Thursday, March 10, 2005
Advance apologies for light posting
I'm announcing "ready" for one jury trial tomorrow; for another one in two weeks; and for yet a third in mid-April. Chances are good that all three will be reached, which would mean back to back trials for ol' Beldar. The middle one might turn out to be something I can blog about eventually — in fact, I'm already having to bite my fingers to keep from using my blog as a mock jury pool because it raises issues which I'm quite sure that both my lawyer and nonlawyer readers would find provocative, and it's a genuine "case of first impression" both legally and factually that it's awfully hard to predict how a real jury will react to. Anyway, my blogging over the next several weeks is likely to be light and even more unhinged than normal.
Other weblog posts, if any, whose authors have linked to Advance apologies for light posting and sent a trackback ping are listed here:
How are you trying so many cases, Beldar? I thought actual trial was a virtual Oz.
(2) The Sophist made the following comment | Mar 10, 2005 10:34:10 AM | Permalink
Good luck, Beldar. :)
You will tell us about these cases of first impression once you're done arguing them, I hope?
Just one is a case of first impression, and I hope things work out that it's a story I can tell when it's done (at least at the trial court level), with the advance permission of my client of course. Another is a rare bird I've never handled anything like it, nor seen one or known another lawyer who's handled one but there are at least a few reported decisions in the general area. The third (picking a jury Monday at 9:00 a.m., I learned today) is absolutely garden variety, but of course important to the litigants in it and hence to me as well.
As to the number of trials in such a short span, it's very unusual. (By contrast, I had exactly one trial during all of calendar year 2004.) But as always, the reason to try a case is because the other side won't settle on a reasonable basis. That may be because one side or the other is unreasonable, or it may be because one side is deluding itself and won't recognize what is a reasonable basis. But that's why we have courts and juries, God bless 'em.
(4) Bucky Katt made the following comment | Mar 11, 2005 2:29:25 PM | Permalink
Count your blessings at least you're *not*
Mr. Thomas Mesereau, having to deal with Michael Jackson as your client. ;-)
(5) The Old Coot made the following comment | Mar 11, 2005 2:46:02 PM | Permalink
I love it when you post "more unhinged".
The comments to this entry are closed.