Jokes of the Day

This is from Bart McQueary (of course the first joke had to be an attorney joke):

This attorney is crossing this cop and he is trying to create doubt as to how well his partner can be trusted.

So the attorney asks “Do you completely trust your partner?”

“Yes I do,” the cop responds.

“Do you have lockers at the police department?” probes the attorney.

“Yes we do,” the cop responds.

“And do those lockers have locks on them?” asks the attorney.

“Yes they do,” answers the cop.

“Then if your partner and fellow officers are so trustworthy, why do you feel that you have to lock your lockers?” the young attorney asks with a sly smile.

“Because sometimes we get defense attorneys in there.”

This one from Bob Little:

So a magician, who has a parrot as part of his act, is trying to entertain guests on a cruise ship. He first makes hankerchiefs disappear but his parrot starts saying “Other hand, other hand”. The magician gives the glares at the parrot and goes to the next act where he makes flowers appear. The parrot says “Up sleeve, up sleeve”. The magician is furious and he pulls out a gun and shoots the parrot. Unfortunately, the bullet misses the bird, goes through the wall and hits a steam pipe which bursts. That night, the ship sinks and the magician and many others are floating in the sea waiting to be rescued. The parrot flies over and says “Okay, you got me. What’d you do with the ship?”

The Myth of the Beyond Control Tortfeasor

There is no need to reprint this article that Lawreader found, but please go read it here. CONTRARY TO POPULAR MYTH, FEW INJURED AMERICANS FILE LAWSUITS.

Protecting the poor

This is an excellent quote posted by Lawreader from Miller v. Commonwealth, 270 Ky. 378 (KY, 1937):

Indeed, it is, for the poor, the lowly, and the helpless, that governments and courts have been set up and laws have been written. The great and mighty have little need for these. They would perhaps be greater and mightier without them, than with them, but the poor and lowly would be utterly wretched without them. The more helpless you are the higher you stand in the favor of the courts

This reflects an aspect of the pursuit of justice that I hoped to capture with this weblog. I interviewed for one of the largest firms in Lousville for a summer internship and asked how they treated pro bono work. The interviewer told me they were far to busy to do pro bono work and so it was not a consideration. I’m sure there are some large firms that do a fair share of pro bono service but I suspect it is the small firms and solo practitioners that do the greatest share. If anyone has statistics on this, please let me know.

Let us be sure to keep a healthy sense of humor . . .

. . . . lest we be mistaken for a bunch of lawyers.

I invite readers to send me their jokes (including the inevitable lawyer ones). I hope to feature the best ones on a regular basis. I personally am joke challenged in that I always forget the important part within minutes of hearing it - so please send them in.

15 Minutes of Fame

I guess the Herald-Leader has taught me to not miss reading them for even a day since this blog was mentioned yesterday - right when I was pretending I could become anonymous. Oh - well. Superman never had these problems even though the glasses were a rather poor disguise if you ask me.

Refocus

I have refocused my blog to remove marketing aspects and highlight candid discussions related to the pursuit of justice.  I do not care about being anonymous and do not expect to be anoymoous - that was not what brought about the changes.  I took my picture off because I cannot compete in the looks department with Diana Skaggs.  Sigh.  But, anyone who wishes to contact me can e-mail me at the address in the “About” section. 

Biggest lesson learned since law school

This lesson really should not be a surprise to me.  When I worked for social services in Kentucky, prior to law school, I was required to appear in court in a neighboring county one day regarding a home study.  I was the supervisor of the child protection team and refused to sign off on a home study because the requesting worker ended up telling my worker a bunch of concerning information AFTER we had completed the home visits.  Had we known this stuff, we would have taken a different approach.

Anyway, the judge wanted to know why I refused to approve the home study so I went to court armed with a Kentucky Revised Statute and related Kentucky Administrative Regulations that clearly said that developing a case plan with the family rather than just a home evaluation was required (I guess I was thinking a little like a laywer even then).  The judge said “I don’t care about those statutes!” shortly before some mention of contempt. 

I should have learned then that being a judge does not automatically equate with following the law.  But, I am now learning that judges are not always concerned with pesky things like statutes and Supreme Court decisions - at least not in the family law arena.  I am not just talking about the areas of family law that have waffle room built in with “best interests” standards that mean something different to everyone.  I’m talking about even where the law is clear.  I guess this is similar to the lesson I learned in law school that there was nothing at all objective about objective standards - in the law or in grading.

Please do not misunderstand, the vast majority of judges I have encountered do use the law as their rudder. I also interned for a judge that is now on the Kentucky Supreme Court who impressed me with his/her knowledge and application of the law.

Going underground - sort of

Oh, I know one cannot achieve anonymity after posting my name and contact information previously on this blog. However, after reflecting on what I want to achieve with this blog, I am revising it to remove the passive marketing appearance and make it more about candid comentary.

Unfortunately, my main server was malfunctioning today and I am posting this through dial-up which is soooo slow. Once my server is back up and I can access the internet via broadband, I’ll finish the revisions.

Amen to being a cost effective lawyer!

I agree wholeheartedly with this post from The Practice.  We do not have mandatory arbitration for lawyer’s fees in Kentucky but the concept remains sound.  I suspect that you are more likely to find this sort of efficient practice of law in a small or solo firm where an efficiency mindset is necessary to succeed. 

Free Legal Advice

I have some legal advice that I am quite comfortable putting forth as sound:  Do not go to court drunk.  Nothing good can come of it, especially if you have been court ordered to refrain from alcohol use in order to regain custody of your child.  I witnessed this recently in a courtroom that shall remain anonymous and I suspect the week in jail the intoxicated parent received will be a sobering experience - at least temporarily.  By the way, drinking several mixed drinks the night before your court date will still leave your very intoxicated that next morning. 

I also learned that Fayette County courts have portable breathalyzers readily available right there in the courtroom.  Now that’s judicial efficiency!