Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Ever get the disciplinary board complaint threat from opposing counsel? I got one of those once. I wish I'd kept it. Had words like "vehemently" and "strenuously" in it. Dude was batshit crazy.

Back when I worked for the Democratic Party in the state, about once a week someone would call in a bomb threat. Once you have people threaten your life on a regular basis lawyer's threats don't seem very serious.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?

I like HIIT (occasionally), but I found it amusing that the trainer at my last gym (a) ran the HIIT workouts, but didn't actually do them with us, and (b) went straight to the free weight section after class and did all of the big compound lifts.

There's a guy at my gym who runs the comp team. He's fucking ripped and strong as fuck. Zero body fat. Pound-for-pound, strongest dude I've ever met. He doesn't do anything but heavy, Olympic-style lifting. He keeps telling me that that is why he's ripped. I keep telling him he has some crazy genetic thing happening that he can't see.

I think a mix is best. It's been best for me. I tell him (and myself) that I don't want to put on any more muscle* because my knees are happiest when I'm at my current weight or below.

TM

*(It's totally a choice. It's totally a choice. It's totally a choice.)

[Tyrone Slothrop]

In Judge Sullivan's decision today rejecting Lt. Gen. Flynn's challenge to his sentencing for lying to the FBI, at pp 17-18 the court tweaks Flynn's counsel for lifting arguments in their brief from an amicus brief in another case. Ethical violation?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

In Judge Sullivan's decision today rejecting Lt. Gen. Flynn's challenge to his sentencing for lying to the FBI, at pp 17-18 the court tweaks Flynn's counsel for lifting arguments in their brief from an amicus brief in another case. Ethical violation?

Once I was trying to get a case transferred from E DT Tx to Mi, back when EDT was rocket docket home for all patent cases. Local sent me a brief Apple had filed on very similar facts. I pretty much copied it. It was poetry, except you know how no one pays for poetry? Apple paid a lot, I’m sure.

Do I need to confess to someone besides you guys?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

In Judge Sullivan's decision today rejecting Lt. Gen. Flynn's challenge to his sentencing for lying to the FBI, at pp 17-18 the court tweaks Flynn's counsel for lifting arguments in their brief from an amicus brief in another case. Ethical violation?

Are you thinking ethical as in a break of the Rules of Professional Conduct or ethical as in just a general bad thing to do?

If the former, what rule are you thinking of?

If the latter, there are a bunch of attorneys running around DC doing some very, very bad things these days, many of which may not run directly afoul of the Rules of Professional Conduct. I'm not sure getting academic concepts of attribution and citation into the Rules is my top priority. But, yeah, I wouldn't copy it word for word and wouldn't want one of my partners or associates to, either.

That having been said, I just sent a nasty letter to someone (a variation on a troll) making a claim against a client and it was based heavily on a brief filed in another case against the same company (with attribution, I was trying to rub in their face that I knew they were already on the hot seat for bad behavior), and I didn't have a lot of compunction about having us track another good argument pretty closely, though adding lots of detail on our own facts and trying to twist the knife a couple more times here and there.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Are you thinking ethical as in a break of the Rules of Professional Conduct or ethical as in just a general bad thing to do?

If the former, what rule are you thinking of?

If the latter, there are a bunch of attorneys running around DC doing some very, very bad things these days, many of which may not run directly afoul of the Rules of Professional Conduct. I'm not sure getting academic concepts of attribution and citation into the Rules is my top priority. But, yeah, I wouldn't copy it word for word and wouldn't want one of my partners or associates to, either.

That having been said, I just sent a nasty letter to someone (a variation on a troll) making a claim against a client and it was based heavily on a brief filed in another case against the same company (with attribution, I was trying to rub in their face that I knew they were already on the hot seat for bad behavior), and I didn't have a lot of compunction about having us track another good argument pretty closely, though adding lots of detail on our own facts and trying to twist the knife a couple more times here and there.

I was once in a room with the head of a large class action firm. Dude was scanning a Bloomberg screen, picked up the phone and demanded an associate file a complaint in some securities thing. "Just copy Milberg's."

I just assumed that all fungible work is copied. I filed a novel complaint in a class action (written to keep the claim out of the MDL) a few years later and gave a copy to someone at another firm in Word format to use. I assumed everyone shared that kind of stuff. People shared stuff with me. Seemed impolite not to do so. We were both on same side, so it could only help.

