44

This wasn’t an actual court case. The show seeks people in civil disputes and pays them to have their case arbitrated by Judy instead of settled in court. (The legal term for this is Alternative Dispute Resolution, I believe.) They sign contracts agreeing to be bound by whatever decision Judy makes. The show then sets up this mock trial, and she is free ...


36

No, the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct permits County Judges to practice law except "in the court on which he or she serves or in any court subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the county court, or acting as a lawyer in a proceeding in which he or she has served as a judge or in any proceeding related thereto." This is because County Judges in Texas are ...


22

If this case was decided before a real judge, rather than Judge Judy, the impertinent party could be held in direct contempt of court (imposed summarily and punishable by penalties similar to a misdemeanor crime), after being given a moment to make a mitigating statement, but should not have have had the case summarily decided by the judge merely on that ...


8

You identify basically two issues. Non-Responsiveness and Failing To Meet Deadlines One is that he's taking longer than planned to get your work done, and might have abandoned you. The sad but true reality is that lawyers frequently do get busy and sometimes fail to meet the deadlines that they have set for themselves. In this respect, the legal industry is ...


7

Given a large database of email addresses that you can't prove have given consent to receive email, the only legal thing to do with it, is to (securely) delete it. (I am going to switch your question about a larger company to a bank: in the UK, big pharma is forbidden from advertising to individuals.) In principle the rules are the same for a huge bank and ...


5

This is a fairly general answer, as much of the nature of what could happen depends on what the first lawyer did or didn't do, state of Missouri laws, and rules of the Missouri State Bar. The friend could find another lawyer so they both can determine exactly what happened with the forgotten filing by the first lawyer. Your friend will need to find a lawyer ...


5

In the U.S., pretty much the only circumstance in which a proceeding like the one you contemplate could occur without the criminal defendant present physically in the courtroom would be one where the criminal defendant was physically present when the trial started (say on the morning of day 1) and then failed to return after a break in the proceedings ...


4

In-house counsel is presumed to be intimately familiar, in a way that retained counsel is not, with both the day-to-day operations of the business and its longer-term strategic planning. So imagine that you're in an R&D intensive industry, and you've been sued by a competitor. The competition's in-house counsel has served you a request to produce ...


4

Statistics deceive courts all the time Most judges and jurors know no statistics. Most doctors and social scientists use statistics without really understanding them. Therefore, innocently or otherwise, perfectly valid statistics are introduced into courts in ways and manners that result in mistakes even before we consider the possibility of deliberate ...


4

Does this prove that the unlicensed attorney is practicing law outside their jurisdiction and is providing legal advice by representing the "client" in legal negotiations? No. Your quote of the email does not prove that the receiver engaged in unlicensed practice of law. Nor does it prove that the receiver/non-attorney is representing, or advising,...


3

Is this an ethical decision for a judge to make? It depends. We don't have enough context from the clip to tell. It's possible the defendant had a weak case on the facts, the law was against him, and all this happened toward the end of a trial he was about to lose anyway. In that case, Judge Judy's verdict would tend more ethical. If all this occurred at ...


3

The witness would not be regarded as dishonest - they would be viewed as having been tricked. The defendant and defence team would be viewed as dishonest, and could be considered to have fabricated evidence. The defendant could be regarded as not having attended their trial, and the defence lawyers (since you're spelling "defence" the same way as I do I'll ...


3

Cohen has ethical problems, but this is probably pretty far down the list. If he were lying about the law, though, that could be treated as a violation of Rule 4.1 of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct: In the course of representing a client, a lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of fact or law to a third person. It could also be ...


3

I think the quote is just awkwardly worded. It makes more sense when rearranged like this: "Forgetting for the time our job as lawyers, I wonder whether the best mood or habit is not that we should think of human beings as a whole, we should look at life sub specie aeternitatis, and yet believe that all specific choices may be momentous." So he's just saying ...


