1. He Didn’t Know About The Evidence
It was my third month of practice. I was in family law at the time. Representing mom in a petition for a restraining order against boyfriend/dad.
At issue in the broader case was child visitation, custody, support etc. but today's hearing was just on the RO. We had pretty good facts but it was mostly based on testimony of the parties. My client was way more reputable as a witness so I was feeling confident.
10 minutes before the hearing, my client shows up. I give her a last-minute prep on what to expect and then she says "I'm glad I'm going through with this. I can't deal with it any more and he's just getting worse. To top it off, he left me a drunken, ranting voicemail on Saturday."
"You have your phone with you?"
"Yes."
We play the voicemail and it's a full two minutes of ex-boyfriend screaming stuff like "I should have freaking killed you when we were together." "You were always such a witch." "I hope you burn to death in a fire."
I didn't have time to ask her why the heck she hadn't said anything to me about the voicemail before the bailiff called our case. We sit, the judge asks if either side has additional evidence, and I ask for permission to play the voicemail.
The ex-boyfriend, who didn't have an attorney, didn't object, so I played the whole nasty two-minute rant in open court.
Judge goes "We're going to take a brief recess before I issue my ruling. If the parties want to meet and confer in the hall, they are welcome to."
The boyfriend knew he was screwed. We settled the whole case then and there. My client got her wish list in terms of custody, supervised visitation, child support, plus the restraining order, to boot.
night-shark
2. I Got My Money Back
Not a lawyer but I played one in small claims court. My lease had an exit clause that said if I fronted two months’ rent, they would work to lease my place and return anything unused. I checked with the office ahead of time, and they ensured me there was a waiting list, so I gave them two months and moved. They never returned a dime. I talked to the new tenant and confirmed they moved in a week later.
In court, the judge was commenting on how he didn’t see anything explicitly saying they would return any unused rent, even though that intent was stated to me a few times.
Dumbo from the leasing office piped in with, “Your honor, in almost every case we can return some money, but in this case we didn’t have a tenant in the two months after he left.”
So she gave the case back to me and I presented the affidavit from the new tenant confirming the move-in date. The judge awarded me double what they owed. Turns out leasing office dumbos 1 and 2 thought they could lie to me and “return” my excess rent money to themselves.
GiltLorn
3. I Made $1800 After Paying $300
Years ago I had to do something at a strip mall in a bad part of town, it took me about 20 minutes and then I found that my car had been towed. Ubered to the tow yard. A giant sign says 'cash only'. Had to call another Uber, drive to the ATM and back, and pay them $300-some bucks. Got a terrible hand-written receipt that, believe it or not, was itemized.
I went home, googled, and found that they violated the law in three separate ways: towed illegally; illegally refused to accept credit cards; and had multiple charges that the law called 'unreasonable' like dolly fees and load / unload fees.
I took them to a small claims court.
The judge began by asking the tow yard owner about his relationship with the property owner and how the decision was made to tow my car.
"Oh," the slimy tow truck dude answered, "my cousin works there if he says tow, I tow. It's a hundred percent legal!"
The judge's eyebrows begin to rise.
"But," the dude continued, "But what I detest the most your honor is this jerk claiming I don't take credit cards. I'm a businessman! I take credit cards all the time! He's a low life that does not have any credit cards, that's why he wanted to pay cash!"
I was having a "HOLD IT" overload, and the judge saw me smiling and hopping in my seat and patting my manila folder of receipts.
"Do you actually not have any credit or debit cards?" the judge asked me.
I pulled out my wallet and showed him, and then I pulled out a time stamped photo of the "CASH ONLY" sign I took that day, and another one I took the morning of the hearing.
The guy mumbled something like "OK you got me there" and then had nothing but "Huh, I didn't know that" when the judge asked him about the legality of each unreasonable itemized charge.
Anyway, each violation pays double the total tow charge, and since there were three, that's how I made $1,800 on a $300 investment.
Gorperly
4. She Handed Over the Evidence
Not a lawyer, but we had no evidence that the woman who slammed into my stopped car going 85 mph was drunk until she indignantly admitted it on tape in her deposition.
She busted into my deposition and demanded she go first because I was a “lying witch”. She excitedly told my lawyer that the police report was wrong because it said she was coming from the movie theater when she was actually coming from her friend's bar.
“Did you have anything to drink at your friend's bar?” “Of course.” “How many drinks” “I dunno, they just keep my glass full.” “Did you take any medicine that day?” “Methadone and low blood pressure medicine.” “I see.”
The cops had refused to breathalyzer her at the scene because her husband was a firefighter that they knew personally. They told her to go home, sober up, and go to the hospital later. I heard the whole thing but had no proof until she handed it to me. They settled the same day.
cagetheblackbird
5. The Pun Win
I got a hidden shout-out from a federal judge in a ruling that I consider to be one of the high points of my career. Here’s what happened. Before a hearing for an emergency injunction against USDA, I was watching the hearing before mine (a trademark infringement case). At the end of that hearing, the judge accidentally used a pun, and could not stop laughing. She was literally crying.
I decided at that moment I was going to intentionally use a pun in my hearing. I did—I accused USDA of engaging in a “shell game” by illegally diverting some federal funds to an egg industry trade group. The judge called me on it but laughed heartily. My client won (the judge threatened to put the Secretary of Agriculture in jail).
A major newspaper reporting on the case said the judge “winced” at my puns but agreed with my arguments. False! When the written ruling was issued, the last sentence said that an injunction was issued against USDA’s use of the funds for “any plans they may be hatching”. Undeniable shout-out.
timshel4971
6. Experience with Drug Cases
I was a volunteer family advocate. I worked with families who were falsely accused of child abuse. Part of that was going to court with them. I was contacted by a family whose children were in foster care because of parental drug use. The family claimed that they didn't do drugs and that no one would believe them.
They had a court-appointed attorney who did nothing but tell them to stop using drugs. I honestly didn't believe them. I was pretty jaded. I told them to request their case file for me to review.
I was surprised when they called me back and had the case file. I met with them and went through everything. I noticed claims of drug use, and court findings of drug use, but no test results in their paperwork. I told them to ask for the results.
Long story short the caseworker wouldn't give them the actual results, and the lab wouldn't either. So, I drug-tested them myself at a different lab. They tested clean. Color me shocked.
There were 4 months to go until the next court date. Every time CPS drug tested them, they went right after to the other lab and did a second test. All clean. I told them to tell the lawyer beforehand that if CPS claimed any dirty drug tests, to ask in court for the test results. He didn't want to. I was starting to get mad.
So, the day of court I had a stack of clean drug test results in my bag. The lawyer wouldn't even look at them, and he was openly hostile to my presence and involvement.
