Ask A Lawyer

So let’s do one of these threads. I am a lawyer. I’ll answer reasonable questions about the law, or if you want, about going to law school. I’m a generalist but my area of knowledge is U.S. law. I can answer how other common law nations work in theory but keep that in mind.

Disclaimers: I’m not your lawyer and am not offering to represent anybody in any manner. I’m just offering general information. Do not rely on what I’m telling you for anything important. You may not get a response at all.
Odds are I’ll tell you to find a lawyer in your jurisdiction. It is not my problem that you think you can’t afford one.
By asking a question you agree that you are not seeking legal representation and will not rely on any response as legal advice.

Pic unrelated, unfortunately.

Attached: 996D47F0-5BD8-443E-886B-BDE9EE76E72D.jpg (1000x1500, 196K)

Other urls found in this thread:

How is revenge porn and stealthing handled by the law? Are these now being taken seriously?

There are specific criminal laws against revenge porn in most states, to my understanding. Even without them there are theoretical arguments to be made under existing criminal law, for instance invasion of privacy or similar. Resharing of nudes can theoretically be stopped using copyright law as well.

If I recall correctly, stealthing is that thing where you whip off your condom and creampie the girl for some stupid reason. I think they’re trying to criminalize it in California but I’m not up to date on that. My concern from a litigation viewpoint would be the difficulty of proving intent, and how easy it’d be to just say the condom slipped off or broke, and you’d have no physical evidence to the contrary. That said, holy shit how hard is it to get a girl to go bareback these days? I never had trouble.

how can i legally go about avoiding as much taxes as possible if not not paying any at all?

do you know of any tax loopholes like this video

if one were to hypothetically commit tax fraud what would be the most effective way to hide taxes and make everything appear as legal as possible?

I don’t know shit about tax law. My understanding is the current gimmick for the wealthy is a family foundation. These seem to be necessary if you want to maintain high social standing and keep your family members’ viability in national politics.

I will say that I know a lot of people with offshore “investments” that are pretty obviously tax shelters.

I wouldn’t trust that guy’s presentation any farther than I can throw it, by the way. There are shedloads of stupid tax gimmicks that these guys hawk all over the place. You see them talked about in judicial opinions now and again. I really wouldn’t trust that shit. Especially shit that says you can pay NO taxes with their scheme.

I'm a law student from Europe.
1) Do you have any experience in representing companies from different countries? I have more of an affinity for property/contracts etc than criminal law. And being from an Eastern Euro country i feel like international business is my ticket to western standard wealth.
2) How does the legal system of Louisiana work within the US as a whole, it seems like an oddity?
3) And, lastly, do common law marriages apply to homosexuals? Prior to the supreme court ruling, when some states didn't allow it, how did common law marriages for them work?

My underage sister suffers from high-functioning cerebral palsy, but is essentially treated like an incapable vegetable by our single, heavily self-medicating mother. My sister and I have given thought to letting her live with me so that she can gain some semblance of life experience and independence, but we both know our mother would never be on board.
It's functionally impossible for me to somehow legally take custody from my mother, right? I heard these kinds of cases always go in favor of the biological parent unless they're clearly abusive or incapable. If you ask me, our mother is as incapable as it gets, but she somehow holds an entry-level job and passes drug tests so my argument is pretty weak.

1. It’s a good business to be into, helping foreign investors gain access to your nation. Usually what happens, to my understanding, is a U.S. or other firm will contract with you for opinion letters evaluating your nation’s laws with respect to a proposed course of conduct. Usually, I suspect, your employer would be a U.S. law firm rather than a corporate client. One thing to look out for, especially with U.S. clients, is whether certain practices constitute bribery under the relevant U.S. law, even if they’re legal “grease payments” (or otherwise necessary to do business in your nation). U.S. law is really harsh with respect to that.
2. It is a bit odd. The state legal system, as you have clearly surmised, operates off civilian law, while the federal law in that state is common law. All that said, it’s a lot less strange in practice than you might think. Like its reputation as an oddity is all there is.
3. The idea of a common law marriage is a misnomer in most cases. Usually the practice has been enshrined in statutory law. And in most cases, I think the concept has been abandoned or abrogated. Family law isn’t my thing so I can’t tell you for certain, but in my state at least, there’s no such thing as a common law marriage. That said, the way Obergefell works is that the state cannot deny the benefits of a “marriage” relationship to homosexual couples that they grant to heterosexual couples. That’s really all there is to it. The fact that a particular right may exist at underlying common law doesn’t change that.

The child’s wishes are also relevant in these cases, to the extent the child is capable of expressing them.

You really need to talk to a lawyer. You might be able to at least force her to capitulate through attrition. It’s not always the side with the best legal rights that wins. Your mom will need lots of money to fight back, you know?

Thanks, i'll keep that advice in mind

My sister wants to move into my home but we both still care about our mother, for what it's worth. I don't want to run her out of house and home. I just want what's best for my sister since my mother is struggling to even take care of herself.

How often does just the act of bringing it into court cause a side to give in? If starting the process has a chance of shocking her into listening then it may be worth it.

Rather than give you the full details, I'll jump straight to the chase, since that's the important bit: can you re-open a case in civil law that was dismissed with "prejudice"? It's specifically a med mal case in the state of CA.

The nutshell is that I was injured in a medical context. I had to file within a year. I did. Legal counsel was hard to find, and finally a shady law firm took the case. They bailed on it before discovery, a few months before arbitration actually, citing a lack of "evidence". I'm now on SSI disability and I suffer from permanent side effects relating to the injury in question. Evidence now is plentiful. Is it possible to re-launch the case?

A couple years ago I got into a whole thing with an ex of mine and she filed a DVRO against me.
It was a bad time for everyone,
The judge granted it and I did a year of court mandated therapy. no charges were ever filed, I was never arrested or anything, moved on afterwards, went back and finished college, working and doing pretty good these days.

My question is would this potentially disqualify me from working in a school or teaching at a later point in the public education system?

Is there any way to seal DVRO from my record after it expires, and how difficult would that be?

>How often does just the act of bringing it into court cause a side to give in? If starting the process has a chance of shocking her into listening then it may be worth it.
The overwhelming majority of lawsuits that are filed end in settlement or dismissal before trial for one reason or another.

It’s worth talking to a lawyer just to see what your options are honestly. It could be as simple as talking to your mother, even though you don’t believe she’d capitulate, sometimes with the right argument she might be more willing than you’d think.

And yes, sometimes suing or threatening suit is necessary to force the other side to the bargaining table.

What would be your advice for someone who wins the lottery and receives many hundreds of millions of dollars? I've heard that when someone wins the lottery, they should seek a lawyer. Why?

>can you re-open a case in civil law that was dismissed with "prejudice"
There may be some very unusual exceptions, but “with prejudice” means you fucked up and it’s over. You may be able to appeal the dismissal, but you can’t file a new lawsuit on the same grounds. A dismissal with prejudice means it’s as though you went to trial and lost.

It sounds like you might have a legal malpractice lawsuit though. Odds are the evidence you think wasn't available was available for discovery, for legal purposes, so you aren’t likely to find the court to be particularly sympathetic.

I don’t envy your position. Good luck finding new legal representation. Odds are everyone will tell you there’s no hope. Especially if your underlying case wasn’t attractive enough to get representation before that “shady” firm fucked it up.

Boy, I don’t know. I’d talk to a lawyer about getting it sealed. The problem is whether in your state employers, especially schools, can ask about expunged and sealed matters and whether you’re allowed to say “no” when asked. In my state, USUALLY they can’t ask about that, but I know on my bar exam application, it was one of the exceptions to expunged matters.

So... yeah I’d talk to someone that handles school law/professional licensing law. It’s probably possible to get it sealed, if it really matters. I understand it’s embarrassing.

It’ll help keep hangers-on and scumbags at bay if they think they can get a chunk of flesh out of you now that you have money. A lawyer might also help convert the trickle payment into a lump sum, though there are specific firms to do that now.

Basically I think the best thing is that they’d help you set up trusts so the money can’t get stolen from you in a bad investment deal or whatever. People with deep pockets often get grifters coming out of left field trying to scam. A lawyer could help set up stuff to keep that from bankrupting you.

Alright. I've talked to my mother seriously about this and she dismissed it, but I'll bring up legal action and see where it goes from there. Thanks.

As a follow up question, where can I find some resources to learn about having dependents? I can't imagine all the paperwork that must be done and records that must be changed after such a big shift.

I can sort of look at it in a positive light because I turned my life around after that, I can't put it all on her, I made some mistakes.

I don't know how much of that info is even float around, I can find the court record if I search for it quite specifically in the county data base, but doesn't have much info beyond the court decisions. I don't think it shows up when I background check myself so no ones asked me about it in years, and I don't have to list any arrests/convictions on job applications.

I've heard DVRO sit in some weird gray area where you can't expunge them like a regular record because it's all through family court.

I'm in California btw.

Well, I think main thing you’d want to handle is her disability payments, any school enrollment, and the like. Those things need to be taken up with the individual agencies directly. As to yourself, the main thing would be taxes.

I’m not sure there’s a comprehensive guide to this sort of thing, or where you’d find it.

Best of luck.

So would you personally, not as a lawyer (but using your knowledge as a lawyer), just suggest I make peace with the fact that I got screwed over by a multi-billion dollar HMO group and the incompetent law firm who took on my case, and ditched it when they felt there was not going to be any significant pay out based on their facts of the situation at that time?

To be honest, I probably need to see a shrink for various reasons. But one of the things that does weigh on me is the fact that I'll never get justice in this case. A very doctor who very obviously breached duty of care, indirectly maimed me, and got off scot-free because of the weight of their lawyers. The dozen law firms that I took my case to in my city said that going against this group was like suing Walmart. Because I was not dead or in a wheel chair, and could still string together sentences, the HMO group was going to fight tooth and nail as their policy. I never stood a chance, and that one law firm really botched things further and give me a false hope. The whole affair just gives me a cynical feelings about our society, the medical industry in particular, and your area as well.

I don't know what type of answer I expect out of you. I'm just sulking/venting. My situation just sucks, and it's not about the money. It's that I'm having trouble moving on, especially when I'm reminded everyday by my symptoms.

I should see a therapist, right?

>I've heard DVRO sit in some weird gray area where you can't expunge them like a regular record because it's all through family court.
Yeah I believe that. Your remedy might be an application with the court itself to seal the case, but I don’t know California law AT ALL and you would absolutely require a lawyer to handle this.

I can’t answer any of these questions for you man. I’m sorry for what’s happened to you, but I can’t even say you have no hope.

Like I said, you might have a case against the law firm for fucking up... provided they actually did fuck up.

How could I defend myself against fake rape/aggression charges? Are there any preventive steps that could be taken before the charges? How am I supposed to prove I didn't do something, apart from hoping to have (and remember!) a strong alibi for the dates it was supposed to happen?

It all depends. With every solution, in theory, there’s a countermove you can come up with that’ll render any defense imperfect.

From my perspective though, the ideal is to have contemporaneous writing, whether texts or whatever, where you seem to be acting normally with each other, where you even talk about having had sex and she says she enjoyed it. It makes claiming you did something wrong a lot harder later on, if she was still talking to you and made no complaint at any point.

That said, you could theoretically cook something up to counter that.

The specter of “fake rape” is honestly overblown though. Avoid putting your dick in crazy, avoid random hookups at frat parties where there’s lots of alcohol and drugs. That should honestly protect you against 95% of them.

Tax law or CPA?

Why not both?

Bump for new questions.

And another one for more questions.

Are you happy?

I'd say so, yes.

if my wife begins divorce proceedings and i liquidate all my assets into cash then hide the cash, will she still take all my shit?

What kind of place do you live in?

Yes. Men try this all the time. It's rarely successful. Courts and lawyers aren't stupid. The people who do divorces are all highly familiar with this kind of behavior.

They look at your bank records, look at when certain asset transfers took place and for how much (this is a public record on many things like your house).

So what happens if you claim the money's all gone? You get thrown in jail for contempt. And they still get a judgment against you, so if you try to bring the cash back into the country, or out of whatever place you hid it and buy a new house, new car, etc., they'll just enforce the judgment then.

The only way to securely keep your wife from "taking everything" is through a properly-structured prenup. Or, I guess, getting lucky and getting a wife that'll just walk away from the whole marriage when shit goes bad.

Own my own home.

Mind describing it?

4 bed 3 bath single family home in the suburbs. Nothing much to talk about. It's an average home. I live comfortably but not opulently. I didn't do biglaw so I'm not living in midtown Manhattan in a co-op.

Ok, explains how you can have a family. I'm aiming to study law so I was curious what the lifestyle was really like outside the movies.

There's a lot of variation. I will say that some markets, especially in biglaw, it's tough to have a family because you're just that busy. "Work-life balance" became a huge buzzword earlier in the decade, for good reason. You get guys who work 80 hours a week in some markets. Just know that you don't have to live like that. You can work a 9-5 with no problem.

what happens if the judge throws the prenup out? how hard is it to get away with murder really?

>what happens if the judge throws the prenup out?
I think this is pretty hard to accomplish. Like there'd have to be an unseverable illegal provision in the prenup... and I can't think of any illegal provisions that wouldn't be severable (e.g., agreeing to giving full custody to you, or agreeing to no child support if she has custody would both probably be illegal but would be severable). Even if there are unconscionable terms, those should all be severable without throwing out the whole prenup. The things that'd screw you is if there was evidence that she didn't consent, or was taken advantage of during the formation of the prenup. But this is why you have a lawyer draw it up, and she's carefully advised to seek a lawyer of her own before signing. An actual lawyer's gonna prevent that shit from happening.

>how hard is it to get away with murder really?
Probably harder than you think. It's not that forensics are that great, it's just that the motive is usually painfully obvious. If you're talking about a random murder of a literally who, then you're into territory where classical detective work fails and where forensics take over. In those cases some scheme to carefully cover your tracks might help. But yeah, where it's your wife or your business partner or someone who fucked your girlfriend... you're a suspect and you get carefully checked out from the git go.

Any unexpected perks of your job?

Strangely enough popularity with women. Like, I expected it sorta, but not to the degree it's happened. And it's not just gold diggers and desperate whores, it's intelligent, desirable women.

Like for years, when I was younger, I thought, "Boy I don't want a girl who wants me because I'm X, I want a girl who wants me for who I am." That way of thinking is SUCH bullshit. The women I'm talking about aren't after you simply because you're a lawyer; it's just a conversation starter more than anything, and it's one that fits in a short sentence.

I'm glad it tracks. The most interesting girl I met in a long time was in a law lecture I sat in.

Any advice you can share about studying law, and later getting employment?

Idk how you first world people can be so dumb about reality.

You are a lawyer, should have seen deaths, corruption and all shit I'm used to and even this way you still dont know not about humans, lol.

You are after girls that are above average looking, that arent mentally damaged and a lot of others factors that just englobe "exceptions", you cant even see that your perspective and wishes are distorted and think the problem is into the other side.

The difference betweem you in your graduation is age, time, wealth and basic knowledge, just that. You couldnt see it before because you were out of the 20% of guys who fucks 80% of all woman.

>Any advice you can share about studying law ...
For your first-year classes, go over actual bar prep materials for that subject. Contracts, torts, criminal law, civil procedure, property... read bar prep outlines to get the utter basics down.
Also, read up on how to respond to a law school exam. That was one thing that took me way too long to figure out and cost me dearly.
Finally, figure out how to brief cases and outline a class before you get to law school. That's something I really never got down in law school.
>... and later getting employment?
Go in and talk to your career office regularly. Ask if there's something you should be doing at this particular point in your law school education. Especially if you're not going the OCI-biglaw route. They have tons upon tons of weird options.

>You are a lawyer, should have seen deaths, corruption
lol what? What do you think lawyers do man? You watch too much TV.
>You couldnt see it before because you were out of the 20% of guys who fucks 80% of all woman.
Not really. I was a khhv before and through law school. I also gained 50 lbs. Yes, it's true, during law school I probably could've made time with a lot of women. But no, you're wrong that I was in the 20% of that 20/80 meme. So fucking wrong man.

Thanks man.

Attached: 1519341238538.gif (160x120, 447K)

Pre-law undergrad here, I'm glad to see law school can improve your prospects with women. Are you still a KHV even today? Did the quality of women who were attracted to you improve as soon as you entered law school or only after you graduated/started practicing? Also, how much do you think the prestige/ranking of your law school affected this, if at all? I haven't read all the posts yet so I'm not sure if you've been to a T14/T20 or anything.

>Are you still a KHV even today?
No, I got my first date/handhold about six months out of law school when I got on tinder. Got my first gf/kiss/sex about six months after that when an old friendgirl decided to confess her feelings to me.
>Did the quality of women who were attracted to you improve as soon as you entered law school or only after you graduated/started practicing?
I’d say it went up somewhat once I was in law school, and went up decently upon graduation, and even more on bar admission (I suspect mostly because I didn’t represent myself as a lawyer even to dating prospects until I was admitted to practice).
>Also, how much do you think the prestige/ranking of your law school affected this, if at all?
Zero or near-zero. I didn’t do T14, but I was in the upper half of T1 schools. I suspect HYS would turn heads because of the name, rather than it being law. End of the day, even a Cooley grad that passes the bar can call himself a lawyer. The overwhelming majority of women don’t know that your school is T1/T2/T3, and don't know it makes a diff.
It’s one of those things where regional prestige of the overall college would carry you more than the national prestige of the law school.

how hard is it to transfer my probation to a different city in my state?

ive been trying to move for years and last second I fucked up and got arrested and just wanna move to the big city and my probation becomes unsupervised there.

what do I do? my PO told me i might have to wait until my pretrial diversion probation thing is over with first but that will take forever.

i want to move there to find a train and i need public transit etc

find a job* still groggy

I’m not answering this.

I'm young and I don't know how taxes work, really. I sold some stocks and I know I have to pay a capital gains tax but I don't know how. Will the government just mail me or whatever? Am I legally required to contact some government shithead to sort it out?

Also do I have to pay taxes if I inherited these stocks but they lost money since they were inherited?

Try reading this.
I really don’t know. Talk to your tax preparer.

Hey everyone it’s Two DUI Guy!

Hi Two DUI Guy.

fuck you nigger i hope you fuck up a case and lose your career

You have legal representation in this matter already. It would be unethical for me to talk to you beyond telling you I can't talk to you because you already have legal representation in this matter.

So let's say a divorce happens and the parent ows child support but does not pay it fully and fails to pay it over the course of the child growing into a adult. What can be done?


Currently I am in my first month of law school at Loyola Marymount University, and its fucking ass right now. Is there any chance I won't be stuck in a dead end law job by the end of law school?

Also everyone is cheating and won't help me cheat too.

What do?

Attached: aaaaAAAAAAAA .gif (240x506, 206K)

The non-custodial parent is in arrears, take him to court and get the money if you can.

Also I'm reasonably certain it's the custodial parent who gets to sue, not the child. Although the money is for the child's benefit, the purpose is to compensate for the outlay of money by the custodial parent to raise the child. But that's a highly procedural issue you'd need to talk over with a lawyer.

>Is there any chance I won't be stuck in a dead end law job by the end of law school?
Your chances of making it at OCI are terrible. Loyola (LA) has virtually no national recognition, so your best hope is local/regional, but for OCI you're competing against UCLA and USC locally, and Stanford, Boalt, Davis, and Hastings regionally. If you can, transfer out. If you can't, there's a secret phrase you need to learn: Bridge to practice. Talk to your career development office when possible.
>Also everyone is cheating and won't help me cheat too.
The only cheating people are doing is using old outlines, most likely. Come exam season, you might be able to get free outlines out of the trash in the law library. Just don't get caught.

Also you're just in your first month. Chill. That first month of law school is hard. Just keep up on your class prep, network, and go to office hours. Your profs are people who might need to write letters of recommendation if you want to get a judicial clerkship.

Also, go laugh at People's College of Law for me. They're on Bonnie Brae south of Wilshire, just a few blocks east of MacArthur Park.

i tried showing this to my sister in law school and she got mad at me and told me to kill myself

what did i do wrong guys

>i tried showing this to my sister in law school and she got mad at me and told me to kill myself
lol what, my post? what specifically triggered her?

the part where it said she had no chance in loyola

Wew. I wish her good luck, honestly. I didn't do T14 and did fine, so maybe she'll be one of the lucky 5-10 who get offers from OCI at Loyola...

Or maybe she can get a job prosecuting at traffic court.


i probably shouldn't show her the rest of this thread

thanks for the advice however

Heh. If you want to trigger her on-demand in the future, just whisper one word in her ear: "Retake".

I'm a junior law student in the Netherlands. Is it hard for a law student in the U.S to get accepted to the bar association? What were your future concerns when you were a young adult studying law?

Bar admission is easy if you study, and I guess as long as it's not California. It's much easier than the LSAT. The bar is just memorization. It's something you should be able to pass provided you studied all the material. LSAT is designed to be nearly impossible to get perfect.
Now just FYI, if *you* wanted to get admission in the US, you'd have to take a one-year LLM program in the US to be eligible for admission.
>future concerns
Not fucking up someone's life. That still scares me a little as a practicing attorney. I hope it goes away when I get more experience under my belt.


