Biglaw Second Year Associate; Won My First Federal Jury Trial Forum

[mjb447]

Those losers.

[RaceJudicata]

Those losers.

Based on this thread, I'm guessing any perceived negative emotions/attitudes have a lot more to do with OP's constant need to flash the term "FEDERAL jury trial" than the result of the FEDERAL jury trial.

But seriously, what losers.

[Anonymous User]

Those losers.

...

[Anonymous User]

Based on this thread, I'm guessing any perceived negative emotions/attitudes have a lot more to do with OP's constant need to flash the term "FEDERAL jury trial" than the result of the FEDERAL jury trial.

But seriously, what losers.

...

[Anonymous User]

OP, congrats. I am also at a V50-V75 firm and the 1983 case I did when I was a second year was one of the best experiences I've had since I started (even though we lost). I got my first three depositions and my only stand-up trial experience out of it. I wonder if we are at the same firm.

[Anonymous User]

What kind of billables do you have at work? I'm also a 2nd year and have an opportunity to take a pro bono case very likely to go to trial in SDNY. However, I am on a pace for 2400/2500 billable hours so I feel like it might be crazy to take a pre-trial pro bono matter.

I'm nowhere near there. In my first year I billed 1950 without pro bono. Can you turn down work? Any way to tone down the billables? A few of my friends, who are in NYC, billed less than 2k. They are at varying vault firms. Seems to me like an opportunity you shouldn't pass up as a litigator. It really isn't easy to get into federal court. And it's a lot different than state court, at least in my limited experience.

I've done state court work as well. It's very different IMO as far as formality and what the judges will let you get away with.

[Anonymous User]

OP, congrats. I am also at a V50-V75 firm and the 1983 case I did when I was a second year was one of the best experiences I've had since I started (even though I lost). I got my first three depositions and my only stand-up trial experience out of it. I wonder if we are at the same firm.

Thank you very much. We just might be.

[Person1111]

What kind of billables do you have at work? I'm also a 2nd year and have an opportunity to take a pro bono case very likely to go to trial in SDNY. However, I am on a pace for 2400/2500 billable hours so I feel like it might be crazy to take a pre-trial pro bono matter.

I'm nowhere near there. In my first year I billed 1950 without pro bono. Can you turn down work? Any way to tone down the billables? A few of my friends, who are in NYC, billed less than 2k. They are at varying vault firms. Seems to me like an opportunity you shouldn't pass up as a litigator. It really isn't easy to get into federal court. And it's a lot different than state court, at least in my limited experience.

I've done state court work as well. It's very different IMO as far as formality and what the judges will let you get away with.

I once did a motion hearing in state court in a pro bono case. I was one of the last people on the calendar that day. The cases before me included someone appealing a traffic ticket, and the judge literally rubber stamped the proposed order we submitted at the end of our hearing. So you are correct that it is different than federal court.

[Easy-E]

Congrats, that has to feel good. I will 100% come here to brag if/when I win a trial., even if it's some low level shit.

We should have a bragging/celebrating/gloating thread in this subforum.

[Anonymous User]

Congrats, that has to feel good. I will 100% come here to brag if/when I win a trial., even if it's some low level shit.

We should have a bragging/celebrating/gloating thread in this subforum.

Thanks a lot. In my head, the purpose of this thread was to share my experience and encourage others to take on these cases because they can seem impossible to win. I guess it divulged mostly into people making fun of me because I put federal in the title.

[Easy-E]

Congrats, that has to feel good. I will 100% come here to brag if/when I win a trial., even if it's some low level shit.

We should have a bragging/celebrating/gloating thread in this subforum.

Thanks a lot. In my head, the purpose of this thread was to share my experience and encourage others to take on these cases because they can seem impossible to win. I guess it divulged mostly into people making fun of me because I put federal in the title.

I get the sense that most people here practice in Federal court regularly, so maybe that's it? I'm mostly in state court so it didn't strike me as unusual to note it. I was also under the impression most biglaw associates never see a court room, but I don't know dick about biglaw really.

My firm takes on this stuff, getting a win on one would be really awesome.

[Anonymous User]

Congrats, that has to feel good. I will 100% come here to brag if/when I win a trial., even if it's some low level shit.

We should have a bragging/celebrating/gloating thread in this subforum.

Thanks a lot. In my head, the purpose of this thread was to share my experience and encourage others to take on these cases because they can seem impossible to win. I guess it divulged mostly into people making fun of me because I put federal in the title.