Court starts. (I had been in this judge's courtroom before with other families.) The CPS supervisor stands up and says that the parents have had 12 dirty drug screens in the past 6 months. The lawyer actually did ask her for the results. She said she didn't have them with her.
I got the results out of my bag and handed them to the mom who was next to the lawyer. She tried to get him to take them, but he ignored her.
I got so agitated that the judge said, "Mrs Baez looks like she's about to have a stroke. What's going on?"
I stood up and explained that we had clean drug tests taken immediately after the mandated ones that CPS claimed were dirty. I briefly explained that the parents had tried getting copies of their results and had been refused. I said that the parents had consistently denied ever using drugs and had clean tests to prove it.
The judge ordered CPS to provide copies of all the drug test results at a hearing in a week.
At that hearing, the case was closed and the children were released from foster care. The family never got an apology from anyone, but they were too traumatized to pursue it. They packed up and moved away within a month.
dorothybaez
7. Empathy from Jury
I was prosecuting a convenience store owner for luring a young girl, who regularly came into the store, back to a part of the store to grope/fondle and kiss her (child enticement). It was the only section of the store without surveillance camera coverage.
They were in the back room for about two minutes and seventeen seconds, per the time stamp on the videos. Of the many arguments the defence put on, one was there was no way there was enough time for anything to happen.
In my rebuttal on closing, I asked the jury to imagine what could happen in the room in that amount of time, and I asked them to all close their eyes while I timed out 2 minutes and 17 seconds on my watch, in silence. After about 60 seconds two of the jurors started crying. Knew it was going to be guilty right then.
Badwolf84
8. No Further Questions
I’m not a lawyer, but I’ve been up against plenty of them as a union chief steward. Years ago we had an arbitration related to Healthcare costs. The company spent the better part of a year trying to break us from pursuing the case. The day had come for our arbitration. The lawyer (there were 3, actually) we were up against was actually Paul Newman's nephew.
Anyway, it was my turn to take the stand. His first question to me was about presenting the grievance as evidence and asking me what step it said it was on at the top of the page. (Our grievance process is a 2-step system, progressing to arbitration if it's not settled) I said "2nd step".
Then he smugly asks "And where is the first step?" To which I replied "The first step is a verbal discussion. It goes into writing at the second step"
He looked hurt but persevered anyway. A few more questions he asked: "If the entire company got base-level insurance, instead of a premium option, would that satisfy the contract?" At this point, he was hoping I would argue that the base-level insurance wasn't sufficient because he was trying to paint the picture that we were just trying to get premium insurance at a base-level price.
I responded with "Yes". He looked dumbfounded. Asked me "Yes?". I said again "Yes, that would satisfy the language in the contract". He kinda looked at the other papers he was going to submit as evidence, then muttered "No further questions".
I knew at that moment that they had brought no real argument to the table. We got our answer from the arbitrator 6 weeks later, during a contract negotiations meeting. It was insanely satisfying watching them read the email during one of the sessions, and the immediate shift in demeanor from their side of the table. They got really quiet.
We were awarded 100% of the arbitration. Full back pay for all employees that were being overcharged, and reduced rate for the premium insurance.
DarcSystems
9. Divorce Trial
In my divorce trial, my ex-wife has spent about two hours explaining to the court what a POS I was and all the horrible things I had done to her and my children and that I was unfit to be a parent. Two solid hours. Lie upon lie.
Just six months earlier? My wife had snuck into my house — she's the one who moved out — and went on my computer to type me a love letter! "Oh, you're so wonderful! You're such an amazing father, great provider, great husband! You've done so much for the community. Please don't leave me!!! " That's the gist of it.
Well, she didn't print it or sign it, it was just a file on my computer left on the screen for me to find. So our challenge — after all her testimony to the contrary — get her to admit she wrote this letter.
I told my attorney — ask her! She won't be able to lie if she's sworn in! Plus she's going to feel incredibly guilty about all these lies. So, he handed her a printout. He had one too. He started reading it. Then he asked her to continue reading. She started to cry.
He asked her...do you remember writing this letter? Her face was shriveling. She looked at her attorney and said "I'm sorry Sandy" (her attorney's first name). Then she looked at the courtroom and said "Yes, I wrote this."
There was silence for a few moments. Then the judge said "Attorneys — in my chambers! Now!"
My attorney told me later: "The judge understood that when your wife said 'I'm sorry Sandy' that meant that her attorney was aware this letter MIGHT be brought up and that she had instructed her client to lie."
The judge was furious. Back in the courtroom, my attorney went down the list lie by lie. Did he really do this? Did he really do that? When you say he was doing this, wasn't it really that? Etc. Then he had her read the entire letter again.
After that, my divorce went from me being 1/2 inch away from losing all custody and relegated to supervised visits to — I got full custody.
LetUsBeginAnew
10. Whose Fault Was It?
Not a lawyer, but was working as a paralegal for a law firm. We were defending a claim which had run into tens of thousands of pounds against our client (a holiday home), by a woman who had tripped over a speed bump while walking back to her caravan, and damaged her knee. The fall was genuine. The question was whose fault this was.
She claimed it was the holiday home's fault because she hadn't seen the speed bump due to low lighting, poor marking etc. The claim had outrageously gone for months and made it to court.
Going through the various questions to her, when our barrister asked how she knew the speed bump was poorly marked (or something similar). Her response "Well, I remember thinking how it wasn't well marked when I was walking up to it". Needless to say, it was a short day in court after that point.
Munchies2015
11. Kicked Out
Not a lawyer, but my girlfriend had a very minor nose to tail and a rookie cop who happened to drive by booked her on some massive charges and fines.
She went to trial, and her lawyer tore apart the cop. In the report, he claimed the officer ticked her ethnicity as African (she's white / European), put the wrong date, and the wrong street name, and didn't get the other witness's details.
The prosecution & officer argued that she had signed the witness statement so while a few things were accidentally filled out wrong, it reflected what happened.
Her lawyer asked the officer to show the court her signature on the statement, he looked at it and said oh I must have forgotten it. The prosecutor and a few police that went to the trial for some reason all let out audible groans.
The judge adjourned for 10 minutes, the police still wanted to press on but the judge threw it out immediately after recess and gave the prosecutor an earful for taking such a ridiculous case to trial.
Timinime
12. Lies in the Court
When I practiced insurance defence. I was handed a file to take over a slip and fall. The guy tripped on a hose and tore his anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). The partner had taken the guy's depo already so I read the transcript.
I'm a Michigan football fan, and have watched every game for 20 years. This guy testified he was the starting safety for a certain rival for certain years. Also that he graduated with a double major that doesn't exist at that school.
I immediately knew this was false. The partner didn't understand. I dug deeper. They lied about so much stuff unrelated to the fall for no reason. Eventually found high school records from football injuries of head trauma, knee injuries, oh and a slip and fall injury a few months after ours. He also testified he rehabbed an ACL surgery after 1 month.
