What is one of the most frustrating parts of being a scientist or researcher?
I'll tell you what it is: referencing!
You have to do so much of it, and it's so annoying. You have to cite your sources, but there are so many different formats for citations! And then sometimes you don't even know how to cite something, and how are you supposed to know that unless you ask someone who knows? And even then, they might not be sure whether it should be an in-text citation or a footnote…
In court recently for a scheduling conference, cattle call style. I was listening to cases being called and heard this gem that made me very nervous about the judge...
Judge: Defendant, where is your answer? Why shouldn't I enter default?
*cue confusion from the parties*
Plaintiff: Uh, your honor, we stipulated to an extension of time to file a responsive pleading. And defendant filed a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.
Judge: That doesn't mean you don't have to file an answer.
Plaintiff: Um. Yes it does. That's exactly what it means.
Judge: What rule is that?
*parties cite rule*
Judge: Well, I don't know about that.
Everyone watching was looking around, very shocked and confused.
I was in the middle of an appellate argument at the state capital building in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania which is a beautiful courtroom with high ceilings and a small rotunda with lots of religious paintings on the ceiling and walls. Midstream in my opponent’s argument he abandoned his argument based upon caselaw, put both of his arms in the air, pointed at the ceiling and proclaimed that his argument was based upon “divine law”. My rebuttal was short: even god couldn’t save his flawed legal argument.
The panel had a good laugh at my one sentence argument-which was successful.
I’ll go first:
While still a baby lawyer only a year and a bit out of law school I was working on some extremely acrimonious motion practice focusing on OC having flagrantly violated federal law in pursuit of an advantage in the suit. We moved for heavy sanctions and threatened to go to the ethics committee, OC cross moved for the same, it got real ugly real fast.
In the midst of the motions back and forth, OC included the following in a response to the arguments outlined in my moving papers:
“Attorney X [youre truly] is not only a liar, he is stupid and in extreme need of greater supervision from the partners in his firm.”
The story ends with me taking the papers to the head of my section and telling him “Hey, OC says I’m stupid and that you should supervise me better.”
The partner lazily read through the motion and replied “Nah, much more fun to let you run around unchecked and wild. Get back to lying stupidly. Or is it stupidly lying? Whatever it is, send OC a thank you note for the extra billing events. Now, young esquire, go forth and litigate, and more importantly go forth and bill hours.”
Isn’t it unethical to threaten to flip someone in to the committee during an ongoing dispute
During P’s depo in a employment discrimination (national origin) case, I asked P to state his nationality. OC objected and when I asked her to explain she stated “racism.”
This is actually funny. I was fairly new and appeared in court on my colleague’s motion and submitted the reply affirmation to the judge at oral argument. The oral argument was quick. The judge asked the attorneys to draft the court order, which was in the form of a stipulation. Plaintiff’s counsel drafted the decision and asked me to sign it. I reviewed it and said I had a problem with the way it was written and the statements indicating that the judge had reviewed all of the papers submitted. I doubt the motion papers were carefully reviewed and know the judge did not read the reply affirmation. Plaintiff’s counsel suggested I let the judge know my position, so I did. The judge screamed at me to get out of his courtroom.
Btw, only plaintiff’s counsel and the judge signed the so ordered stipulation. Today, after years n practice, I’d take the same position.
“[The only authority in my life is my lord and savior, so this court had no jurisdiction over me.]” no words
Yup
Defense counsel said that my arguments did not represent the views of the Government, they were just recommendations from a random attorney. I was a federal prosecutor...
Count IV... with the o. Someone didn’t proofread 🤦♂️
that's called Muphry's Law, btw. There's really something to it.
We sued a company for wrongfully possessing our client’s jet. Opposing counsel called me (not my client) a “liar LIAR pants on FIRE” in their answer.
The defendant corporate rep testified at a pretrial replevin hearing that he lied to the FAA about having our jet and conceded he was wrongfully holding our client’s jet.
We settled days later, got the jet back, and got a significant sum of money for our client.
Oh that whiteboard is pure gold 🤣
During oral argument an adversary tried to support his position with a brand new law that was recently passed but not in effect yet...
I had this recently! Frivolous shakedown lawsuit, we file a cross-complaint we on the same theories as our affirmative defenses. OPC demurs on the basis of a law that was enacted after everything went down. Then, at the settlement conference (somehow before the demurrer hearing), it becomes clear that his only defense to the cross-complaint is reliance on ANOTHER newly enacted law without retroactive application. Absolute nonsense, I was bummed insurance paid out.
