Lawyer asks judge to force rival to wear nicer shoes ...

[intent]

Originally Posted by AldenPyle

In Mississippi, wealthy defendants are forced to appear in court dressed like the little guy in the Monopoly board game. Foreign defendants are required to wear national dress (berets, lederhosen, kimonos, etc.) The juries need to know whats what.
I'll set you up: What, then, do black defendants dress in for court in Mississippi?

 

[NakedYoga]

..

 

[HRoi]

why am i not surprised that this happened in Florida?

 

[AldenPyle]

Originally Posted by intent

I'll set you up: What, then, do black defendants dress in for court in Mississippi?

Court?

 

[Big A]

Originally Posted by NakedYoga

Remember... you show your face on pictures here. I took the MPRE only a few months ago... so maybe I'm a little paranoid, and I know you're in Brussels, but still...
True enough. I'm not calling his integrity into question, just his demeanor, but you may be right. Anyway I took it down but can't get rid of the quotes . . . . .

 

[Ahab]

Originally Posted by Big A

I saw this story but failed to comment on it. I know everyone involved in this story pretty well, so here's some insight:

Bill Bone is actually a fantastic lawyer. I have no idea why he filed the shoe motion (doesn't seem to be his style), but the mistrial is not actually much of a setback. He's tried the case once and won, so there will be heavy pressure to settle. It won't happen again.

Also, Bone probably didn't file the motion to actually win - my guess is that he filed it to get the judge, Hafele, to notice Robb's "self-effacing" tactics.

Robb does that all the time (he is actually a good lawyer too, by the way). He says things like "I'm just a simple lawyer, but I know . . . . " or "I'm just a simple lawyer, so maybe I don't understand . . . . " He's like the Dustin Hoffman lawyer character who spills mustard on his tie on purpose to project an image of a kind of mensch-y screw up bumbling through a case. I've had guys pull that same act on me.

The judge [REDACTED]. My best guess is that Bone just wanted him to be aware of Robb's act - and I assure you, it is an act in my opinion.

So there you go - local knowledge straight from the source.
Thank you...I find this very interesting. I have also found that the best lawyers I have ever dealt with have dressed rather poorly in my mind. Not like TV at all. I had assumed after the 3rd that it was a ruse and now am pretty sure they do this on purpose.

 

[Film Noir Buff]

Originally Posted by Big A

My best guess is that Bone just wanted him to be aware of Robb's act - and I assure you, it is an act in my opinion.
Maybe he had a bone to pick with him?

 

[forsbergacct2000]

Originally Posted by Film Noir Buff

Maybe he had a bone to pick with him?


And another rim shot. Our FNB seems to have an affinity for timely puns.

I hope a keyboard player giving out official rim shots isn't inane. (Or maybe it is, but I actually can do rim shots from my synthesizer if I use the right program and hit the right keys.)

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by Big A

I know everyone involved in this story pretty well, so here's some insight:

Bill Bone is actually a fantastic lawyer. I have no idea why he filed the shoe motion (doesn't seem to be his style), but the mistrial is not actually much of a setback. He's tried the case once and won, so there will be heavy pressure to settle.




You are supposed to have a "wherefore" clause at the end of a motion. Today you could simplify it to something else but lawyers have been basically required to use that form for a long time, so old habits die hard. I teach a legal writing course where I discourage that sort of thing, and I actually have a hard time cutting it out after so many years of doing it. It isn't pretension, it's just how a lot of lawyers do it there.

Losing a large verdict in your favor certainly qualifies as a setback. Is his settlement position improved? Sure. But it's a lot worse than it was when he was sitting on a $12M verdict pending post-trial motions and appeals. Even with a strong case, you always have to worry about the uncertainty of what a jury may do.

Unless there's a Florida rule I'm not aware of, nobody is "required" to use clunky, archaic language like 'wherefore'. What you're required to do is tell the judge clearly what you want him to do. Throwing in "wherefores" and the like may not be pretension, but it is laziness. I spend a lot of time reviewing and editing the work of other lawyers, and I emphasize that "well, that's how it was done in the old brief I used as a template" is not a good reason for including a phrase or statement. If you don't know why you're saying something, you probably shouldn't.

 

[Thomas]

Doesn't Joe Jamail also wear shoes with holes in the soles, despite being rather well-off?

 

[Big A]

Originally Posted by lawyerdad

Losing a large verdict in your favor certainly qualifies as a setback. Is his settlement position improved? Sure. But it's a lot worse than it was when he was sitting on a $12M verdict pending post-trial motions and appeals. Even with a strong case, you always have to worry about the uncertainty of what a jury may do.

Unless there's a Florida rule I'm not aware of, nobody is "required" to use clunky, archaic language like 'wherefore'. What you're required to do is tell the judge clearly what you want him to do. Throwing in "wherefores" and the like may not be pretension, but it is laziness. I spend a lot of time reviewing and editing the work of other lawyers, and I emphasize that "well, that's how it was done in the old brief I used as a template" is not a good reason for including a phrase or statement. If you don't know why you're saying something, you probably shouldn't.

You are correct on both counts. Losing the verdict is a setback, but it isn't like it is going to disappear. Additionally, since my last post I actually called down there and spoke to someone who knows the whole case well. They indicated that the plaintiff thought the damages were miscalculated, and that they should have gotten much, much more. So while it is true that leaving that verdict behind hurts because you never know what a jury will do, there's at least a bright side for the plaintiff who (1) has seen the entire defense case already and (2) will have enough leverage in settlement to possibly settle the case without having to go through another trial. It isn't the end of the world.

I do the exact same job (legal writing instructor, as well as a legal and non-legal book editor) as a sideline. I wasn't saying that the "wherefore" was required; I was saying that the prayer for relief is typically referred to as a "wherefore" clause, so ubiquitous is the use of the word. Old habits die hard - it isn't necessarily laziness - some people like how it sounds, some people feel like they should use it since it's what judges are used to seeing it. Most of the lawyers I know aren't that lazy - they have considered why the language is there, and have decided to keep using it for one of a number of reasons.

 

[Bounder]

Originally Posted by crazyquik

Supposedly these are the defense counsel's lucky shoes that he doesn't want to get resoles.

It's not like he's the President or anything.

I think this picture is really to Obama's credit. First, he went to the trouble to put topys on his shoes. It's a pity we can't see the uppers but I am impressed that he has given even this much thought to his footwear. Very few people do.

Second, I have to be impressed by his work ethic. You don't wear topys out like that walking around on carpets.

 

[intent]

I'll say it again. I like Obama and all, but don't you suspect a photo op when you see that?

 

[Bounder]

Originally Posted by intent

I'll say it again. I like Obama and all, but don't you suspect a photo op when you see that?

Probably. But I doubt if he made a staffer wear his shoes and walk half of Chicago in order to set it up. I think the topys are genuine, too.

 

[intent]

Originally Posted by Bounder

Probably. But I doubt if he made a staffer wear his shoes and walk half of Chicago in order to set it up. I think the topys are genuine, too.

Goodwill.