I get the sense that most people here practice in Federal court regularly, so maybe that's it? I'm mostly in state court so it didn't strike me as unusual to note it. I was also under the impression most biglaw associates never see a court room, but I don't know dick about biglaw really.

My firm takes on this stuff, getting a win on one would be really awesome.

Yeah, most my cases are in federal court at my firm. But there is absolutely 0% chance that a partner would let me try it. I did impress one partner, who is a trial attorney, and she seemed open to the idea of bringing me on for her next trial and having me take a couple of witnesses.

We'll see if I stay here long enough to get that chance. But as far as pro bono goes most my in court opportunities have been state court, and it's completely different.

[mjb447]

Congrats, that has to feel good. I will 100% come here to brag if/when I win a trial., even if it's some low level shit.

We should have a bragging/celebrating/gloating thread in this subforum.

Thanks a lot. In my head, the purpose of this thread was to share my experience and encourage others to take on these cases because they can seem impossible to win. I guess it divulged mostly into people making fun of me because I put federal in the title.

I get the sense that most people here practice in Federal court regularly, so maybe that's it? I'm mostly in state court so it didn't strike me as unusual to note it. I was also under the impression most biglaw associates never see a court room, but I don't know dick about biglaw really.

My firm takes on this stuff, getting a win on one would be really awesome.

I'm enjoying your answers, OP, (I asked a serious question up-thread!) and I hope I didn't discourage you. Winning any kind of trial sounds pretty awesome. The specific post that I made fun of was just a little tone-deaf IMHO and I was ribbing you for it.

[Anonymous User]

Congrats, that has to feel good. I will 100% come here to brag if/when I win a trial., even if it's some low level shit.

We should have a bragging/celebrating/gloating thread in this subforum.

Thanks a lot. In my head, the purpose of this thread was to share my experience and encourage others to take on these cases because they can seem impossible to win. I guess it divulged mostly into people making fun of me because I put federal in the title.

I get the sense that most people here practice in Federal court regularly, so maybe that's it? I'm mostly in state court so it didn't strike me as unusual to note it. I was also under the impression most biglaw associates never see a court room, but I don't know dick about biglaw really.

My firm takes on this stuff, getting a win on one would be really awesome.

I'm enjoying your answers, OP, (I asked a serious question up-thread!) and I hope I didn't discourage you. Winning any kind of trial sounds pretty awesome. The specific post that I made fun of was just a little tone-deaf IMHO and I was ribbing you for it.

No worries. Understood, and no hard feelings. I was giving you an honest answer, however. People were much happier when I won an arbitration in a L/T case. Not so happy when I won a civil rights trial. Maybe my speculation of the reason why was off.

[arklaw13]

If you got into the case late and discovery was already over, how did you make it past qualified immunity? Seems like they give it out like candy these days.

[Anonymous User]

If you got into the case late and discovery was already over, how did you make it past qualified immunity? Seems like they give it out like candy these days.

Can you elaborate don't know what you mean by qualified immunity.

[arklaw13]

If you got into the case late and discovery was already over, how did you make it past qualified immunity? Seems like they give it out like candy these days.

Can you elaborate don't know what you mean by qualified immunity.

As in officers/warden/police chief file for summary judgment arguing that they didn't clearly violate the constitution so officers get qualified immunity, judge grants because there isn't a case with exactly the same facts as yours. Or judge denies it, officers get interlocutory appeal and circuit court reverses district court because SCOTUS lately is like QUALIFIED IMMUNITY FOR EVERYONE ALL THE TIME LULZ.

Don't know why you would need elaboration when that's usually the single biggest hurdle for any kind of excessive force case.

[Anonymous User]

If you got into the case late and discovery was already over, how did you make it past qualified immunity? Seems like they give it out like candy these days.

Can you elaborate don't know what you mean by qualified immunity.

As in officers/warden/police chief file for summary judgment arguing that they didn't clearly violate the constitution so officers get qualified immunity, judge grants because there isn't a case with exactly the same facts as yours. Or judge denies it, officers get interlocutory appeal and circuit court reverses district court because SCOTUS lately is like QUALIFIED IMMUNITY FOR EVERYONE ALL THE TIME LULZ.

Don't know why you would need elaboration when that's usually the single biggest hurdle for any kind of excessive force case.

This wasn't an excessive force case it was deliberate indifference. It's the first one I've done, but I haven't seen this come up in the other cases I've seen at the firm. I came into the case after summary judgment.

[Anonymous User]

If you got into the case late and discovery was already over, how did you make it past qualified immunity? Seems like they give it out like candy these days.