Motion for fraud on the Court filed, immediately settled.
Someguy469
13. Anger Management Issues
I watched my lawyer have this moment last time we were in court. Short version: my ex abused my kid, I withheld visitation and hired a lawyer. I offered supervised visitation with a plan to integrate regular visitation once he completed anger management and parenting classes as well as had 6 months clean of all substances.
When he was on the stand he mentioned that he had been taking prescription meds for 10 years. (To illustrate that he’s been on meds for a decade and never had a problem being a “good” dad.)
The lawyer asked what meds, and he listed off a bunch; meds like methadone, Klonopin, Vicodin, OxyContin etc.
She asked why he began taking those particular medications. He replied “Well I messed up my back last year riding my quad,” She asked him to repeat himself. He said it again. The look on her face was amazing.
She said, “So, you’ve been taking large amounts of meds for 10 years?” He said yes. She said “10 years of major medications due to an injury that happened two years ago?”
The judge agreed with my request for supervised visits pending his completion of all the necessary steps. Ex never completed any steps and kiddo hasn’t had to see him in 4 years.
mutantmother
14. The Crooked Tenants
I represented an elderly Indian couple, who didn't speak English very well and owned a rental property. They had a tenant at the time who had not paid rent in over six months. They had tried to evict her on their own, but when they got to court, the tenant produced some hand-written notes which they had given her a year prior thanking her for payment (but they failed to date the notes.) Of course, the tenant added recent dates herself.
The tenant also produced a partially certified check receipt, but most of it was illegible. Anyway, because of their poor English, they had difficulty understanding the questions and giving intelligent answers, so they lost the initial case. They hired me to help address all of the various lies that the tenant was putting forth.
Anyway, we refiled. I had my clients pull the banking records, so we could show the date that the certified check was actually deposited into their account. The plan was simple, let the tenant make the same arguments and then present the banking statements showing the deposit date. My clients also found a photocopy of one of their notes, but it was not dated (unlike the copy the tenant presented the last time).
Well, when the judge finally understood that the things the tenant had presented occurred the year before, his cheeks turned bright red and he asked the tenant "What year did you make this payment?"
The tenant started saying something like she couldn't be exactly sure when... and the Judge cut her off again in a very loud voice "What year?!"
Needless to say, the clients got their eviction granted.
Bonus content: When the tenant arrived at court I watched as she got out of her car, walked to the back and pulled out a wheelchair and proceeded to stay in that wheelchair until the case was over.
Once the Judge left the courtroom, she folded up the wheelchair and carried it to her car mumbling that she hates lawyers. Anyway, that was a very satisfying day.
sirhecker
15. Saved the Client a $35000 Judgment
I did a quid pro quo case for a guy who was doing my firm's website. It was a breach of contract case for a credit card. The debt had been sold and at the time of trial, the ad danum was something like $35k.
The client brought me in late in the game. He’s already gone to mandatory arbitration and lost. I get the case a week before the bench trial and when going through the pleadings, etc, I realize that the plaintiff never sent a “237 notice.”
This is when one side tells the other that they need to make available either tangible evidence or a party witness at trial. Think subpoena, but less bite. So the plaintiff forgot to send this notice to the defendant that he needed to appear at the trial.
Normally, if a defendant doesn’t appear at a civil trial, you get the obvious - the judge only hears one side of the story and the defendant loses. When a 237 is given and the defendant doesn’t show, the judge is supposed to infer that the defendant didn’t show because his testimony would have hurt his case (“negative inference”).
But, because this was a debt buyer, the plaintiff had no actual knowledge that this credit card bill and charges belonged to my client. All they get is a single-page printout from the original debt holder saying they sold this debt, and if they’re lucky, some copies of statements. They could easily have proven it by calling my guy as a witness.
Even if the client denies the charges, the plaintiff can make a good case because the defendant's name is on the bill, it’s to his address, the restaurant charges are for the sub shop on his block, etc. and all that would come out when the called def as a witness.
So, I tell my guy to wait down the street. We do pre-trial motions and the plaintiff asks for my client. I point out their procedural errors and they panic. They put on their witness, who is some account rep at the debt buyer and I object to hearsay on EVERYTHING they try to get in.
She has no knowledge, can’t lay the foundation for statements and the only thing she can remotely testify to is her own business record - the single page showing a debt sale. Not enough.
Then the plaintiff's attorney gets a “bright” idea. He starts to ask his witness about the arbitration hearing. I see where he’s going and let it play out a bit. He’s trying to get in an “admission of party opponent.” Basically, a witness can say that at the arbitration hearing, my client admitted this was his debt.
But this is an out-of-town attorney. He doesn’t realize that because arbitration is mandatory and has very relaxed evidentiary rules (all evidence comes in if you tell the other side what you’re going to use) - that this county considers arbitrations to be the equivalent of settlement conferences and the testimony isn’t admissible at trial except to impeach.
Result: Directed finding for my client, who saved himself a $35,000 judgment. The judge praises my defense and I get to make super fake small talk in the tiny elevator with the plaintiff and his witness after trial, where I walk out to hand my client the court order in his favor. Most satisfying win, ever.
pieisforclosers
16. The Opposition’s Statement
It was day two of a child custody modification trial. The opposition and her attorney were and are completely crazy. Their allegations were so weak that I told my guy, “Screw it. Let’s go for custody ourselves.” I’m cross-examining Mom about her proposed custody plan for Dad in some detail and I ask her, “Would you accept this for yourself?”
She snaps back, “Absolutely not!”
I ask, “Why not?”
“Because I’m a MOTHER.” To his credit, my guy kept a straight face the entire trial and never once got mad. Her petition was denied outright. Ours was accepted by the Court.
If the mom or her lawyer hadn’t been such pains to deal with, my guy probably would have agreed to some small reductions in his custody just to keep the peace. Instead, the Judge gave us nearly everything we asked for.
EnderKCMO
17. The Witness Was Fake
I had a client charged with battery. The alleged victim didn’t really support the prosecution’s case and in any event, was reluctant to testify. They still had another witness though, and she said that my client was hitting the alleged victim, so it wasn’t looking great.
The prosecutor and I were talking before court started, hanging out by the courtroom doors, when the witness walked in. She looked right at my client (who was sitting not five feet from me), then scanned the room and said “Where is [client name]?”
The prosecutor and I looked at each other for a minute, and then he said he needed to check on something. When I saw him a few minutes later, he told me he was dismissing the case.
wbdunham
18. A Legendary Defense
I was testifying for the defense; a young man had been arrested for assaulting a police officer, allegedly throwing bottles during some unrest in Oakland following the verdict in the trial of the cop who shot Oscar Grant in the back on the BART platform. I had been there filming stuff, caught his arrest on video and his brother found my footage on youtube and asked me to testify.
