The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
can you get sanctions because opp counsl filed a horrible motion
| Low-t Toaster Base | 10/23/14 |
| provocative temple stock car | 10/25/14 |
| insanely creepy library | 10/25/14 |
| sapphire spectacular boltzmann | 10/25/14 |
| provocative temple stock car | 10/25/14 |
| Cobalt Painfully Honest Quadroon | 10/25/14 |
| startling citrine doctorate box office | 10/25/14 |
| Lascivious ticket booth chad | 10/25/14 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: October 23rd, 2014 11:18 PM Author: Low-t Toaster Base have you ever seen someone argue a motion was filed for an improper purpose or was otherwise sanctionable because of how awful the brief in support was? like guy cites a total of one case; provides no affidavits or competent evidence for stuff that clearly calls for affidavit support, and the whole thing was so woefully bad that he was clearly just trying to delay, harass etc?
|
 |
Date: October 25th, 2014 12:44 AM Author: provocative temple stock car State or federal court? Answer is probably no. Funny story: once I opposed a motion like this, got all high and mighty at the hearing, pointing out how ridiculous the guy's arguments were in light of widely known controlling precedent, and lost the fucking motion with a comment from the judge about how I came across as arrogant and I should talk too my managing partner about acting like a professional. So, I'd take it at face value and treat it like every other motion. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2707991&forum_id=2#26581460) |
|
Date: October 25th, 2014 12:47 AM Author: insanely creepy library I was on the other side of one of these. Opposing counsel was arguing like winning was a foregone conclusion and asking for sanctions. Midway through, the judge was like you you should stop talking like that because you are going to lose. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2707991&forum_id=2#26581477) |
|
Date: October 25th, 2014 3:21 AM Author: sapphire spectacular boltzmann (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2707991&forum_id=2#26581915) |
|
Date: October 25th, 2014 10:53 AM Author: provocative temple stock car It was a mtd. She just gave me leave to ammend the conplaint to address some stupid argument that is foreclosed by the state supreme court. It was small enough that she knew I wouldnt appeal. I think she just didn't like a 1st year Shitting all over some grizzled veteran in front of a room full of lawyers. I learned my lesson. Now I never make it personal and I never attack boomers for their shit lawyering. I keep it focused on the facts of the case (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2707991&forum_id=2#26582396) |
Date: October 25th, 2014 3:17 AM Author: Cobalt Painfully Honest Quadroon It's extremely hard to get sanctioned just because your work sucks. Judges see a ton of terrible briefs. But I'm sure there are certain judges that are known for it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2707991&forum_id=2#26581910) |
|
Date: October 25th, 2014 8:36 AM Author: startling citrine doctorate box office You don't realize how shitty the avg brief is, esp in fucking state court. Not just pro se litigants but fucking actual SHITLAWYERS just turning in crap. Even BIGLAW firms turn in crap a lot or do faggot shit like exceed the page limits without getting leave or submitting 500000000 pages of evidence with their MSJ or pages of objections to MSJ evidence.. its all absurd faggot shit and no one gets santioned (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2707991&forum_id=2#26582163) |
|
Date: October 25th, 2014 11:02 AM Author: Lascivious ticket booth chad Cr (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2707991&forum_id=2#26582440) |