Can you elaborate don't know what you mean by qualified immunity.

As in officers/warden/police chief file for summary judgment arguing that they didn't clearly violate the constitution so officers get qualified immunity, judge grants because there isn't a case with exactly the same facts as yours. Or judge denies it, officers get interlocutory appeal and circuit court reverses district court because SCOTUS lately is like QUALIFIED IMMUNITY FOR EVERYONE ALL THE TIME LULZ.

Don't know why you would need elaboration when that's usually the single biggest hurdle for any kind of excessive force case.

This wasn't an excessive force case it was deliberate indifference. It's the first one I've done, but I haven't seen this come up in the other cases I've seen at the firm. I came into the case after summary judgment.

Ah I missed that on my initial read through. Kudos to the inmate for making it past summary judgment.

[dixiecupdrinking]

If you got into the case late and discovery was already over, how did you make it past qualified immunity? Seems like they give it out like candy these days.

Can you elaborate don't know what you mean by qualified immunity.

As in officers/warden/police chief file for summary judgment arguing that they didn't clearly violate the constitution so officers get qualified immunity, judge grants because there isn't a case with exactly the same facts as yours. Or judge denies it, officers get interlocutory appeal and circuit court reverses district court because SCOTUS lately is like QUALIFIED IMMUNITY FOR EVERYONE ALL THE TIME LULZ.

Don't know why you would need elaboration when that's usually the single biggest hurdle for any kind of excessive force case.

Isn't qualified immunity a non issue if the case didn't involve suing these people in their personal capacity? Could be wholly irrelevant here....

[arklaw13]

If you got into the case late and discovery was already over, how did you make it past qualified immunity? Seems like they give it out like candy these days.

Can you elaborate don't know what you mean by qualified immunity.

As in officers/warden/police chief file for summary judgment arguing that they didn't clearly violate the constitution so officers get qualified immunity, judge grants because there isn't a case with exactly the same facts as yours. Or judge denies it, officers get interlocutory appeal and circuit court reverses district court because SCOTUS lately is like QUALIFIED IMMUNITY FOR EVERYONE ALL THE TIME LULZ.

Don't know why you would need elaboration when that's usually the single biggest hurdle for any kind of excessive force case.

Isn't qualified immunity a non issue if the case didn't involve suing these people in their personal capacity? Could be wholly irrelevant here....

Really depends - OP described it as an 8th amendment claim, noted something about the officer's story not making sense. Sounds more like an excessive force kind of claim against the officers, where qualified immunity would apply. Could be that I read into things wrong, of course.

I had to do quite a bit of research on excessive force cases, and qualified immunity stuck out to me as the biggest hurdle. It didn't matter for the case I was working on because the rule was clear, but the officers will always raise it. And SCOTUS just reaffirmed its love for it this term. So I tend to get cynical about it becuase (i) I think it's a shit rule, at least as currently formulated; and (ii) the trend is that it just keeps getting stricter.

[Anonymous User]

If you got into the case late and discovery was already over, how did you make it past qualified immunity? Seems like they give it out like candy these days.

Can you elaborate don't know what you mean by qualified immunity.

As in officers/warden/police chief file for summary judgment arguing that they didn't clearly violate the constitution so officers get qualified immunity, judge grants because there isn't a case with exactly the same facts as yours. Or judge denies it, officers get interlocutory appeal and circuit court reverses district court because SCOTUS lately is like QUALIFIED IMMUNITY FOR EVERYONE ALL THE TIME LULZ.

Don't know why you would need elaboration when that's usually the single biggest hurdle for any kind of excessive force case.

Isn't qualified immunity a non issue if the case didn't involve suing these people in their personal capacity? Could be wholly irrelevant here....

Really depends - OP described it as an 8th amendment claim, noted something about the officer's story not making sense. Sounds more like an excessive force kind of claim against the officers, where qualified immunity would apply. Could be that I read into things wrong, of course.

I had to do quite a bit of research on excessive force cases, and qualified immunity stuck out to me as the biggest hurdle. It didn't matter for the case I was working on because the rule was clear, but the officers will always raise it. And SCOTUS just reaffirmed its love for it this term. So I tend to get cynical about it becuase (i) I think it's a shit rule, at least as currently formulated; and (ii) the trend is that it just keeps getting stricter.

This wasn't excessive force, it was deliberate indifference. I said this in an earlier post.

[arklaw13]

This wasn't excessive force, it was deliberate indifference. I said this in an earlier post.

Ah, makes sense. Must have missed that too.