So, what is your favorite scummy lawyer argument? Forum

[I.P. Daly]

Although not technically a legal argument, my favorite legal motion has to be where a pro se litigant filed a "Motion to Kiss My Ass." See Washington v. Alaimo, 934 F.Supp. 1395 (S.D. Ga. 1996).

The plaintiff moved for “all Americans at large and one corrupt Judge Smith [to] kiss my got [sic] damn ass sorry mother fucker you.”

Unfortunately, Plaintiff Washington's motion was dismissed.

[Redzo]

Although not technically a legal argument, my favorite legal motion has to be where a pro se litigant filed a "Motion to Kiss My Ass." See Washington v. Alaimo, 934 F.Supp. 1395 (S.D. Ga. 1996).

The plaintiff moved for “all Americans at large and one corrupt Judge Smith [to] kiss my got [sic] damn ass sorry mother fucker you.”

Unfortunately, Plaintiff Washington's motion was dismissed.

Awesome. Was he held in contempt or did the judge just dismiss it?

[I.P. Daly]

The court dismissed the motion and enjoined Plaintiff Washington from filing a lawsuit in any federal court unless he signed an affidavit that he had read Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 and agreed to abide by it.

[Redzo]

The court dismissed the motion and enjoined Plaintiff Washington from filing a lawsuit in any federal court unless he signed an affidavit that he had read Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 and agreed to abide by it.

Nice!

[kahechsof]

Although not technically a legal argument, my favorite legal motion has to be where a pro se litigant filed a "Motion to Kiss My Ass." See Washington v. Alaimo, 934 F.Supp. 1395 (S.D. Ga. 1996).

The plaintiff moved for “all Americans at large and one corrupt Judge Smith [to] kiss my got [sic] damn ass sorry mother fucker you.”

Unfortunately, Plaintiff Washington's motion was dismissed.

I'm guessing the plaintiff was presently incarcerated when he was filing this motion?

[Flanker1067]

Every time a defendant-attorney is claiming the defense of privilege/confidentiality....

This rule only exists to allow lawyers to do shitty things, with some theoretical purposes as well.

[Redzo]

Every time a defendant-attorney is claiming the defense of privilege/confidentiality....

This rule only exists to allow lawyers to do shitty things, with some theoretical purposes as well.

Wait, are you referring to attorney-client privilege in general, here?

You don't see how it is essential to a functioning adversarial system? I am dismayed to see this on a forum for future lawyers, unless I am misinterpreting you.

[Flanker1067]

Every time a defendant-attorney is claiming the defense of privilege/confidentiality....

This rule only exists to allow lawyers to do shitty things, with some theoretical purposes as well.

Wait, are you referring to attorney-client privilege in general, here?

You don't see how it is essential to a functioning adversarial system? I am dismayed to see this on a forum for future lawyers, unless I am misinterpreting you.

I realize that wasn't clear. Should be an attorney-defendant.

[mrloblaw]

This thread falls well below expectations.

[CanuckObserver]

Every time a defendant-attorney is claiming the defense of privilege/confidentiality....

This rule only exists to allow lawyers to do shitty things, with some theoretical purposes as well.

Wait, are you referring to attorney-client privilege in general, here?

You don't see how it is essential to a functioning adversarial system? I am dismayed to see this on a forum for future lawyers, unless I am misinterpreting you.

I realize that wasn't clear. Should be an attorney-defendant.

Right, because only defendants rely on attorney-client privilege. Oh, and by the way, attorney-client privilege is not for the lawyer to waive however they feel about it morally, but for the client to waive EXCEPT if one of the limited exceptions apply. So all this jumping on lawyers is mute if those exceptions do not apply and the client has not waived it.

Nor is the exercise of privilege exclusive to criminal matters.

There are a lot of people here who should rethink the practice of law and what they think their role as a lawyer is. Though I will for now give the benefit of the doubt and just assume you all have little idea yet of how privilege (in its various forms) is an important part of the legal system.

[Icculus]

Although not technically a legal argument, my favorite legal motion has to be where a pro se litigant filed a "Motion to Kiss My Ass." See Washington v. Alaimo, 934 F.Supp. 1395 (S.D. Ga. 1996).

The plaintiff moved for “all Americans at large and one corrupt Judge Smith [to] kiss my got [sic] damn ass sorry mother fucker you.”

Unfortunately, Plaintiff Washington's motion was dismissed.

When I know I'm going to retire, this shall be my final motion.

[Stanford4Me]

Right, because only defendants rely on attorney-client privilege. Oh, and by the way, attorney-client privilege is not for the lawyer to waive however they feel about it morally, but for the client to waive EXCEPT if one of the limited exceptions apply. So all this jumping on lawyers is mute if those exceptions do not apply and the client has not waived it.