Plaintiff’s 45+ page appellate brief for a new trial quoted the following in support of his argument: “The lady protests too much, methinks.” -Hamlet, Act III, Scene II
the lawyer doth forget his metric feet,
if fairly you have quoted him above.
Not in a document but I saw a stripper once testify it was “an act of god” that her boobs popped out of her top whilst she was upside down on the pole. She was on trial for violating a law that prohibits nudity if alcohol is served at the club. I almost burst out laughing.
Not in any pleading, but after filing a motion for summary judgment, OC filed no response. Of course, the tentative ruling granted the motion. OC requested a hearing. While waiting for the judge to take the bench, OC threatened me if I told the judge why he filed no response. I had no clue what what he was talking about. This case was in a county I did not practice in on a frequent basis with a small enough number of judges that they were all aware of the more interesting cases each was handling. Based on the judge’s demeanor toward OC, it was obvious that the judge knew the reason for OC’s failure to file an opposition. He had been sanctioned in the same county to spend two weeks in jail after his failure to comply with the court’s fourth or fifth previous orders (and escalating sanctions) to pay spousal support in his own divorce proceeding. (The response date was during that two week period). During oral argument, the judge indicated that being incarcerated was not a sufficient reason for not filling an opposition, cut off every attempt to obtain another opportunity to file an opposition and said OC had plenty of, um, ‘time’ to prepare and file an opposition. Malpractice?
Opposing counsel tried to argue that my motion to dismiss actually entitled his client to summary judgment. OC (obviously) failed to provide any support or justification, and the judge did not find his argument persuasive lol
Have some interesting stories that go a bit beyond the papers.
Opposing counsel lied to the judge. However, the judge wasn’t interested when I attempted to respectfully address at oral argument. When my client, who was sitting at counsel’s table, said, “ There’s no justice in this courtroom “, the judge screamed,” Shut up... you have a lawyer...” When I returned to the court room to pick up a copy of the order, the clerk told me I was lucky I wasn’t arrested for contempt. Was horrified.
Another judge denied a summary judgment motion, which was made timely by being mailed before the deadline, on the erroneous basis that the motion was not filed timely (the motion obviously was filed with the court after the papers were timely mailed by the sjm deadline). The partner screamed at me and demanded I personally file the papers of the renewal motion. I don’t think opposing counsel even raised the argument.
Opposing counsel moved for summary judgment based on testimony taken out of context or misconstrued. Totally no basis for motion. In fact, we cross moved and succeeded.
In a case in which plaintiff’s counsel clearly obstructed discovery in multiple different ways, we made a discovery motion and also sought sanctions. At the court appearance, the court attorney tried to get counsel to stipulate to discovery despite multiple previous failed efforts by the defense. Plaintiff’s counsel, in response to a statement that has conduct was illegal and violated the rules, stated the statements were defamatory.
I have more outlandish stories that go beyond the papers.,
On a motion for attorneys’s fees, opposing counsel’s argument for a substantially higher rate than the local rate for the practice area was because he took the case on contingency and that is “risky.”
And that was his *only* argument. The response was fun!
OC1, insane. I had taken over a case opposing counsel knowingly commenced against a deceased respondent without ever advising the court. The prior attorney had made a number of court appearances and even entered into stipulations with opposing counsel that had been so ordered. Once I became the attorney of record, I immediately moved to dismiss the case and sought sanctions. Opposing counsel, who had previously moved successfully to restore the case to the trial calendar, repeatedly sought adjournments of the dismissal motion. At a 3rd court appearance re the dismissal motion, while waiting for the case to be called, I overheard opposing counsel talk to a pro se respondent in a different matter. The pro se respondent asked him if she should read the stipulation he had prepared, and his response was “No”, so she signed the stipulation without ever reading it. I was appalled. There was a new judge in the part who I suspected had a relationship with opposing counsel who argued in opposition to the motion without submitting any opposition papers. The judge, who took lunch for one hour in the middle of oral argument, granted the dismissal on a basis different than set forth in the motion and denied the motion for sanctions. Opposing counsel eventually refiled another action, which I immediately moved to dismiss while filing a separate action by order to show cause in the state’s trial court. In the new action by opposing counsel, the affidavit of service of the petition stated that service of the prerequisite notices had been done by certified mail return receipt. However, none of the certified mail receipts could be found in the postal service system. This was one of four grounds for dismissal of the new action by opposing counsel.
Agreed. This is the type of attorney who makes practicing law much more difficult than it has to be and makes some people want to run from the profession.