Corner Crossing latest

[manitou1]

I know Greg , he is a good guy. Worked with him on DU committee I believe.
State could do worse, way worse.

I cannot see anybody being a "good guy" that attempts to trample people's rights.

 

[VikingsGuy]

I cannot see anybody being a "good guy" that attempts to trample people's rights.

Lawyers don’t get to substitute their personal opinions for those of their clients. We remain a nation of laws, not men. (At least for now)

 

[BuzzH]

Lawyers don’t get to substitute their personal opinions for those of their clients. We remain a nation of laws, not men. (At least for now)

Nobody forces a lawyer or law firm to take a case, however.

Sadly, I think the almighty dollar clouds even personal ethics, let alone opinions.

 

[TOGIE]

when are oral arguments expected?

 

[VikingsGuy]

Nobody forces a lawyer or law firm to take a case, however.

Sadly, I think the almighty dollar clouds even personal ethics, let alone opinions.

Good lawyers understand their role in society- I suggest you re-read to kill a mockingbird.

 

[BuzzH]

Good lawyers understand their role in society- I suggest you re-read to kill a mockingbird.

The gangster "roll" in their pockets matters...

 

[Elky Welky]

I've been vilified plenty of times by people who don't understand that I defend people's rights, not their actions.

You're both right, however. I've also done civil work, and one of the perks of that side of the law is that you can always turn down a client. If I look at something like the UPOM case here in MT, the attorneys worldviews do tend to align with their clients. On the flip side, these people, no matter how repugnant, are entitled to competent representation. And we are better off that they have lawyers making these arguments as opposed to going at it alone.

The cleaner the record (which the attorneys are making sure they create), the more likely the case is going to stand when it is ultimately adjudicated.

In this case, I'm glad Mr. Eshelman had his team to make all the arguments they could. It helped Judge Skavdahl make a very thorough record as to why they were so very wrong, and it will help the 10th circuit do a thorough job of rejecting their arguments as well.

 

[BuzzH]

I've been vilified plenty of times by people who don't understand that I defend people's rights, not their actions.

You're both right, however. I've also done civil work, and one of the perks of that side of the law is that you can always turn down a client. If I look at something like the UPOM case here in MT, the attorneys worldviews do tend to align with their clients. On the flip side, these people, no matter how repugnant, are entitled to competent representation. And we are better off that they have lawyers making these arguments as opposed to going at it alone.

The cleaner the record (which the attorneys are making sure they create), the more likely the case is going to stand when it is ultimately adjudicated.

In this case, I'm glad Mr. Eshelman had his team to make all the arguments they could. It helped Judge Skavdahl make a very thorough record as to why they were so very wrong, and it will help the 10th circuit do a thorough job of rejecting their arguments as well.

Do the same thing as Union President, defend the rights/process, not the actions.

Good post.

 

[JAG]

Erase? Nope. More like “correct erroneous evaluations and reduce property tax burden from working ranchers”.

Precisely ... :

'Skavdahl wrote that Eshelman’s claims of lost property value caused by the judgment were misguided. Such a claim “is based on a fictitious right the Plaintiff never actually held under law,” the judge wrote.'​

 

[VikingsGuy]

The gangster "roll" in their pockets matters...

We lawyers aren’t nearly the slaves to dogma, paychecks or political masters as the public employee union members, so I can understand your confusion on the point.

 

[BuzzH]

We lawyers aren’t nearly the slaves to dogma, paychecks or political masters as the public employee union members, so I can understand your confusion on the point.

Rigggghhhttttt. And you wonder why you catch grief?

Laffin'...

 

[WildWill]

Good lawyers understand their role in society- I suggest you re-read to kill a mockingbird.

Yes "Good" lawyers. From my experience 2 "scum bags" per one "good" when it comes to lawyers.

 

[Elky Welky]

Yes "Good" lawyers. From my experience 2 "scum bags" per one "good" when it comes to lawyers.

@VikingsGuy I guess this means we are both scum bags

 

[Forkyfinder]

@VikingsGuy I guess this means we are both scum bags

Theres worse things, being an engineer for example.

 

[WildWill]

@VikingsGuy I guess this means we are both scum bags

I work in the medical field the majority of my dealing are with malpractice lawsuits so literal ambulance chasers. I just don't know what definition is being used to describe a "good" lawyer. In my opinion the best lawyers are willing to drop their morales in order to represent their clients rights as you mentioned earlier. But that's not exactly my definition of being a "good" man.

 

[HappyCamper]

Yes "Good" lawyers. From my experience 2 "scum bags" per one "good" when it comes to lawyers.

My experience says that ratio is at least 5:1.

 

[Ben Lamb]

But that's not exactly my definition of being a "good" man.

I get that, especially in policy work but my counter would be that the oath to defend the undefendable is an honourable thing. It helps ensure the rule of law and it creates a more broad definition of honor.

Having said that, what do you call 2 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?
















A good start.

 

[Elky Welky]

In my opinion the best lawyers are willing to drop their morales in order to represent their clients rights as you mentioned earlier. But that's not exactly my definition of being a "good" man.

I've never needed to "drop my morals" to represent my clients' rights. That misinterprets what I said. I said there is an important distinction between my clients' rights and my clients' actions. I defend one, not the other.

But I also wouldn't claim to be a good lawyer or a good man. The jury is out on all that.

@Ben Lamb that scenario doesn't happen very often, because usually some sharks come along and save the lawyers. It's professional courtesy.

 

[TimeOnTarget]

We have that many lawyers here?!?

 

[Forkyfinder]

We have that many lawyers here?!?

Who knew.

Makes me think we need to have more threads about wildlife law