Bumping for more questions.

Is Better Call Saul realistic ?

Haven't watched it. From what I've heard, probably not.

Bumping for new questions.

Is court stressful or just routine? If I were to sue someone for $500 would I be super stressed or is it not that scary? I'm not doing that, but just curious

Explain the law against perpetuities Mr. 3L

Also, difference between motion for directed verdict and JNOV?

Is there any feasible way for a "father" to be absolved of any & all responsibility for his "children" on the basis that he is not the biological father, on account of his wife being a cheating whore?

I'd say it's pretty stressful even when you're used to it. There are routine appearances, of course, but taking something to trial and taking examinations takes a lot of preparation. It's why appearance fees are so high.
>If I were to sue someone for $500 would I be super stressed or is it not that scary?
You personally would probably find it stressful even though it'd be small claims with simplified rules of evidence. It's one of those things where knowing how to handle it would be a huge boon.

I'm not a 3L. Either way you'd want to ask a 1L, or someone that's studying for the bar exam. That shit isn't relevant to my practice, and I honestly don't feel like looking it up to give you the "right" answer.
To the extent I was ever into property law, my interest was more fee tail/entailment... which conveniently, my property prof completely skipped since it has very little relevance to American property law at any time in our history.
>Also, difference between motion for directed verdict and JNOV?
This is simple, and being a procedural issue, right in my wheelhouse. DV (also called JMOL, for judgment as a matter of law) takes place after trial but before the jury renders a verdict; basically you argue that there is no way any reasonable jury, properly applying the law, could come to a contrary conclusion. JNOV (also called a renewed JMOL) is requested *after* the jury renders a verdict, and it's a request to set aside that verdict and rule differently. The reason the JMOL/renewed JMOL terminology has become so prevalent highlights the interrelatedness of these procedural moves. A JNOV motion is identical to a DV motion, but is timed differently. The "renewed JMOL" terminology is an important note, however, that often, a requirement of moving for JNOV is that you filed a timely motion for a directed verdict (which may have been denied or "taken under advisement").
To my understanding courts prefer not to grant DV motions because of the procedural annoyance if they get reversed on appeal. Reversal of a granted DV motion essentially requires the entire case be retried, at enormous expense to both parties. Reversal of a JNOV just reinstates the jury verdict that was already rendered.

If he's not the biological father, then yes, absolutely. There's some complexity involved where he's effectively accepted the children as his own, but it's entirely possible to go to court and get rid of your child support responsibility and even get back payments of child support you did pay if you can prove the kids aren't yours (i.e., through a DNA test).

How come this concept is so unheard of? I keep hearing about people who got fucked over from paternity fraud, and not only does the mother get away with it, but sometimes the definitely-not-biological-father is even expected to continue paying.

1. It costs money.
2. The guy is probably the father.
3. I suspect after a few years of parenting the child, most men would find it heartbreaking to no longer think of themselves as the child's father, even though they're divorced now.

1. Divorces cost money, might as well dive in deep.
2. I'm talking about cases where it's definitely proven that the guy isn't the biological father.
3. I ain't no cuck, I would never knowingly/willingly continue maintaining a child that isn't mine.

is law school even worth it if one doesn't go a big name school?

It's better to be a low-quality lawyer than a high-quality barista.

I work in a restaurant in CA, and I have a new boss. A coworker (a cashier) told me that she left the other day without getting her tips. She came back after clocking out. She was gone for only a few minutes. She explained to the new boss that she forgot to print out the piece of paper that shows how much she is owed in tips from credit cards and that she needed her tips. She said that he looked at the windows, saw that they were dirty, and told her that he would give her tips to her if she clocked back in to clean the windows. He said that he wouldn't give her tips to her next time if she didn't finish her sidework before leaving. Is it illegal for a manager, supervisor, etc. to withhold tips until sidework is done? I know that they want to have checks in place to make sure sidework gets done. I just think that withholding tips as part of that procedure might be illegal. Also, we don't pool tips at my place; we're tipped individually.

You can still be one of countless personal injury lawyers. And if you live in the US, there's no shortage of those cases.

