LOLZ @ LAWYERS

he's the accuser

$$$ working freelance $$$

not as lawyer (I don't do contentious/court work usually) just doing a watching brief for a client

court hours (10-4) and mad skrilla :D

it's true, freelance work is what commands the big $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

cutty are u like an actual practicing lawyer

yes

i am a litigator

cutty what is your onbike nutrition for 80 miles in Zone 3 with about 7k feet of gross climbing?

i dont think you should spend 80 miles in Z3

what if youre on the program and being paid to drag LA to the bottom la mongie

then it's your job!!! 80 miles in Z4

coz, are you like a bannister? or a railgrip? what the hell do you britishes call it?

INCONTROVERTABLE PROOF OF HOW EXCITING LAWYERS ARE

http://www.youtube.com/user/MarriageTrial#p/a/u/1/6zLtYQ6K1rI

Sorry, "incontrovertible."

Actually, it is a very interesting reenactment, but mostly to lawyers (i.e., insider baseball).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESJINXeBjhc

What is a "document review" and what does it practically entail? I do not understand "contract law" in general I think.

JONES, ESQ.

laurel, document review is like--you are an attorney but your job is to wade through piles of e-discovery documents redacting privileged information. it's grunt work and it's pretty horrible work for someone to do permanently as a lawyer.

many people who couldn't/can't get jobs out of law school do this as a temp job, then find out later without any formal REAL lawyer training they will never get a job anywhere else. it's scary.

for temp work, it's not bad pay.

document review generally refers to a portion of discovery or litigation preparation. firms will often hire temporary "contract attorneys" (that is, they are not staff attorneys or associates) to do this. it is mind numbingly terrible usually, reading troves of email, correspondence or what have you, then making determinations as to the responsiveness of the document to a request for production. also, the docs will be reviewed for privilege or sensitivity, etc.

xpost.

in the UK it is often the trainees' job ;_;

Ahh, thanks. Bf is native German-speaker and has degree/career in own country but not barred in US. He was doing doc review/e-discv as temp between jobs. Still getting calls for more of same. Good $$ but arrrgh.

money ain't bad and the overtime can get pretty lucrative.

my firm and others dont do overtime. that could be a local issue

i spent time (TOO MUCH time) on the doc review/e-discovery circuit. one firm i worked for was absolutely terrible; the other was actually quite good. and yes, the money was pretty good (esp. if you could work as long as you could stand it). i did it for as long as i did b/c of the money, so you could say that i got out of it what i wanted. it's true that it doesn't do anything for developing your skills as a lawyer, but (a) i already had pre-existing legal skills and knowledge on which to draw when i finally got out; and (b) dirty little secret of lawyering is that (w/ exceptions for the more arcane aspects of, say, tax law or something like patent law [where you really do need a scientific and/or engineering background]) most lawyering stuff DOES NOT REQUIRE a super-duper intellect. sure, you have to have SOME brains but really most stuff doesn't really require the absurd l-school pedigrees and "honors" that the snooty BigLaw firms require -- if you're halfway intelligent, have a law school education (so you at least know the lingo and way of thinking) and/or have some guidance (a mentor or two, reference to a good legal database) you can figure out most lawyerish shit.

FWIW, i got out of doc review hell b/c i was able to get into lol "bank compliance" work (pretty much a dead letter post-Lehman Bros/AIG). now i'm trying to go solo -- let's see how that works.

yeah, it's only once u get inside the compound they tell u it doesn't matter if ur only halfway semi-literate

i know we're not really supposed to "do meta" or whatever, but is it okay to say that i imagine these guys are the gabbnebs of their particular lawyering assosciating?

the entire BigLaw portion of the profession is the gabbneb of lawyering associating. which is why that the only good thing about BigLaw is the paycheck.

yeah, it's only once u get inside the compound they tell u it doesn't matter if ur only halfway semi-literate

― chris nibbs (cozen), Wednesday, February 10, 2010 4:30 PM (3 minutes ago)

this is too otm, it's sad

Hey Eisbar, how did you get into the doc review thing? Not that it's a lofty ambition or anything, but you know ... it's good to be prepared in case it takes forever to find that first real job.

hey burt

check out the online job boards like CareerBuilder or Monster -- they're staffed by temp agencies (who, BTW, are the major source of evil in the doc review world) and if they need folks they'll advertise.

they're on craigslist. seems like you can make big money if you're fluent in a rarer language like japanese or finnish!

i actually know German pretty well -- not native, but well enough to get onto a German-language assignment if i wanted to. and while there are more German speakers in NYC than, say, Finnish or Dutch speakers, they aren't as dime-a-dozen in NYC as Spanish, Chinese or even French speakers so that keeps the hourly rate for that kind of work high.

of course, if you can speak Dutch or Korean AND there's work you can clean up doing that kind of work. provided yer brain doesn't explode from the tedium, of course.

that said, a very good friend of mine has been kept alive after she got laid off during the beginning of the Great Recession by doing Spanish-language work (she's native Puerto Rican).