3

There are basically two kinds of conduct that you identify. One is backing away from what you believe were oral promises made by the employer and lawyer regarding payment. Whatever the status of the promises made by the employer, the oral statements made by the lawyer would probably be viewed by a court or ethics board as settlement offers or proposals ...


3

On the contrary, it is unethical for a prosecutor to bring a case where there is no reasonable prospect of conviction. The prosecutor is an officer of the court and as a representative of the state, their primary concern is the guilty are convicted and the not guilty are not.


3

What stops a university form doing anything it wants is the contract you entered with the university when you enrolled. (I'm writing from the perspective of a student, not faculty). You and they are bound by the contract, and part of that contract will be a clear outline of academic processes such as ethics, grading, class requirements and test taking, as ...


3

You are confusing 'barrister' (which is in the quote) with 'lawyer'(which is in your question). It is a solicitor's responsibility to act as legal representative to the client, and that is not altered just because he disagrees with his client (though of course he must not assist the client to commit perjury, for example). The barrister's job is to conduct ...


3

No From https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice "justice" is the systematized administration of punishment and reward. Further to this, one can say that justice excludes randomness. Justice is whatever society decides is the correct way to reward or punish its members for their actions. For example, in a society without slavery, justice includes the ...


3

RCW Chapter 26.44 covers abuse of children, and RCW 26.44.030 1(a) states the duty to report: the reporter "has reasonable cause to believe that a child has suffered abuse or neglect" – the law doesn't say "a child is currently suffering abuse", it say "has suffered". But then: subsection (2) says: The reporting requirement of subsection (1) of this ...


2

No Federal prosecutors are representatives of the Attorney General of the United States and act on his/her behalf: not on their own account. From the DoJ website: This Act established the Attorney General as head of the Department of Justice and gave the Attorney General direction and control of U.S. Attorneys and all other counsel employed on behalf of ...


2

In the sense used in the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure this means that prosecutors should not try to convict a defendant of a crime when the prosecutor believes that the defendant is innocent, and should not seek a sentence which is disproportionate to the crime committed, even if the prosecutor believes that he or she is able to do so. This has to be ...


2

This varies by jurisdiction. (Needless to say, this approach, even where permitted, is a bad choice for clients with thin pocketbooks.) The American Rule As a general rule, this is permitted in all U.S. jurisdictions without informing the attorneys about each other, and in general, there is no obligation of one of the attorneys who knows about the other to ...


2

is there some kind of ethical violation here? Would that evidence, in support of my case, be a serious issue for the lawyer should we go to court? It is deplorable (and therefore unethical) for the lawyer to be vexatious. But unfortunately that is not considered serious enough to subject him to sanctions. Despite all the judicial babbling about "...


2

Would a law firm in this situation have a higher or lower "duty of care" in this situation than another professional firm? No. But, the law firm would have to take care that the client wasn't, in practice, compromising the firm's professional independence or causing the law firm to engage in illegal activity. In practice, law firms are usually ...


2

It’s against the law For example, form the New South Wales Legal Profession Uniform Conduct (Barristers) Rules 2015 24 A barrister must not deceive or knowingly or recklessly mislead the court. Barristers who break the law become ex-barristers.


2

I recall this tactic being used in a Perry Mason novel. But even with the flexibility with the law those books had, Mason had the defendant in court although not at the usual place, and had secured the permission of the Judge in advance for this. I think that deceiving the Court, even briefly and for arguably legitimate reasons, will not go well. Deceiving ...


2

It's happened before in real life. Here is a 1994 article describing an Illinois criminal trial where defense counsel pulled the old switcheroo and sat a different person with him at the defense table instead of the defendant. The defendant, instead, sat somewhere else in the courtroom. After a witness misidentified the perp as the person at the defense ...


2

... reimburses the person ... Reimburse means: 2: to make restoration or payment of an equivalent to reimburse him for his traveling expenses The amount paid must be equivalent in value to the gift received, otherwise it isn't reimbursement.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible