A Good Pennsylvania Law

PITTSBURGH (AP) - A Pittsburgh man accused of taunting a police dog on Sunday was being held in jail on $100,000 bail. Police say Kenneth King, 23, taunted Benny, a German shepherd, as he walked by a police vehicle. Police say King screamed that he hates dogs and threatened to kill the animal after it started barking.

King's mother said the situation is serious, but questioned the high bail. She said people have been arrested for hurting people and they don't have bail set that high.

Taunting police animals is a felony under Pennsylvania's animal cruelty law.

Freedom of Advertising

Ahhh, summer is over and college students across the nation are free to make an ass out of themselves in the name of "free speech". Colorado State University's school paper's editorial board took the deeply philosophical position of "F*** BUSH". The Board claimed that the headline-sized "article" was meant to foster student discussion of the freedom of speech. More like the freedom to be a jerk-wad. It should be noted that another article on the same page appears to be critical of Hillary Clinton and her health care plan.

Fallout from the Bush expletive has been visited upon the paper. Not because of University sanctions (the University is prohibited by law from penalizing the paper or its staff) but in the most American way possible -- Capitalism. As a result of the paper's need to express this intellectual point of view, it has lost approximately $30,000.00 in advertising resulting in pay and budget cuts. I guess this will teach studets about freedom of speech: Maybe the government can't prohibit stupidity (unless it endangers public safety) but the market can and will punish such asinine proclamations and that's America at work.

For more on this item, click HERE.

Bye Bye Con-Vick

So Michael Vick plans to plead guilty to federal charges of dog fighting and conspiracy. What a surprise. At least now we can put an end to the deluge of "innocent until proven guilty" from the Vick apologists. And it's not "innocent until proven guilty" it's "deemed innocent in the eyes of the law until proven guilty". The court of public opinion can rule long before any judge or jury. Moreover, just because a judge or jury hasn't heard the facts doesn't mean that the accused didn't do it. When you commit a crime, you're guilty even if you're not charged, tried or convicted. It's only in the eyes of the law that you are deemed "not guilty".

In some judical systems is phrased as "not proven guilty" which acknowledges that sometimes while the prosecutor may not have proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, it doesn't mean that the accused is necessarily innocent. O.J. would fit into that category.

But with Vick, such technical legal quandries are moot. He's guilty. He may come back at some later date saying that he only pled guilty because his friends and associates were willing to frame him to cut a better deal but I don't think the public is going to buy that load. He's a scumbag and deserves whatever prison sentence he gets.

I get so sick of talk show hosts criticizing the guys who turn state's evidence. They act like the Goodfellas code is a good thing that shouldn't be violated. That's B.S. Citizens of an honest society should work with law enforcement to bring criminals to justice. Otherwise, the bad guys have the upper hand and the world is worse off because of it. Or we could just turn to vigilante justice which is always fun too!

Anywho, does this mean he should be banned from football for life? Probably not for the dogfighting charges alone. Once he serves his sentence and whatever suspension the NFL imposes, he should be allowed to pursue gainful employment even as a multi-million dollar football player. That is allowed to try. Hopefully, NFL teams will weigh the pros and cons (no pun intended) of hiring and will realize the damage to their franchise's reputation isn't worth it. Moreover, depending on the length of his sentence/suspension who knows if he'll be the same player he once was or even if he'll be a viabile player at the pro level. CFL get ready! Or maybe the Raiders would want him since they probably still won't have their 1st round QB pick this year signed by then.











Right back at you, Mike.

Dirty Bomber: Guilty

So after winning his fight to be tried, Jose Padilla has been convicted of federal support of terrorism charges. Out of the frying pan and into the fire. Kudos to Padilla's legal team.

Some in my office have said, "We'll it's about time after we've been feeding and housing him for all these years." Not to mention the waterboarding.

At least I hope we did. We certainly should now.

Civil Law

So Bad He Was Good?

Watched parts of a trial yesterday. It was a plaintiff's attorney that I'd never seen before against an attorney against whose firm I have a number of cases. The plaintiff's attorney was awkward and seemingly ill-prepared. He didn't seem to have his questions lined up and planned on just hoping his client could give her story in narrative form. Defense counsel repeatedly objected to the narrative and the judge sustained the objections.

The plaintiff's attorney did have the advantage of the fact that the defendant didn't show up for trial. Allegedly, he was unable to make it in to town from Nebraska or Kansas or Oklaholma or some such state. That always is a good thing for a plaintiff (issues of insurance coverage notwithstanding).

In closing argument, the plaintiff's attorney repeatedly commented that defendant has produced no evidence. Defense counsel repeatedly objected saying that a defendant has no burden of proof and the Court sustained the objection. While I think there is some issue as to whether it is fair commentary to point out a defendant has adduced no evidence, the judge sustained the objections. Moreover, the plaintiff's attorney was so bent on pointing out the lack of defense evidence that he entirely failed to comment on the strengths of his own unrefuted case.

He went on and on about defense counsel claiming there was an X-Files-type conspiracy theories between plaintiff and the plaintiff's doctors. It might have been effective if it wasn't so rambling. Maybe he could have used a tag line like: "The truth isn't out there. It was up there (pointing to the witness stand) from where my client and her doctor testified."

I spoke to another plaintiff's attorney who was watching the closing arguments and he wasn't too impressed with the close. There were times where I found it downright painful to listen to what he was trying to say.

But what do I know? The jury came back with a verdict for the plaintiff in the amount of $6,500 on a case with around $2,500 in medical bills. More than 2-1/2 times the bills so not bad for a "whiplash" type case. I guess I just don't know if I can be bad enough to get that good of a result.

I Beg Your Pardon

Yep, President Bush commuted Scooter Libby's 30 month jail time sentence. So what? Presidents grant pardons and commutations all the time. It's just that this instance has reeked of partisan politics from the outset. Other presidential pardons have excused some of the scummiest of the scummy. Drug-dealers. Murderers (commuting death sentences to life without parole). Tax evaders (Anyone Remember Marc Rich?).

For anyone to claim that the commutation of Libby's sentence turns American jurisprudence on its head is ridiculous. It's par for the course. President Bush just didn't wait to do it on his way out of office.

For more on presidential pardons and commutations granted by President George H.W. Bush and President Bill Clinton, click here.

Justice Prevails

Washington D.C. Administrative Law Judge, Roy Pearson, lost a lawsuit involving pants that he took to a dry cleaners and subsequently were misplaced. The pants were ultimately found again but that didn't satisfy Pearson. He filed suit against the shop for the misplacement of the pants and for violation of a D.C. consumer protection statute -- the cleaners had a "satisfaction guaranteed" sign on the wall and since the judge wasn't satisfied, the store breached its warranty under the statute. The claim on the lost pants were subsequently dropped. The lawsuit sought damages in excess of $54 million dollars.

$10,000's worth of defense attorney's fees later, the dry cleaner operators prevailed with the judge hearing the claim ruled that the dry cleaners did not owe Pearson anything and that Pearson would have to pay approximately $5,000 in the defendants' court costs. The judge reserved ruling on whether Pearson will have to pay the defendant's attorney's fees.

The American Bar Association is looking into sanctions against Pearson for filing a frivolous lawsuit and action has been instituted directed at removing Pearson from office. As an ALJ, it is unlikely that Pearson was voted into office but he can be removed by those who appointed him. Losing a $100,000 job seems to be worth his vindictive pursuit of this joke of a claim.

For more on this story, click here.

Ha Ha

I generally don't loathe Paris Hilton and her ilk, but something about seeing her bawling on her way back to jail does my heart good. Does that make me a bad person? Oh, well. Letting her out after three days was ridiculous. Now if they can just get Nicole to join her. For more on the incarceration of the drunken heiress, click here. For more on celebrity justice, click here.

Poor Little Rich Girl

How sad a day it is when socialite millionairesses are held to the same standards as the wretched, huddled masses that tune in to their reality TV shows. Paris Hilton has fired her publicist for allegedly mis-informing her that she could drive following Paris' DUI plea. Poor little Paris didn't know her license was suspended. Despite being told by the police on at least one prior occasion before prosecutors moved to revoke her probation. Of course, in the end, it's up to each driver to be responsible for knowing the status of his or her license. "I'm very busy and didn't ask my attorneys about it" doesn't cut it. Neither does going on a radio interview hours after a DUI and saying, "It's no big deal. I just wanted an In-n-Out Burger".

Is this a witch hunt? Well, regardless of what you think of Paris Hilton and her kind, if the treatment she's receiving isn't typical of how DUI probation violators are scrutinized, it should be. Does the D.A. have to wait until she actually kills someone while under the influence? Or even kills herself?