German, eh, what degree of proficiency are they looking for? I studied reading German (lol lit academia) for about 6 years.

a lot of the agencies have in-house tests to see if you're proficient and to what degree. the tests are tricky for non-natives but doable (and not at the level of difficulty that, say, the Goethe Institute would impose if you take one of their German language proficiency tests). of course, if shit needs to get done and you speak enough German to know what's going on (which is really all you need, you're not actually TRANSLATING) then you can get on that way as well.

Ah, cool, thanks. I took a few Goethe Institut classes down at the NYU Washington Mews building ... they make you realize you knew nothing about the German language if you never encountered it actually being spoken.

my mom just forwarded me this

Begin forwarded message:

How about this? It's all true!!

These are from a book called 'Disorder in the American Courts' and are things people actually said in court, word for word, taken down and now published by court reporters that had the torment of staying calm while these exchanges were actually taking place.

_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory?
WITNESS: I forget.
ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot?
_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?
WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam?
____________________________________

ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the twenty-year-old, how old is he?
WITNESS: He's twenty, much like your IQ

ATTORNEY: Were you present when your picture was taken?
WITNESS: Are you shitting me?
_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: And what were you doing at that time?
WITNESS: Getting laid
_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: She had three children, right?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: How many were boys?
WITNESS: None.
ATTORNEY: Were there any girls?
WITNESS : Your Honor, I think I need a different attorney Can I get a new attorney?
_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: How was your first marriage terminated?
WITNESS: By death.
ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated?
WITNESS: Take a guess
_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual?
WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beard.
ATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female?
WITNESS: Unless the Circus was in town I'm going with male
_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney?
WITNESS: No, this is how I dress when I go to work.
_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: Doctor, how many of your autopsies have you performed on dead people?
WITNESS: All of them. The live ones put up too much of a fight.
_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you go to?
WITNESS: Oral.
_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?
WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 pm.
ATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time?
WITNESS: If not, he was by the time I finished
_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample?
WITNESS: Are you qualified to ask that question?
_____________________________________

And the best for last:

ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor?
WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
ATTORNEY: I see, but could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless?
WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law

im a lawyer for a govt agency (no tombot) and i get fwd'd ^that^ like twice a yr

counselor.

i didn't know j. crunch was an esq.

ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you go to?
WITNESS: Oral.

^lol

orallllll roberts university

http://www.trogerslawoffice.com/images/header_3.jpg

lols-a-plenty. Makes me feel a little better about the examinations I've performed.

ATTORNEY: She had three children, right?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: How many were boys?
WITNESS: None.
ATTORNEY: Were there any girls?
WITNESS : Your Honor, I think I need a different attorney Can I get a new attorney?

lol

http://www.bobpitch.com/anon/LionelHutz.jpg

http://www.abovethelaw.com/images/entries/Peter%20John%20P%27Ta%20Mon%20Peter%20P%27Ta%20Mon%20John%20Trial%20Lawyer%20Above%20the%20Law%20blog.jpg

^^^^^^ real lawyer ad, btw

omg

last year he apparently billed himself as "the thug lawyer." new year -- new ad.

But the reason I actually revived was that I spent the last several days in brutal deposition preparations with a very meticulous partner who wanted his 90-page outline perfect. Anyone who knows me knows I (1) hate working in this way and (2) am terrified of making mistakes at work. In the middle of reviewing the outline I noted to the partner that there was a typo in the document number. He then said "We need to sit down and talk about this." My heart sank for about a full 30 seconds before I realized he was just reading the first line of the document we had come to in the outline.

No, I'm sorry. "We need to sit down and talk about this" is the name of my dog.

The guy defending the deposition I'm watching right now is the biggest schmuck.

He has repeatedly objected to "reading a document not admitted into evidence." Nothing is admitted into evidence, this is a deposition. He also keeps objecting to "hearsay" the second a document is introduced and before any statement from it has actually be referred to.

There’s definitely a feeling of “how long can I keep up this charade” to litigating from home in sweatpants.

Loving this Boston defense attorney’s content pic.twitter.com/AVXWkfi6at

— 𝔅𝔞𝔟𝔶 𝔤𝔲𝔯𝔩 𝔡𝔞 𝔭𝔯𝔦𝔫𝔠𝔢𝔰𝔰 (@sug_knight) July 29, 2021

have literally argued this defense irl

The “LawTube” trend is excruciating but I’m fascinated by the people, mostly women in their 40s and 50s, that donate to these creeps. They are usually male personal injury lawyers in their 30s or 40s. It’s barely “true crime” and mostly consists of moaning about millennials, expungement, and bail reform.

“Thanks for the donation “PotteryMom,” “#JusticeForSally!”

I also don’t want people to confuse this with courts streaming their proceedings. I think that’s (conceptually) good and sometimes enjoy watching them. It’s just the “reaction” culture that I find really gross.

Verdict Unsealing videos