I had only seen bottles being thrown from this one corner of a parking lot, from behind me, with the bottles flying over my shoulder. The defendant was in a group in front of me.
On the stand, the prosecutor seemed to think I knew the defendant and was there basically committing perjury on his behalf. I explained why I had been there that night, that I had never seen this guy before, hadn't been coached by the defense, and hadn't been paid other than a small amount for my travel and time.
Finally, exasperated after much back and forth, the prosecutor says, "Well if you don't know the defendant then why are you here testifying for him?" I thought for a moment and said, "I guess I just wouldn't want an innocent man to get convicted for a crime he didn't commit."
He got visibly flustered and quickly moved on, trying to insinuate that if I didn't know him, how would I have known to be looking in his direction to see whether he was throwing things, I tried explaining that if you're looking at a group of random people, and one of them throws something you will naturally fixate your attention on that person.
But because nobody in that group threw anything, there was nothing to notice in the first place; it looked like the police just grabbed him at random.
They rested, the defense attorney bought me lunch down the street and then he got a call from his colleague that the jury took all of 10 minutes to return a "not guilty" verdict on the assault charge. They said my response was legendary though, and that no attorney should ever ask a question they don't already know the answer to.
This guy just seemed to have a narrative about a prior relationship to the defendant that he assumed was accurate, and was trying to call my credibility into question.
BigMetalHoobajoob
19. He Tried His Luck
Misdemeanour trial defending a guy accused of 3rd-degree assault on his girlfriend. She had a ‘bruise’ on her neck and told the police that it was from my client strangling her. Somehow it got around the public defender's office that someone overheard the ‘victim’ admit to her mother that it was a hickey. She was on the stand and she was terrified.
I kid-you-not I had the ‘Tom Cruise standing there struggling whether he should accuse Nathan Jessup of ordering the code red’ moment. I was battering her with answers, not open-ended questions (as it should be). It also helped that I had a projector slide up on a screen in the courtroom of a massive butcher knife stuck in the wall - yes, she threw it at him. I had her admit that, but that wasn’t the clincher.
It was the moment when I honestly decided while standing in the middle of the courtroom whether or not to assert that the bruise on her neck was a hickey. I didn’t know if it truly was at all. I mean it was hearsay within hearsay with a double smattering of more hearsay. But I wasn’t going to assert it as if it was overheard, I was going to assert it as a fact.
The trouble I had with the decision to go with this was that what if I asserted it was a hickey and she says “no, I got that from him strangling me”? Then I look like a massive idiot and it only bolsters the DAs case. I literally said “screw it” in my head and said “and, isn’t it true that the bruise on your neck is a hickey?”
She breathed out, slumped in her chair, and eked out a “yeah”. I thought I was Vince Lombardi. We won.
FreekoftheCreek
20. Three Strikes
I self-defended against an utterly crap charge of using my cellphone (which was turned off charging) while driving. When the cop pulled me over, and said it was because he saw me using my cellphone at a light, I told him that was impossible, it was turned off, and I would happily turn it back on and show him it hadn’t been used in over 10 mins.
He refused to see it and wrote the ticket. $590, I was mad. I’ll own up if I make a mistake (I once got a ticket for going 81 in a 60 zone that I thought was an 80, I didn’t even fight because I was in the wrong even if I wasn’t knowingly speeding) but this was complete crap.
I didn’t really think I had a chance but hoped the cop wouldn’t show. My luck he did, and then the prosecutor showed me his statement. He lied and said I told him I had “just been checking my messages”.
Well, when he pulled me over and I told him I’d show him my phone, I took screenshots of my call list, my email account, and my text messages, all of which showed the time of the screenshot and the last call/email retrieval/text sent or received.
Then, when he testified, he said that he had seen me pull my phone out of the cup holder, look at it and put it back in.
My phone was on a dash mount when he pulled me over. So I asked him about the cup holder and he said it was dash mounted. I actually had a picture of the interior of my car (because I thought maybe he’s seen me touching the screen of my car's controls (I drive a Prius) so I’d taken a picture of the interior.
That of course showed the cup holders are NOT on the dash and instead are in a console in between the driver and passenger seats. Strike 2 against him.
Finally, I produced my cell phone records that showed I owned an iPhone 6 Plus at the time of the ticket. I asked him again if he was certain I’d put it in a cup holder and he said he was (he could hardly change his story on the stand).
So I took a cup that was on the desk (in case people needed water during the trial) and set it and my phone in front of him, and asked him to try to put my phone into the cup. 6 Plus phones were huge AND I use an Otterbox Defender. There was no way it would fit in a cup holder.
He glared at me and said, “Well, the cup holders in my truck are big, it would fit in them!” I reminded him the ticket showed I drive a Prius - and they are not a big car. Third strike.
Three times I proved that what he said could not have happened.
The judge at this point interrupted (she said at the start she would provide advice since I was representing myself, and that was part of her job) and said I’d made my point and did it very well!
That was when I knew I’d won.
And boy was that cop fuming. But it was a glorious moment for me.
Courin
21. Background Checks Are Important
My client's house burned down from an explosion in the fuel oil tank used to heat the house. It was clearly the oil maintenance company's fault, but his homeowner's insurance (from a very reputable company) still refused to pay out, citing a ridiculous technicality in his policy.
Essentially, the policy covered damage caused by the oil heater but they claimed that it was the storage tank that exploded and wasn't part of what was covered.
So they deny his claim, which was about 1.2 million, and then I get involved. During a deposition with the claims adjuster, I ask how she came to the conclusion that the storage tank was not a part, or at least connected to, the heater. She states that she relied on her "expert witness" who was an engineer. Little did she know I had already checked this person's background. He had zero engineering experience or education.
As most of you might know, you don't get attorney's fees in most cases. However, when an insurance company denies your claim in "bad faith", now you do. Her little admission cost the company about 500k in fees, on top of the original claim of 1.2 million.
Barbie_and_KenM
22. Volunteering Information
Cross-examining a custom home builder who had a lump sum contract (set price as opposed to “cost plus” which means the cost of the materials plus x% as builder fee) with the homeowner. He claimed he put 20% more labor/materials into building the home than the contract provided for and he was suing for these excess costs.
I was asking him about an email with my client negotiating the price of the construction and he volunteered that he knew he couldn’t build it for that price. My head snaps up, my supervising partner’s head snaps up, and opposing counsel goes pale.
The dialogue was something like this:
Me: You quoted ‘x’ price?
Builder: Yes
Me: You knew you couldn’t build it for that price?
Builder: Yes
Me: You knew the homeowner was relying on that quote?
Builder: Yes
Me: You knew the homeowner wouldn’t have signed the contract without that representation?
