Monday hit me like a corked bat, straight to my head (not corked).
In order to understand my woes, it is necessary to understand my schedule.
Monday:
- Property Class
- Meeting with Student Bar Association Rep to Budget for a Big Event We Are Planning
- Case with Client 1
- Meeting with Professor 1
- Meeting with Professor 2
- Work to be done: Research and Research Report; Prep for Case 2
Tuesday:
- Case with Client 2
- Turn in Research Report before 12:00PM
- Civil Procedure
- Meeting with Client 3
- Meeting with Dean
- Work to be done: Reading for Contracts; Reading for Property
Wednesday:
- Contracts
- Fellowship Meeting
- Law for Dummies Class
- Property
- Work to be done:
- Reading for Contracts; Reading for Civil Procedure; Prep for Interview
Thursday:
- Interview with Los Angeles Public Defender in Manhattan @ NYU
- Missing: Contracts and Law School for Idiots
- Civil Procedure
- Work to be done: Prep for Appellate Advocacy; Prep for Career Fair
Friday:
- NYU Career Fair with Michelle
- Pass out on couch.
It is important to note that I only go one day without wearing a suit this week; this is a tie of my personal record.
Keeping me busy is a good thing. Most anybody who knows me will attest that I do the best under pressure with what would otherwise be too much for a normal person to handle. In fact, whether subconscious or with active knowledge, I seem to hunt down the most packed schedule possible.
Today was an interesting day. I got a quick start with Property class. The assigned reading contained nearly 50 definitions, just enough to make me go crazy (brought to me by the makers of the "G-d Hates Me Lake"). Property law is quite interesting and very useful, but is not my favorite. I could not see myself settling disputes between owners of land, estates or any sort of Chattel (look it up).
I got through the two-hours of preaching - revisit the description of my professor - and was ready to get my hearing on. The excitement began when three gorgeous - and very religiously desirable - ladies who site behind me ask me why I was looking so "snazzy". This is the moment that a guy like me cherishes. I never like to brag or make myself sound good, unless somebody opens the door and invitingly asks me. When that door is open, watch out. Perhaps this is why I like interviews.
I turned to the object of what was to be my verbal affection and proceeded to make insinuated and very non-literal love to myself. I told them that I had a hearing today.
Cue the disgusted faces.
What did I do? Hearing? And then it hit me that when a student says they have a hearing, it is usually a bad thing.
I had to counter the disgust. I am trying a case today in front of a judge for unemployment law. I told them about how it is a real case, in front of real judge, in my best Judge Judy intro impression. I included that I get to do all the stuff that we don't get to do in law school, and that basically, it is what keeps me coming back.
After I finished building myself up, nothing could stop me.
Cue the Judge.
I had spoken to one of the third-year law students about the Judges at the site that I go to most often. Of course, my disdain for the incompetent Judge, and he told me about his least favorite. Two out of three Judges in this one location were the subject of the conversation. I finally got my chance to meet Bad Judge number two.
There is a spectrum of Judges and two scales. This is a lot to contend with. The first scale, or what we shall call the "Ego Scale" goes from hating the job to loving ones-self. The second is one I know as the "Rule Scale". This one is a bit more complicated. It starts at a total disregard for any rules of evidence or procedure to a love-affair with the application of the rules. Judge One, or the incompetent Judge, hates her life and hates the rules. Judge Two loves the rules almost as much as he loves himself and his title.
Judge One despises me, so of course, I am only going to take cases in front of Judge Two. And, today I had Case 1 in front of him.
We will play a game about the worth of my partner. Finish this sentence: "What is he good for? Absolutely _____ "
If you said, "nothing," you win a prize suitable for this occasion - nothing.
He saw me take out my notes and questions. He said, "You printed it out?" I told him, "uh, yeah!"
I asked him if he did, and upon his answer of no, I looked puzzled and asked him if he memorized his, then? He said, "Dude, I am going to do it from my computer." I relayed to him that he was not going to be able to use it, he argued with me, and ended up not listening.