What I think differentiates the briefing in Flynn's case is:

1. This is Judge Sullivan, who flies off the handle a lot and doesn't seem entirely stable (Sometimes, it's warranted, like the Ted Stevens case, where he wound up causing a couple prosecutors to lose their jobs; Sometimes it's not -- like when he flipped out on prosecutors during Manafort's trial and had to apologize later);
2. These guys copied verbatim. Everybody knows everybody lifts from other briefs to save time. You can't ethically charge clients to re-engineer that which you can easily copy. But there's an expectation you'll at least reorder the sentences, omit an authority or two... rewrite the thing a bit so it isn't nakedly obvious lifting. Verbatim regurgitation is lazy, and it's daring a firebrand like Sullivan.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Once I was trying to get a case transferred from E DT Tx to Mi, back when EDT was rocket docket home for all patent cases. Local sent me a brief Apple had filed on very similar facts. I pretty much copied it. It was poetry, except you know how no one pays for poetry? Apple paid a lot, I’m sure.

Do I need to confess to someone besides you guys?

I represented a friend of a friend in an unemployment claim appeal as a favor about a year ago. Typically takes a couple minutes at some silly admin hearing to get a bad denial reversed.

Not this time. Lyft filed a brief on why the guy, who'd driven for Lyft for a few weeks, was an independent contractor and not an employee. The brief was 20 pages long. I had no claim against Lyft because they were indeed not an employer. But I kept the brief because it was damn well written, and state of the art up to a few months before the hearing.

I guarantee that brief, and a similar one authored by Uber, are being copied near verbatim by every employment lawyer in the state who runs into the issue of independent contractor vs. employee.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I was once in a room with the head of a large class action firm. Dude was scanning a Bloomberg screen, picked up the phone and demanded an associate file a complaint in some securities thing. "Just copy Milberg's."

I just assumed that all fungible work is copied. I filed a novel complaint in a class action (written to keep the claim out of the MDL) a few years later and gave a copy to someone at another firm in Word format to use. I assumed everyone shared that kind of stuff. People shared stuff with me. Seemed impolite not to do so. We were both on same side, so it could only help.

What I think differentiates the briefing in Flynn's case is:

1. This is Judge Sullivan, who flies off the handle a lot and doesn't seem entirely stable (Sometimes, it's warranted, like the Ted Stevens case, where he wound up causing a couple prosecutors to lose their jobs; Sometimes it's not -- like when he flipped out on prosecutors during Manafort's trial and had to apologize later);
2. These guys copied verbatim. Everybody knows everybody lifts from other briefs to save time. You can't ethically charge clients to re-engineer that which you can easily copy. But there's an expectation you'll at least reorder the sentences, omit an authority or two... rewrite the thing a bit so it isn't nakedly obvious lifting. Verbatim regurgitation is lazy, and it's daring a firebrand like Sullivan.

I think a complaint (or a contract) is different because the words themselves have legal import, while a brief is an argument about the law. I don't think it's a huge ethical violation (and GGG, I don't know the applicable rules) but I think Sullivan was essentially embarrassing them for copying someone else's homework -- I don't think he's going to report them to the Bar for plagiarism.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

There's a guy at my gym who runs the comp team. He's fucking ripped and strong as fuck. Zero body fat. Pound-for-pound, strongest dude I've ever met. He doesn't do anything but heavy, Olympic-style lifting. He keeps telling me that that is why he's ripped. I keep telling him he has some crazy genetic thing happening that he can't see.

I think a mix is best. It's been best for me. I tell him (and myself) that I don't want to put on any more muscle* because my knees are happiest when I'm at my current weight or below.

TM

*(It's totally a choice. It's totally a choice. It's totally a choice.)

He sounds like he hit the genetic lottery. Putting on muscle will cause your body to burn more calories, I believe, but it will not alone fight off the weight gain that occurs as metabolism slows in middle age. I think you need to add cardio for that.

And putting on muscle to offset weight gain can be a double edged sword. If you get too bulky, you look strange in clothes. If you have to get suits re-tailored, it's also expensive. If you're lifting enough to cause the arms to get tight, you're risking looking a bit too bulky, IMO.

This time of year, the challenge is too not eat one's face off to the point that you wind up looking like a muscular fat guy (Russell Crowe look). If you start gaining weight and think, "Well, I'll just bulk up on muscle and that'll cover up the fat," you wind up with the worst of both worlds.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I think a complaint (or a contract) is different because the words themselves have legal import, while a brief is an argument about the law. I don't think it's a huge ethical violation (and GGG, I don't know the applicable rules) but I think Sullivan was essentially embarrassing them for copying someone else's homework -- I don't think he's going to report them to the Bar for plagiarism.

Agreed. But depending on whether you're in notice or fact pleading jurisdictions, complaints can include legal arguments similar to those one sees in briefs.

He strikes me as a very annoyed judge. I don't think he likes his job very much.

Also, Flynn's new legal team is a bunch of scorched earth psychos. Sullivan may be sending a message: "You're doing your client no favors."

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Agreed. But depending on whether you're in notice or fact pleading jurisdictions, complaints can include legal arguments similar to those one sees in briefs.

Yes, but I don't think there's any shame in copying those. You can copy the language in a brief, too, but you should use quotation marks to show that the words are someone else's, and if you don't do that then you are hiding that fact.

He strikes me as a very annoyed judge. I don't think he likes his job very much.

Also, Flynn's new legal team is a bunch of scorched earth psychos. Sullivan may be sending a message: "You're doing your client no favors."

I think the two are related. Flynn pleaded guilty and then started making a bunch of silly arguments to try to get out of it. Sullivan ripped him a new one for the original crime, and can't be happy to be wasting his time on the more recent stupidity.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Back when I worked for the Democratic Party in the state, about once a week someone would call in a bomb threat. Once you have people threaten your life on a regular basis lawyer's threats don't seem very serious.

I'd little concern that he actually had an ethical claim to make against me. My sole concern was the annoyance of the process.

The reasons for this were many. This man wore crazy expensive suits with the loudest and sharpest lines I'd ever seen. And he also wore those white contrasting collar and cuff shirts. He almost looked like the SNL parodies of Donald Jr. and Eric Trump. He was half mafioso/half moron-who-has-a-personal-shopper-at-Neiman's-who-laughs-behind-his-back. A pinkie ring would have rounded out the look, but he also could have been a bank CEO with bad taste.

But more than all of this, he had that toxic mix of personality traits common in almost every person you've met and thought, The world might be better off if this guy were hit by a train: Endless tenacity married to quite limited intelligence.

He drove me fucking nuts.

I've not been evacuated for bomb threats, but I have had my ass kicked a few times, and I've had a gun pointed at me. I might prefer fearing for my life over enduring a person like that lawyer. For no matter how funny he was, how much we'd laugh about how English must've been a second language to him -- the son of a bitch would send emails and letters all day, every day. He was relentless, and dumb as a fence post. He tortured me just by being who he was and requiring me to engage him.

I don't know where he is, but wherever he is, he is annoying some poor souls to near suicide. It is my Xmas wish (a small one among many others far more important) the new year meet him with grave and insurmountable misfortune.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Yes, but I don't think there's any shame in copying those. You can copy the language in a brief, too, but you should use quotation marks to show that the words are someone else's, and if you don't do that then you are hiding that fact.



I think the two are related. Flynn pleaded guilty and then started making a bunch of silly arguments to try to get out of it. Sullivan ripped him a new one for the original crime, and can't be happy to be wasting his time on the more recent stupidity.

One can also simply rewrite the argument. I avoid briefing as much as possible, but where its necessary, if I find a chunk of text in a brief that makes my argument, I'll usually want to bend it to my writing style anyway, so it'll be changed. I also hate string cites, so I'll usually yank a bunch of those. If you're just lifting straightaway, you're a lazy ass. (Sorry, Hank.)

I've only had one client try to undo a plea. It worked out very badly for that person. Flynn's counsel seem to be doing him a disservice along the lines of that being done to Lori Loughlin by her lawyers.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I'd little concern that he actually had an ethical claim to make against me. My sole concern was the annoyance of the process.

The reasons for this were many. This man wore crazy expensive suits with the loudest and sharpest lines I'd ever seen. And he also wore those white contrasting collar and cuff shirts. He almost looked like the SNL parodies of Donald Jr. and Eric Trump. He was half mafioso/half moron-who-has-a-personal-shopper-at-Neiman's-who-laughs-behind-his-back. A pinkie ring would have rounded out the look, but he also could have been a bank CEO with bad taste.

But more than all of this, he had that toxic mix of personality traits common in almost every person you've met and thought, The world might be better off if this guy were hit by a train: Endless tenacity married to quite limited intelligence.

He drove me fucking nuts.

I've not been evacuated for bomb threats, but I have had my ass kicked a few times, and I've had a gun pointed at me. I might prefer fearing for my life over enduring a person like that lawyer. For no matter how funny he was, how much we'd laugh about how English must've been a second language to him -- the son of a bitch would send emails and letters all day, every day. He was relentless, and dumb as a fence post. He tortured me just by being who he was and requiring me to engage him.

I don't know where he is, but wherever he is, he is annoying some poor souls to near suicide. It is my Xmas wish (a small one among many others far more important) the new year meet him with grave and insurmountable misfortune.

Some days, it's a pleasure to push the buttons on such people, walk away, and let them burn.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

One can also simply rewrite the argument. I avoid briefing as much as possible, but where its necessary, if I find a chunk of text in a brief that makes my argument, I'll usually want to bend it to my writing style anyway, so it'll be changed. I also hate string cites, so I'll usually yank a bunch of those. If you're just lifting straightaway, you're a lazy ass. (Sorry, Hank.)

I've only had one client try to undo a plea. It worked out very badly for that person. Flynn's counsel seem to be doing him a disservice along the lines of that being done to Lori Loughlin by her lawyers.

Seems like Flynn is playing for a pardon.