Builder: Yes
Me: And you told home owner’s lender you could do it for ‘x’?
Builder: Yes
Me: And the bank relied on that price and wouldn’t have given a loan if knew it was wrong.
Builder: Yes
This is textbook fraudulent inducement and he had no idea. Builder got poured out in the arbitration award and slapped builder with sizable punitive damages on top of it. Five minutes of testimony sunk his case because he volunteered information without being prompted.
CastIronMooseEsq
23. Photo Evidence
I represented a guy whose car died in the middle of the freeway at 4 am. He put on his hazard lights and called 911 for help. At the same time an LAPD cop, heading to work around the same time in a police unmarked car was driving around 87 - 92 mph (per our deconstructionist). He doesn’t see our guy, strikes him and causes a major 6-car collision, including overturning an 18-wheeler truck.
Police arrive and take photos. LAPD officer claimed our guy did not have his hazard lights on and he was only driving 60 mph. He was clearly trying to put some of the faults on our guy.
At the deposition of the investigating officer, she doesn’t remember if our guy’s hazard lights were on or not. The attorney brings photos from the scene. One of the photos showed my guy’s hazard lights on. We were dismissed shortly thereafter.
Chelesuarez
24. False Claims
I represented a DUI client who swore up and down to me that he hadn’t been drinking or doing any drugs. Newbie officer who had his field training officer with him in the car. The rookie pulls my client over for a tag violation and walks back to the car with the body camera still on, the training officer says “Get him out for a DUI” and the rookie says “But he’s not intoxicated” to which the reply was “do it anyway.”
Body cam clicks off, turns on 7 minutes later and they’re doing field sobriety exercises on my client. My client sat in custody for 3 weeks until I finally got the tape from the prosecutor and presented it to the judge. The “oh crap” looks from the prosecutor and FTO when the judge saw the tape, I’ll treasure that one.
Judge wrote the police chief a letter saying the FTO was dead to him and he’d deny every search warrant he tried to bring thereafter for being a liar. The client is hopefully still on track with his civil attorney in a lawsuit.
Public_Defenfer
25. The $5000 Video
I’m not a lawyer but a legal videographer. This gentleman was claiming injuries/seeking damages against his employer after a fall at work. He claimed he couldn't raise his right arm above his shoulder because of the fall. The first deposition comes along and I am hired by the defendant's attorney to videotape the deposition of the plaintiff. Does anyone know the first thing a court reporter asks you to do in a deposition?
"Please raise your right hand and repeat after me..."
Plaintiff raises his right arm above his shoulder with ease and no sign of discomfort. It does not occur to him what he has just done. Both attorneys were looking down at their notes when this happened and neither of them caught it. The plaintiff himself didn't catch it. The court reporter looked at him and then looked at me and her eyes went wide with realization at what just happened.
4 hours of deposition proceed where the plaintiff is instructed (multiple times) to show his range of motion and precedes to pretend like he can't raise his arm above shoulder level which he did at the very beginning of his deposition.
Deposition ends, the plaintiff's counsel leaves, I call defense (hiring party) counsel over and show him the first 2 mins of tape, counsel excitedly whispers to me, "Case closed, you just saved us tens of thousands of dollars". I got a $5,000 bonus and the plaintiff's case was dismissed with prejudice.
THE_PHYS
26. Chopped and Screwed
My client was a woman working at a meat packing plant. Her glove (they would only give her the loose kind because they were cheaper) got caught in the machine and she lost her arm. We sued the owners of the plant for the glove issue. We also sued the machine manufacturer for failing to include the required guard.
Then we sued the distributor for being in the chain of the sale but didn’t really think they played much of a role.
The manufacturer swore they included a hand guard and said the plant owner must have used a grinder to take it off. During a deposition of the guy that owned the distribution company, he shows up with the sale documents he was supposed to have turned over weeks before.
Turns out there was a note in small print at the bottom he didn’t know about that said the sale was without the hand guard. Which is against the law. I pointed it out and we ended up settling that afternoon with the distributor.
The woman got all her medical bills paid, got money for a prosthetic and got a bunch of pain and suffering damages.
Temjin
27. A Heated Argument With the Judge
I was taking my ex to court over custody of my kid. I had compiled a 150-page dossier complete with a report from child protective services since there was abuse in the household. Text messages and tons of records of contempt of our previous agreement.
My daughter has a court-assigned lawyer which is normal in these cases, after reading through all the materials and talking to all the parties sided with my lawyer and I.
The ex decided to represent themselves because of hubris I suppose. Before the case was heard in the hallway, outside of the courtroom she gave me an agreement she typed up which would grant me custody as well as some generous provisions for herself.
I politely declined as we were confident we would be getting a lot more in the trial.
The case was called. Testimonies in. She put on the most hilariously insane and embarrassing show for the court. In her closing testimony, she attempted to hand the judge the agreement she tried to give us.
Judge refused to take it. You can't just hand me things. That's not how you submit things into evidence. I'm not reading that.
She's arguing with the judge, yelling at him, and losing her patience. In the insane nonsense she was spewing she said, "...and this agreement gives him custody which is one of the things he's after!" in what I assume was an attempt to show that she's attempting a compromise.
My lawyer peppers in a quick statement, "Ok, so you agree for the father to have full custody?" She snaps in heated anger, "Yes! That's what I agreed to!" Our side falls completely silent and the judge after much effort ends her little outburst.
Gave his final verdict which started with granting me custody and putting her in court-mandated therapy.
She literally gave away custody of her daughter in a heated argument with the judge.
CitizenAlpha
28. Cockfights
I was representing Mom in a bitter custody fight. Dad wanted full custody and argued mom was an unfit parent. Mom wanted full custody because Dad had a history of domestic violence towards her and the kids.
Dad's lawyer was doing a good job of painting her in a bad light during his cross-examination, and I was starting to get worried. His lawyer brought a close family friend as a character witness for Dad, who said the usual nice things about Dad.
Then he said something about them owning chickens. I thought that was odd so I asked more questions.
I was able to get the friend to spill the beans that the Dad owned chickens for illegal cock fighting, and he'd take his minor children to these cock fights, and when the children were acting up, he'd punish them by forcing them to feed the chickens, during which they would get pecked and scratched by the chickens.
And obviously, the children were terrified of those chickens. I could see the color draining from Dad's lawyer's face. Mom got full custody.
BabarThePug
29. Evidence Backfires
I acted for a plumber who ripped up a tile floor to replace a pipe. He installed a new tile on top but warned the owners not to walk on it for 48 hours. He emphasized not to let their kids or their dogs walk on it either. They walked on it but alleged the defects were caused by improper install.
We had an expert do a report which confirmed that it was consistent with proper installation but people walked on it too soon. Crazy homeowners still went to trial on it.
