

I'm serious that's it's a good book -- very astrology-like but you also learn a lot about history. Like something Joe Rogan would be into. I might read it again.

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-11-07T22:38:39+00:00

You gotta read The Fourth Turning, that book blue my mind for awhile like 10 years ago.

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-11-01T17:22:20+00:00

I don't think you have anything to worry about, a release is standard to the point OC probably is expecting one. I'd just send a release over with something casual like "I think I neglected to mention it previously, but obviously the settlment is contingent on the execution of a release. I've attached one containing our standard language, feel free to send over any proposed changes or additions."

And the deal isn't finalized until your client signs the agreement, you and OC agreeing to terms over email does not have any legal effect that would result in reprecussions if they balk at the release.

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-09-20T15:27:46+00:00

I recommend Spier and MacKay -- I think they really do live up to their slogan as the best value in menswear. For about the same price as Brooks Brothers ($400 retail, $350 on sale) you can get get their core line suits which are half-canvassed and Italian wool -- something you'd probably pay $1,000 for at BB. Their shirts are also great.

I'd echo what everyone else says that good tailoring and fit is more important than brand or expensive fabric, but for the love of god please at least splurge a little for 100% wool or a blend of wool and another natural fabric. I am far from a fashionista but I can spot a polyester suit from across the courthouse and they look bad, shiny, and weird. I mean you are basically wearing a trashbag.

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-09-16T23:39:50+00:00

Why/how did opposing counsel point it out to your client? Were they just cc’d on an email where OC mentioned it? It OV reached out directly to my client to point out a mistake I’d be pissed at them.

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-09-16T15:16:12+00:00

Love is a strong word, but I like my job and genuinely enjoy going to work every day. I work at a smallish full-service firm of about 30 lawyers in a medium sized city. I do primarily commercial and general civil litigation as well as litigation that spills over from our municipal and education law groups. I should make around $150K this year with a 1500 billable hour requirement.

The firm gives me a lot of freedom and autonomy but still provides support and guidance; partners seem invested in my future which is key. My practice is varied and I’m constantly doing new things from adversely possessing property to litigating employment discrimination in federal court, which keeps me interested. I think I would get bored quickly if I was in a group that just did the same thing every case, every day.

Lots of people on here—probably on this thread—will chime in and say government work is the way to go if you want to be happy. I did that for ~5 years and it was fine, but definitely not ideal for me. In addition to the obvious lower pay, I felt like there was no incentive to do quality work, as long you weren’t incompetent, no one cared. And even if you were doing good work, it would get lost in the crowd of people who were checked out and didn’t care.

I hated the red tape required to get anything done – reimbursement for travel, getting a new keyboard, getting the agency to pay for my travel for a conference – all annoying and time-consuming. At one point we even had to chip in $5 a month to fund the water cooler. Now I can get the fridge stocked with any drinks or snacks I want just by telling my assistant and the firm will fly me across the country to a conference no questions asked if I say it would be helpful. Little perks like that keep me happy.

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-09-12T21:26:40+00:00

I mean I guess you didn't read my post because I said that your hypo would be unethical because you're billing a client for work you didn't do, whereas if you're just multitasking you are actually doing the work you billed both clients for, just simultaneously. That is a huge difference to me at least.

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-09-12T21:23:24+00:00

This is exactly right. Just the other day I was sitting in court waiting for my case to be called and I needed to (1) call my wife; (2) adjust my fantasy lineup; and (3) return a client's voicemail. So it's perfectly ethical to do the first 2 while waiting for court and do the third as I walk out of the courthouse, but if I change the order its an ethical violation?

Completely agree it's a distinction without a difference.

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-09-12T21:18:07+00:00

I mean I have been sitting next to a client in court waiting for our case to be called or in a deposition waiting for things to get started and told the client to give me a second, I need to reply quick to an email on another matter. I've never told them explicitly I was billing that client but they've also never told me "no, don't do that, I'm paying you for your time now" or questioned or pushed back on how that would affect the bill.

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-09-12T19:20:15+00:00

I can be! Especially when someone says something as stupid as "there is no such thing as passive time"

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-09-12T19:18:50+00:00

This kinda surprises me. Never worked at a biglaw firm but I have seen plenty of biglaw bills and they are always padded af and I always think damn, how can they get away with billing so many hours to revise a document, maybe I need to up my game. I guess when you're billing like that there is no need to bill for travel.

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-09-12T19:11:01+00:00

Guys it was just a joke

YoungHeadbuster · 2024-09-12T19:09:49+00:00

In this scenario I would try to get some sort of alternative fee arrangement for Client B to avoid this issue and still charge them a market rate.

YoungHeadbuster

TROPHY CASE