Nor is the exercise of privilege exclusive to criminal matters.

There are a lot of people here who should rethink the practice of law and what they think their role as a lawyer is. Though I will for now give the benefit of the doubt and just assume you all have little idea yet of how privilege (in its various forms) is an important part of the legal system.

Such amazing insight, d00d. None of this has been brought up.

[Icculus]

Every time a defendant-attorney is claiming the defense of privilege/confidentiality....

This rule only exists to allow lawyers to do shitty things, with some theoretical purposes as well.

Wait, are you referring to attorney-client privilege in general, here?

You don't see how it is essential to a functioning adversarial system? I am dismayed to see this on a forum for future lawyers, unless I am misinterpreting you.

I realize that wasn't clear. Should be an attorney-defendant.

I think he's referring to when an attorney is the defendant and is representing himself.

[23402385985]

Although not technically a legal argument, my favorite legal motion has to be where a pro se litigant filed a "Motion to Kiss My Ass." See Washington v. Alaimo, 934 F.Supp. 1395 (S.D. Ga. 1996).

The plaintiff moved for “all Americans at large and one corrupt Judge Smith [to] kiss my got [sic] damn ass sorry mother fucker you.”

Unfortunately, Plaintiff Washington's motion was dismissed.

Now that's awesome.

[goodolgil]

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-712.ZS.html

The DEA orchestrating an abduction of a Mexican citizen in Mexico does not violate the U.S.-Mexico extradition treaty because the treaty does not explicitly ban abductions. The rest of international law be damned.

[TheFriendlyBarber]

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-712.ZS.html

The DEA orchestrating an abduction of a Mexican citizen in Mexico does not violate the U.S.-Mexico extradition treaty because the treaty does not explicitly ban abductions. The rest of international law be damned.

Clear case of a desired result shaping substantive law.

[23402385985]

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-712.ZS.html

The DEA orchestrating an abduction of a Mexican citizen in Mexico does not violate the U.S.-Mexico extradition treaty because the treaty does not explicitly ban abductions. The rest of international law be damned.

Hahahaha, awesome. This is the stuff that I hope to see in this thread.

[seatown12]

State v. Hechtle, 2004 UT App 96
Cops claim that marijuana use turns your tongue green in order to arrest people for DUI-drugs

[TheFutureLawyer]

State v. Hechtle, 2004 UT App 96
Cops claim that marijuana use turns your tongue green in order to arrest people for DUI-drugs

"Without the sunglasses interfering, the trooper was able to see that Hechtle's eyes were "very red, very glassy." They also "had a droop to them," and the pupils were dilated. Consequently, the trooper "knew that [Hechtle] was probably using marijuana" and asked Hechtle to stick out his tongue. Hechtle complied. The trooper noted that Hechtle's tongue was "very green" with "blisters all over the back of it." This information "confirmed" to the trooper that Hechtle had been smoking marijuana."

Seriously though, Hechtle must have thought he was tripping balls when the cop said he knew he had been smoking pot because his tongue was green. Honestly, that's something out of Super Troopers.

[Flanker1067]

Every time a defendant-attorney is claiming the defense of privilege/confidentiality....

This rule only exists to allow lawyers to do shitty things, with some theoretical purposes as well.

Wait, are you referring to attorney-client privilege in general, here?

You don't see how it is essential to a functioning adversarial system? I am dismayed to see this on a forum for future lawyers, unless I am misinterpreting you.

I realize that wasn't clear. Should be an attorney-defendant.

I think he's referring to when an attorney is the defendant and is representing himself.

He doesn't have to be representing himself, but yea. Canuck isn't too quick. An attorney-defendant claiming privilege is probably defending an obstruction of justice charge or something related. The classic case is where the attorney learned from his client where a dismembered body was of a girl the client had killed. The attorney went to take pictures, moved the body around in the process and then lied (or concealed) when asked face to face by the girl's father if the attorney knew anything about the girls dissapearance. I think the charge was something about tampering with a dead body, but the attorney got off.

[TheFutureLawyer]

He doesn't have to be representing himself, but yea. Canuck isn't too quick. An attorney-defendant claiming privilege is probably defending an obstruction of justice charge or something related. The classic case is where the attorney learned from his client where a dismembered body was of a girl the client had killed. The attorney went to take pictures, moved the body around in the process and then lied (or concealed) when asked face to face by the girl's father if the attorney knew anything about the girls dissapearance. I think the charge was something about tampering with a dead body, but the attorney got off.

I remember that case. Sam Waterson really threw the book at Fred Savage.