In their evidence disclosure they included a series of pictures. One of the pictures had in the foreground a tile that was tilted upwards.
The background very clearly showed a dog’s paw pressing down on the other end of the tile. That wasn’t so much and I got them as they got themselves.
asoiahats
30. The Judge Made A Mistake
While doing SSA disability hearings a few years ago I represented a guy in a case that was back on remand from Federal Court. Long story short, the original Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) didn’t follow the correct procedure and denied the guy because he “could return to his last work (Step 4).
Basically, he was granted a partially favorable decision that gave him $700 a month, rather than the $2,100 he should have received.
The ALJs are notoriously douches who try to scare people out of pursuing claims. This judge apparently thought he could intimidate me and my client into withdrawing the appeal by threatening to take away all the guy's benefits. Little did he know, I’m not a moron, and I hate bullies.
He started the hearing by asking my client if he was aware that he could take all his benefits away. Asking if “your counsel has informed you that by continuing this hearing, you may lose all benefits and owe all amounts back to the agency as an overpayment.”
This was completely impossible, because 6 years had gone by since the original decision, and the judge could only reopen the decision within 2 years. The guy was bulletproof on this issue. Also, the job he previously did (computer system installer) was completely obsolete and physically impossible since his physical problems prevented him from lifting more than 20 lbs, and the computer he was installing during the 1980s was 50-150 lbs.
The judge didn’t think about that and clearly didn’t read the federal court remand notice.
So, long story short, the judge says to me, “Counsel, have you done your ethical duty and advised your client that he could lose all his benefits today?” To which I responded by looking at my client, and in a full voice saying, “He can’t do that.”
Then, without missing a beat, I looked back at the judge and said, “Your honor, I have advised my client that you cannot take his benefits away.”
I told the judge we would waive all other procedural portions of the hearings and proceed directly to vocational expert testimony. I asked the vocational expert two questions, “would the prior job require lifting more than 20 lbs?”
And “Has the prior job existed as performed since 1999?” She quickly answered “No.” to both questions and then on her own elaborated on all the reasons why.
The total hearing was 6 minutes long. The judge had no choice but to grant the original application, and the guy got $158,000 in unpaid benefits. And $1,400 a month more than he had been receiving.
He broke down into tears and said he could finally keep the promise to his wife to return her ashes to the beach they got married on in Hawaii. A dream he had years ago decided would be impossible. Best day of my career, so far.
SearchingforSilky
31. Medical Malpractice
I served on a jury that was deciding a medical malpractice case.
The plaintiff's common bile duct was cut during a gall bladder surgery (a risk she was made aware of beforehand). She was suing the surgeon who performed the operation. The plaintiff's lawyer called as a witness a surgeon who had performed this surgery thousands of times. Speaking from this breadth of experience, he told us this mistake was "entirely unacceptable" and something that no competent surgeon would do.
The defense lawyer got up and grilled him for a while to make it clear that this guy made a bank by travelling around the country testifying against other surgeons. Right before he sat down, the defense lawyer said, "By the way, have you ever cut the common bile duct during this surgery?"
The case was decided (and the jury all but burst out laughing) when he answered, "Yes, I have."
tomusama
32. Inconsistent Stories
A woman was charged with possession of a large amount of substances. Her boyfriend was a known, big-time drug dealer with a long list of priors. Her story was that Four officers (A, B, C, D) came up to her outside her home and demanded to know where her boyfriend was.
They wanted all sorts of information about the boyfriend and his associates. When she refused to tell them anything, she says Officer A threatened her, including pulling out his gun and pointing it at her. She also indicated that Officer A was wearing street clothes while B, C, and D were in uniform.
Officers claim she gave them permission to search her home, where they found the substances. She says she never gave them any such permission and they planted/pretended to find the drugs.
Officer A, it turns out, had been in the newspaper shortly before the case went to trial for various serious incidents of abuse and corruption. The prosecution naturally assumes this woman is lying and simply trying to take advantage of the media publicity.
At trial B, C, and D testify that they were there with Officer E, not A. Once the defense theory developed a bit, the prosecutor offered into evidence a handwritten schedule log book thing that listed which officers were working on each day, to show that Officer A wasn't even scheduled to work that day.
There were various reasons this log might not have been admissible, and it was never disclosed to the defense until right before they attempted to admit it. But I quickly looked it over and, somewhat to the surprise of the judge, did not object to its admission.
Did not make any reference to the log until the closing argument. Then showed it to the jury and told them to look at it more closely. Officer A was not listed as working on the Date. But the log also shows duty assignments for the officers working. Officer B is listed as being assigned to the evidence room or some such at the station, and Officer E is listed as being assigned to a patrol car across town with Unrelated Officer F.
Along with various other inconsistencies in the officers' stories, this led to a very speedy acquittal.
CyanideNow
33. He Was Disbarred
My favorite was a proceeding that actually lead to the disbarment of the opposing attorney. The opposing attorney was sent discovery requests that he never responded to. Multiple emails were sent and nothing.
Moves to compel and the attorney shows up furious that we file a motion and are wasting the court’s time. Says we’re playing games and claims that he’s sent multiple emails and we aren’t responding.
The opposing attorney produces emails that supposedly show he’s been begging us to respond.
After looking at the produced emails and then looking at my calendar we see that the date in the timestamp doesn’t match the day in the time stamp. It turns out the attorney doctored an email he prepared last week and changed the date but forgot to change the day.
Judge was furious and chewed him out about professionalism and ethics for 15 minutes while we just sat quietly. It was actually uncomfortable to watch.
This idiot then gets angry at the judge and tries to say that it was his IT guy’s fault. Lying is an extreme no-no for attorneys. Our legal system depends on us being honest.
He was disbarred later that year.
iquit_again
34. How The Tide Turns
I represent tenants in eviction proceedings. Landlords being landlords, I have lots of "gotcha" stories. The most recent one was last week, in a classic "he-said, she-said" case. That is, the entire case depended upon whom the jury believed.
When the landlord was sworn in prior to testifying, she unnecessarily said "yes, on the bible," when asked to tell the truth, the whole truth, etc. Her testimony, however, was evasive. She avoided answering almost every one of my questions. She even avoided answering some of her own lawyer's questions.
During a recess, but still in the middle of her testimony, she was seen outside the courtroom, in full view of the jury, whispering with her lawyer and a family member about, obviously, what she was supposed to say on the stand.
When she got back up, the first thing I did was ask her what she was talking about with her lawyer and her family member outside the courtroom. I demanded to know whether they were telling her how to answer my questions. Her lawyer objected. The judge overruled the objection and ordered the witness to answer. The witness responded: "my life is my life."
During closing arguments, her lawyer tried to argue that she must have been telling the truth because she swore "on the bible" even though she didn't have to. That meant, according to him, that she took her oath more seriously than the average person (impliedly, my client) who wouldn't bother swearing on a bible when not asked to do so.