It all depends on what your goals are and what your costs of attendance are. I wouldn't go to Cooley, for example. I'd probably avoid all the T3/T4 schools. As to the T2 schools, I'd only suggest going to them with substantial scholarship money AND you have a very clear, set battle plan to live and practice in the region where that school has the most influence.

As to T1s outside the T14 schools, there's a ton of disagreement on that. I suspect most of it deals with biglaw though. T1s outside the T14s place just fine in medium/small law and federal agencies. As to state agencies, my own experience has been that you'll just as often find T2 people manning posts. It was actually a shock, getting back to my home state and finding that virtually all of the judges went to T2 schools.
It's better to be a barista with no debt than a barista with $120k in student loans. Don't go to law school just to push your life back three years. Go if you know what you're getting into.
You need a couple years at a firm, or studying under someone with a decent-size practice, to be useful at PI litigation in my opinion. There's a fuckton to be done, from investigation and sending demand letters, to taking depositions and discovery, to brinksmanship in litigation, and potentially even taking something to trial (you need at least to be able to do it, you don't want your bluff called at the wrong time and have to bail out of a case).

Sorry, I don't know anything about this. Your coworker may want to see a legal aid lawyer. This should be pretty simple for someone who does employment law to answer, and legal aid people tend to do a lot of that.

OP, what kind of car do you drive? At least the year & the make, if you don't want to tell us too much.

2007 Honda Accord, has 80k miles on it. It's my first car and I bought it new.

I live in michigan, I got 12 points on my license, and was given a 1 month suspension and 6 months restricted status. I am currently in the restricted stage. I hate it, and I continue to drive everyday taking my chances.

So with that being said.

1.Can I lawyer my way out of it? I know I can appeal this decision, but can I hire a lawyer and somewhat expect them to get me off the hook this late or not?

2.If i get a driving while suspended, can a lawyer have the "mandatory additional suspension" dropped.

Overall im just looking for solutions to this issue that involve still driving. My restricted is only good for work, and no passengers.

I served on a jury for a damages case which had very obvious guilt and severe, life-long injuries. At the end the defendant's lawyer, who had made a very weak case overall, suggested that we award far less than the defendant had already paid and would have to pay going forward in medical bills. He still seemed very genuinely sympathetic to the plaintiff throughout this. How does someone like that bring themselves to represent and say things so blatantly wrong whether it be on the plaintiff or defendant's side?

My dog rarely barks. However, it does happen when my neighbors on the left side play catch in their back yard (he hates it when the ball bounces off our fence if they miss). Normally I bring him inside if that happens so he won't be loud.

Well on my vacation I left a family member to watch the house and apparently they just let him bark and my neighbors on the right CALLED THE COPS over a noise complaint. He wasn't even barking anymore by the time they showed up. Anyway I confronted my neighbor and he said he's trying to "build a history" so that the police can act in the future.

Is this realistic? Or is he just being a dickwad and it's nearly impossible to prove a "pattern of barking" (especially since it rarely even happens at all...)

Odds are you waited too long to appeal. Most times the appeal window on those sorts of adjudications are 30 days or less. Also, if you didn’t put up an argument at first, you may be foreclosed from bringing it on appeal. I have no clue what the procedural posture of your case is, so I can’t say for certain. You should talk to a lawyer. For driver shit a free consult should be customary because of how cutthroat that area of law is.
As to #2, I have no idea. Probably not. Talk to a lawyer.

Probably because it’d be frivolous and sanctionable, or at least so unbelievable as to destroy any credibility he could win with the jury, to argue the plaintiff deserved nothing because it wasn’t his client’s fault.

What you should be thinking about is why the plaintiff’s argument was so much better than the defendant’s, rather than why the defendant argued something you believed was so wrong. Odds are the defendant’s argument actually had a basis in law, it’s just that you’d been convinced of the facts by then.

Your neighbor is a retard. He’s trying to scare you. I’d honestly tell him to go fuck himself, and that’s my opinion as a lawyer.

(To be fair, he is following the right basic procedure if he wanted to prove something. It’s important to have contemporaneous records, and police reports are helpful. But if the dog’s gone every time, he just looks like an idiot. He should be taking video of your dog losing his mind and being loud. And even that would be contestable. And in the end, what the FUCK does he think he can get done? Does he think the cops will make you move? Or have your dog put down? Or fine you for something they’ve never observed? Preposterous. That said, avoid letting the dog out too early or too late at night. That can piss people off.)