Speaking of which, the DUI issue has raised its head in the case of Josh Hancock, a 29 year old journeyman pitcher for the St. Louis Cardinals. When word of his early morning fatal collision spread, it wasn't long before the question started being raised of whether alcohol was involved. Immediately, apologists rose to the defense of the fallen athlete. "You can't leap to conclusion on this. The tests results aren't back yet." Well, the test results are now back and the conclusions are clear that Hancock had over 2x the legal BAC at the time of his death and marijuana paraphrenalia was also found in his vehicle. Does it make it less of a tragedy for his friends and family? No. But he apparently had opportunities to avoid his demise. Hancock reportedly turned down offers to have a cab called for him.

Now the Cardinals have banned alcohol from the clubhouse. Not necessarily a bad idea given their manager's own DUI problems. It won't stop players from jumping in their luxury automobiles and driving down the road for a drink. But it will insulate the team from potential liability which could have arisen if an intoxicated player were to get loaded in the clubhouse and injured/killed someone. I don't know if Missouri has social host Dram Shop liability but better safe than sorry.

Speaker Pelosi Visit Illegal?

Although she claims her visit to Syria actually helped President Bush and U.S. diplomacy, Speak of the House, Nancy Pelosi's, much-ballyhooed meeting with Syrian President may have violated federal law. In an April 6, 2007 article in the Wall Street Journal, former Acting Assistant Secretary of State (1984-5) and former ABA commitee on law and national security chairman, Robert F. Turner, writes that the Logan Act makes it a felony for any American, "without authority of the United States," to communicate with a foreign government in an effort to influence that government's behavior on any "disputes or controversies with the United States." Presumably, since Speaker Pelosi's visit was done against the administration's wishes, this would constitute a violation of the Logan Act.

For more on the Speaker's visit and its legality under the Logan Act, click here.

Just Another Day at the Office

Today I had a doctor's evidence deposition scheduled for a case set for trial on March 27th. (In case you didn't know, I'm a lawyer). An evidence deposition is taken when a witness is not available to testify at trial. The transcript of the testimony is then read to the jury as if the witness had testified live. Doctors generally do these depositions because coming to court to testify live disrupts their practice and treatment of patients. I prefer live testimony but you have to try to accomodate the doctors the best you can.

I had some difficulty in scheduling this doctor's deposition because she had an unusual schedule and opposing counsel also had a very difficult schedule to accomodate. After several months and numerous cancellations, the deposition was scheduled for today at a church on the north side of Chicago. The doctor is a member at the church and thought she could get access to a room in the church where we could take the deposition.

Opposing counsel, the court reporter and myself arrived and the doctor came by to say she couldn't get into the church and we would have to do the deposition at her house about two blocks away. I rode with the doctor to her house (she was my client's treating physician following a motor vehicle collision back in December 2001). Defense counsel rode with the court reporter and followed us.

At the doctor's house, she let me out so she could back her large SUV into the one car garage. After I got out I walked over to the house gate and heard a loud yelp behind me. I turned to see a man by the doctor's driver's side window leaning in. As I turned the doctor backed into the garage and the court reporter and other attorney came walking up to the gate. The man then went around the back of the garage out of view.

The doctor left the garage and came into the gated area. She was crying and distraught. Apparently, the man was her neighbor and leaned into her window to tell her that he was going to cut her throat. She told us that the day before he had pointed his finger at her like a gun and went "Bang, bang, you're dead." She called the police to make a report on that.

When we got into the house, she started to arrange us for the deposition and told us that she'd call the police again after the deposition was done. Opposing counsel and I, persuaded her to call the police immediately. We then agreed that the deposition would have to be rescheduled (again) because the situation was just too volatile. The doctor was a jumble of nerves and emotions and noone wanted to proceed with a possible lunatic lurking around outside. Our main concern was for the doctor's safety (and our own).

The police arrived and the doctor made a report. The officer seemed to know the individual in question from previous complaints throughout the neighborhood. Counsel and I agreed to a new date and agreed that I would bring an emergency motion to continue the trial. Hopefully, the judge will be understanding of the situation. Given my knowledge of the judge's temperment, I think she will be.

Before the deposition, opposing counsel, the court reporter and I exchanged stories of the oddest depositions we had taken in the past. After today, we all agreed we had a new top story. We walked the court reporter to her car, then defense counsel and I walked to my car which was parked nearby. I then drove her back to the area around the church where she had parked. Definitely the epitome of "civil" practice.

Courtroom Humor