In my response, I agreed with the landlord's counsel that his client must take her oath, to tell the truth seriously. She must have taken it so seriously, in fact, that she refused to lie under oath when her truthful testimony would have sunk her case. So, instead, she just refused to answer almost every question put to her.
The jury came back in about 30 minutes with a 12-0 verdict in the tenant's favor.
incontempt
35. He Threw Her Under The Bus
Husband and wife were charged with drug sales. His wife had given full admission to the cops and ended up pleading before trial. The drugs were found in a shed with tools that the husband admits are his but he denies knowing anything about the drugs.
I go to trial against the husband and during his testimony, he says something about traditional family values. On cross-examination, I started asking about his relationship with his wife. He admits that he's in charge of the finances, and admits she has to ask permission to spend money.
He ends up saying that she doesn't do anything without his permission. I then ask him if he knows she admitted to selling drugs. He did. So wouldn't she need his permission to do that? Of course, she would, he says. No further questions.
The jury comes back guilty in less than half an hour.
SmallTownDA
36. Something Fishy
I represented an insurance company to recover monies it paid under a homeowners policy. It was a multi-million dollar home with a 450-gallon custom fish tank on the second floor. The owner hired a company to clean the tank, and they brought in a fish specialist to make sure the fish were properly maintained/stored for the cleaning. The specialist then goes to lunch and turns it over to a 22-year-old they had hired a week before who could’ve double for Keanu Reeves in Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure.
The kid just had to drain the tank and start cleaning. Up until I deposed the kid, the fish tank company claimed they had properly drained the water into the municipal sewer system. Not the case.
The kid (who has been fired long before I deposed him and didn’t give two craps about rolling on his employer) testifies that he sparked a joint right after his boss left and then proceeded to drain the tank, but this was the first time he had done a second story job.
The hose they had wouldn’t make it to where it needed to go, so he went into the nearest bathroom. Mindful of his customer, he didn’t want to dump 450 gallons of dirty fish-water into the tub or sink, so he leans the hose over the counter and into the toilet.
Ends up walking out and leaving it there to grab some munchies. When he got back, there was 449 gallons of dirty fish water all throughout the house. The case was settled within 3 days of the deposition.
Drombald
37. The Not So Illegal Immigrant
I practice immigration law. I had a woman come in and explain that she was from Canada, and had been living and working in the US without permission for decades. Her boyfriend beat her up to the point where she was hospitalized.
She pressed charges and the boyfriend basically let her know via friends that his lawyer was going to call her credibility into question since she was an illegal immigrant. Turns out her mom was born in the US and met her dad in college — which meant that she could gain dual citizenship via mom.
We got her citizenship certificate expedited and I made her promise not to tell anyone.
Sure enough, at trial, the defense attorney asks, "Isn't it true that you are a Canadian citizen who has been working illegally in the US for decades?" to which she replies, "No. In fact, here's my certificate of citizenship. I'm a dual Canadian and US citizen." She said the lawyer looked like a puppet when someone cut the strings. The boyfriend became a guest of the state for a long time.
Straelbora
38. We Didn’t Have To Say Much At Court
I'm not a lawyer, but this happened to my wife in small claims court. We lived in a small coastal town in the mid-1990s. She was attending the local community college, which was located on a steep hill. The main road ascending the hill had most of the side streets barricaded for some reason.
One day as she was driving up the hill to classes, she happened to be behind an older man in a small truck. The man attempted to turn onto a side street but found it barricaded, so he put the truck in reverse and backed into my wife.
My wife said the man was apologetic as they exchanged information, and gave her his phone number so they could work out how he would pay for the damage. When we called the number he gave, his wife answered and began to berate my wife, telling her that it was her fault and that we were going to have to pay. No way! Small claims court is the answer.
Our day in court arrived and things looked pretty bad for us since it was our word against his and rear-end accidents are usually considered to be the trailing driver's fault. Before making his ruling, however, the judge decided to skim the paperwork one last time.
A slight chuckle emitted from the judge and he asked the man if he remembered filling out the accident report. "Yes, your honor."
"Then you probably remember stating on the accident form that you put your truck into reverse, backing into the car behind you." "You've incriminated yourself, and lied to the court!" "I'm awarding the full amount. Case closed." "Consider yourself lucky I'm not charging you with contempt."
The wife and I high-fived in the hall outside the courtroom.
Brewbouy
39. A Life Saver
I'm not a lawyer, attorney, etc but for this trial, I was on the jury. The case was about a mother who had raised her son into a toy. It was awful. She got him hooked on drugs, twisted his mind with shame, and because he was an up-and-coming model she was hiding her abuse by claiming she wasn't doing anything but trying to break him free of his dangerous lifestyle.
It was absurd and disgusting - and it was working because the better lawyer played with his head the worse he reacted. Shaking, sudden tone changes, the poor kid was losing it in the face of his bravest/scariest moment.
Then his brother turned everything on its side by speaking well out of turn. He went way off rails on an answer, turned directly to us and started calling out behavior of hers that neither side had presented, including how she went after him and has now started in on the youngest sibling.
The judge instructed him to stop but with no effort, volume or authority. It's like he wanted it to happen. We were instructed to erase that from our minds.
Here is the "I rest my case moment": The defense attorney was clearly upset at the turn of events and goes extra hard at the primary victim (the eldest, model boy on drugs). It's getting way heated - shouting, rough language, all being allowed by the judge.
Somewhere in this verbal beach of Normandy, the defense attorney screams, "Admit it! You went there (his mother's house/ his own home until he ran away) looking for intercourse!!!"
The jury just looked at each other as if Rush Limbaugh was the new star of Hamilton. Why the heck would he go there for intercourse if she never had intercourse with him? I'll never forget the look on the prosecutor's face, it was like a coach after a game-winning play, that the other team ran for him.
Worth noting that after the trial [guilty btw] the judge had a Q&A with us jurors because of how crazy things had been. He said he was certain she was guilty after he reviewed the notes pre-trial but was getting concerned that it wouldn’t be proven.
He never said it, but he totally let things slide so the truth would get out. Very interesting couple of days.
wolfwoodsghost15
40. The Judge Knew
I practice mostly criminal defense. I, fairly recently, had a client who, after pleading guilty to a theft charge, contested the amount of restitution owed. Essentially the client said, I stole some stuff but I didn't steal all of it.
The victim had to come to court to prove the value of the things he alleged were stolen. Some of those things (that my client denied having touched, much less stolen) were rare and valuable coins. To support his claim, he brought a statement purporting to be from a local coin dealer with the type of coin listed and its value.
I knew nothing about coins, but I knew the judge knew a lot about coins, having collected them for years. The DA asks his questions. I muddle through my questions. T
hen the judge said he had some questions and verbally ripped this guy's list to shreds. Stuff like, "You expect me to believe that blah blah blah coin in blah blah condition is worth $250 when I can go online right now and find the same coin for $36?"
I just sat back like Vincent LaGuardia Gambini while Mona Lisa Vito was being voir dired. It was wonderful to watch.
wjray
41. Traffic Case
I was hired late one day in a traffic case set for jury trial the following morning. Usually, the court will say no worries and reset the case to give you time to prepare. I showed up expecting just this. When I told the judge I'd just been hired less than 24 hours ago, she announced aloud in court, and in front of the jury panel, that my client "knew what she did" and we were going to have this trial right now.
I looked at the prosecutor, expecting him to agree that we should reset for a future date. but he was afraid of the judge, and not a very good prosecutor anyway, so he just shrugged. I got mad and said ok then let's pick this jury.
I hadn't even seen the police report yet. I only knew my client was accused of passing a stopped school bus on the right shoulder, which is about as dangerous a move as you can do and not end up in jail.
The terrible prosecutor calls two police witnesses who say they saw the car pass the bus improperly. The prosecution rests. I waited until the police left to resume their duties.
When the judge looked at me to see if I wanted to call any witnesses, I said "I'm going to need the Court to direct a verdict of not guilty from the jury." This angry judge was losing her cool. "What are you talking about, Counsel?"
"Judge, we've just heard from two witnesses about someone passing a school bus, but neither one of them indicated that my client was anywhere near there." The prosecutor had made a rookie mistake, and forgot to check in-court ID off his list, twice.
The judge sighed. She had bullied me into this crappy trial, a total denial of my client's Sixth Amendment right to counsel, and had prejudiced the jury with her "she knows what she did" remark, and had wasted a couple thousand taxpayer dollars in doing it.
"The Court directs the jury to return a verdict of not guilty."
I didn't even wait for them to do it. I grabbed my client by the arm and got out of there fast, pausing to wink at the jury on the way out the door. Someone who had watched the entire thing from the gallery followed me out to the parking lot and hired me for a serious felony on the spot.
I've appeared in front of that judge dozens of times since then, and she has not messed with me once. I'm still waiting for my chance to "move for a bad court thingy."
NAbsentia
42. Client’s Old Age
As a young attorney, I had stated a claim that an insurance company was dragging out a case in bad faith, in hopes that my elderly client would die before they had to pay him. I was requesting that the trial date be given priority due to my client's advanced age.
The judge was no spring chicken himself and seemed skeptical when he asked exactly how old my client was, maybe thinking that he was in his 70s and must merely seem ancient to a baby lawyer like me. When I responded that my client was 92, and the case has already gone on for 5 years, the judge was visibly shocked.
The judge immediately granted my motion for priority, shutting down the insurance company's attorney's attempt to respond. They wrote us a check for a million dollars the next week.
DigitalMindShadow
43. Terrible Expert Opinion
I was a second-year associate and handling my first trial. I represented the plaintiff. The defendant had an expert witness who had testified previously in about 40 similar cases. This expert came out to my client's property and did a completely terrible examination of the issue and his expert report was equally as terrible.
For those of you that don't know, expert testimony needs to meet a certain standard (the Daubert standard, at least in my state) in order to be admissible. This guy basically took some photos and put a ruler on the ground a few times to make his "report" seem legit.
The partners at my firm told me it wasn't worth trying to file a Daubert motion to strike his report/testimony because the case was low value (under $100k) and those types of motions can be very complex and didn't want to bill the client for it.
I was so angry about this guy being deemed an "expert" that I came in on a weekend, on my own time, and drafted a 20-page motion to strike his testimony. I didn't bill the client a dime.
The defendant didn't file a response to my Daubert motion to strike. Instead, they waited until right before the expert was set to testify (he had been sitting in court racking up fees for two full days beforehand).
The judge had the jury leave the room, put the expert on the stand, and allowed the defendant to do a direct examination of the expert. The defendant's attorney, not taking my motion seriously, had their inexperienced associate (just like me) do the examination. It was incredibly basic and didn't respond to any of the points in my motion.
I was in charge of doing his cross-exam (it was my first cross-exam of a witness, ever). I tore the guy, a seasoned expert witness, apart on the stand. I got his entire testimony and report struck.
They also had a second expert witness, who was pretty terrible but not quite as terrible. I also did his cross-exam. Realizing that they were in serious trouble without their primary expert, and their second expert at risk of getting struck, the lead counsel for the defendant (a named partner at a well-known firm) did the direct exam for the second expert.
I again did the cross. I got the second expert's testimony struck except for one very, very tiny area. So essentially he was forced to testify with both hands tied behind his back.
It was the most gratifying moment of my legal career so far.
this_is_not_the_cia
44. Contract Dispute
So I called up my client's disgruntled former employee about a contract dispute that he started and that got my client into litigation. After two questions, it was obvious he was a lying SOB. I didn't want to call him as a witness; he was prone to act unpredictably.
I took down his story as we talked, which was easily proven false by documents and which cast my client in a false and bad light. I did not tell him how I'd caught him in lies.
Fast forward one day: I submit a list of known witnesses to opposing counsel, as required by the rules. Witness number one was the lying sack of crap.
Fast forward to trial: My opposing counsel calls the lying sack of crap as his first witness and the lying sack of crap acts like a lying sack of crap. He tells the same story on the witness stand that he told me on the phone.
I took emails that he wrote and entered them into evidence and proved him a clear liar. My client didn't breach the contract, the party suing did.
After the lying sack of crap left the witness stand, I asked the court for a brief recess -- granted. I approached opposing counsel. My client was still willing to sign on to the walk-away settlement where no money changed hands and no fault was admitted.
We offered the deal two months before and it was angrily rejected. Now, suddenly, it was accepted.
very_large_ears
45.Expert Evidence
I'm relatively junior so I'm hoping to beat this one day. I defended professionals and brought a motion to dismiss a case on the basis that the plaintiff could not prove my client was negligent as she had not served the required expert evidence.
As opposing counsel and I waited for our motion to be heard we were sitting in the courtroom. The judge, who I did not know and who had not read our materials, wanted to talk to the parties of a short trial which was to be heard after our motion was argued. That matter was also a professional negligence matter and the plaintiffs had no expert support.
The judge then spent 10 minutes explaining that he had practiced in professional negligence for many years and was well versed in the evidentiary requirements to prove the elements of professional negligence. In fact, he said, "I very rarely use the word impossible in this courtroom, but it is impossible for you to be successful without expert evidence."
Our matter was then called and I reveled in explaining to the judge that he was about to hear a motion to dismiss a professional negligence case on the basis that the plaintiff had no expert evidence.
I won.
sudzthegreat