We walked into the hearing and he placed his computer on the desk. The inquisitive Judge looked at him and asked what he was doing. After he tried to explain to the Judge that he had notes on his computer, the Judge lambasted him and told him to shut it.
My partner also has Bronchitis, and put a cough drop into his mouth without asking the Judge. You could hear the hard cough drop swishing around his mouth, hitting his teeth. The clicking and loud swallowing was quite a scene-maker.
I had to do something. I then turned to the Judge and explained for my partner that my partner is a little under the weather and that it was not candy.
He was also wearing very nice, but very-not-suit-pants, pants.
You now understand where I am coming from when I say worthless and semi-embarrassing.
As I said, my client is the most believable man ever, but we did not even get to him today. I was tending to the direct examination of our client, so my partner had his chance to show me his worth when performing the cross examination of the employer. My partner struggled along in his cross of the lone employer present. He tried three different times to ask three different questions, and all three times he was shut down by the Judge for one reason or another. His grand total of questions answered by the employer was zero.
I was blown away. He did it again!
The Judge decided to get two witnesses on the phone for questioning during the hearing. After asking his questions, the Judge turned to us and asked us if we had any questions for the witnesses (after they were asked one at a time). After the first witness was questioned, when the Judge turned to my partner to ask him if we had anything, the famous blank stare was returned. Super Me to the rescue. On the spot I cross-examined the witnesses and dealt with an adversarial Judge. He made me fight for my questions.
At one point, the employer pulled out a stack of time cards and wanted to enter them into evidence. I had suspected this would occur, so I prepped my partner on how to object, and what to do. Again, he froze when asked if we had any objections to the time cards being entered. I answered with an objection as to the time card's authenticity. The Judge recessed for five minutes so that we could "look the cards over". The truth is, I did not need the time. I knew exactly what was on the cards and their condition.
When we returned, the Judge asked me if I had any further objections. I stated that the Claimant renews his objection as to the authenticity of the time cards, and that I wished to bring to the Judge's attention the fact that there are three identifiably different handwriting styles within the stack of the time-cards (of handwriting on the cards, where my client's name was printed) and that not one of those three handwriting's belonged to that of my client. I further pointed out that on not one card was there any signature on the line that said "signature". As such, there was no way to authenticate the cards, and so on and so forth.
The Judge said, "Do you have any evidence that shows that these are not his time cards?" Did he ever go to law school? He said he practiced, but there is no way to know when the man made a statement like that?
I wanted to reach across the table and handily place my New York Labor Law statutes in his face and point out the definition of "burden of proof" and then show him the rules of evidence.
Anyhow, with my objection clearly noted on the record (an appealable issue), he entered it into evidence.
It became clear that the only rules that applied were those that weakened my client's case.
He also kept referring to us as law students on the record, which irked me to no end. I wanted to call him by his normal title of Mr. instead of Judge, but I don't think that would have made him happy.
The Judge decided that he wanted to hear the Employer's other witnesses, so he decided to adjourn the case to a later date.
I really wanted to get this out of the way.
Of course, the Employer and his witnesses (via telephone) lied through their pants. They contradicted themselves and gave highly calculated answers. For example, one owner said that my client's supervisor did not make an announcement, but the supervisor said that he did make an announcement to the workers, including my client, but then he said that he never spoke to my client.
My head was spinning, and it has not stopped.
My two meetings with my professors went exactly how I foresaw them going. The production was the same that administrators and professors nationwide are notorious for: nothing. Their infallibility is not to be challenged.
When I got home, all I wanted to do was sleep. Alas, that was not even possible. I had to finish my research report that is due tomorrow, and read for civil procedure.
The rest of my night (as if there was a "rest") was filled with laying in bed, contemplating sleep and preparing for tomorrows case, with the same Judge. I planned on going to bed before 10:00PM, because I really was tired, but my lifeless body had work to do.
Hopefully my partner is more prepared for the case tomorrow. The Great Puppet-Master in the Sky knows he will not be. I do not know why I even try.
This is my life.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment