Powered by TypePad

« Back In Japan | Main | Fretting About Libya »

March 23, 2011


Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet

Rob and Harry:

Because lawyers and judges are what they are, this litigation is more complicated than it may seem. The appellate court wanted the parties to brief two issues:

The first set of briefs covered the issue of whether the trial court had any power at all to consider if there were any violations of the CRA. The state argued it did not have such power and the DA argued that it did. I described their positions on this issue in my earlier comment. IMO, the DA's position on this issue is not frivolous.

The second set of briefs assumes the court had such power and covers the issue of whether the lower court erred in tentatively finding the CRA was violated.

The state argues that it was not because under the express terms of the Act legislative notice rules take precedence over the notice rules provided in the CRA. The DA argues that it was (weakly in my opinion) because somehow the Act must be informed by the policies of the CRA notice provisions, and that the legislature either did not dot its i's and cross its t's in complying with its own rules or violated its own rules. IMO the DA's position on this issue is strained and borders on frivolous.

If the case were before a reasonably objective court, I think the state should win. It appears the panel Dane County Court of Appeals hearing the case leans democrat 2 to 1. Right now, however, the WI Supreme Court is 4-3 Republican. The election on April 5 between Prosser and Kloppenberg, therefore, may be critical in determining how the case comes out.

Regarding the observations that courts are less objective now than in the past, I am not sure I agree. Ever since I became a practicing litigator in 1965, I was always very attentive to the possible political or other predilections of the courts before whom I was appearing so I could pitch my arguments to attract their support. IMO, the court system has operated like this since the beginning of the Republic.

Rob Crawford

What on earth is the attractions to totalitarianism and anti-westernism?

Democrats themselves are totalitarians and anti-western.

Old Lurker

Test Post

It occurred to be that beging with a post containing a Foxnews LUN the day before yesterday, none of my posts have appeared.

Now having deleted that LUN, let's see if this appears.

Old Lurker

And there it is

Old Lurker

But when I posted "there it is" with the same fox LUN, it did not appear until I blanked out the fox LUN.


Danube of Thought

I second JimR's opinion on the courts. It's particularly apt where state and local courts are concerned; every litigator knows what it's like to get home-towned out of a slam-dunk case. Bias in state courts was the basis for the creation of "diversity" jurisdiction in the federal courts, which provides by federal statute that if I am an out-of-state plaintiff filing suit against a resident, I can sue in the federal court in the defendant's home state. (The idea was, and is, that federal judges will be a bit less swayed by local prejudice. No comment.)

Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)

IMO, the court system has operated like this since the beginning of the Republic.


I too always checked on the background of Judges I was before, but I never handled any cases that were blatantly political.

It does seem to me that Wisconsin has taken things to a new level.

Old Lurker


I was reacting to Jane and Rob's observation about the rule of law by observing that a central theme of Atlas Shrugged was how the governments would pass massive complicated laws designed to ensure normal people would always be in violation of some aspect, and then promptly offer waivers and exemptions to those favored by government. I wondered how Ayn Rand had her advance copy of ObamaCare back in 1950?

I see that now Starbucks and more big supporters of ObamaCare have now requested their waivers.

And I see on the ESJ editorial page this morning where a judge has ruled that some geezer who wanted to provide his own medical care outside of the Medicare system would have to give up his SS checks if he wanted to reject Medicare.


Old Lurker


Captain Hate

What on earth is the attraction to Islam?

It's totalitarian and anti-Western.

Because they screwed up by supporting the commies and, when they went tits up, had to double down on their dumbfuckery with the rock worshippers.

Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)


A conservative group has sued HHS over their failure to provide FOIA info to reveal the reasons for the Obama issued waivers.

It seems pretty clear these waivers are not based on standards that would pass equal protection muster.

Provided the administration can slow this down until after the election they will be fine. Otherwise I think there is a chance this will be big trouble.


Well, I think it is safe to say that turning over command of the Libya non-war will be this years version of the promise to close GITMO. Once again Obama has rushed into something with bold promises before even beginning to do the hard work of planning out how to make it happen. The man is simply incapable of learning at this point.


What on earth is the attraction to Islam?

I've heard it has something to do with virgins.

Danube of Thought

In CA they have a rule under which either side can reject, without explaining why, the judge who is initially assigned to a new case. Good rule.

Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet

If they had that rule in Georgia DOT, there are some judges whose calendars would be nearly empty.

Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)

Isn't California like Massachusetts DOT? The only issue is how liberal they are?



Can you imagine what Israel faces with Iran, Egypt, Syria, Turkey and Russia coming after them? The prophet Ezekiel clearly predicted this battle thousands of years ago and you are watching the players get into position with lightning speed.

Jesus said: "When you see these signs, lift up your head and rejoice. Your redemption draweth nigh." Simply stated: The King is coming! Get ready! Planet earth is about to become the playground for the Anti-Christ and his New World Order. The church will be raptured before the Anti-Christ appears; and I believe he could be introduced in Europe at any time. Pray up! Pack up! We're going up...and very soon.

Oh My G*d!

Is it too late for me to get on board before the rapture? Or will I be left behind with...

Maybe I can hedge my bets by doing a crash study of The Post Rapture Survival Guide.


I hate to go totally mundane in these last few pre-rapture days, but David Goldman aka Spengler (whom I expect to meet in those post rapture days, here on Planet Earth) has some pithy observations this morning:

The American and allied bombing campaign of Libya is a pitiable display of fecklessness. The air strikes cannot eliminate the Qaddafi regime and only serve to create a deadlock that prolongs the civil war. Meanwhile, in Egypt, striking policemen demanding higher pay burn the Interior Ministry; in Yemen, a dubious American ally faces mass defection from his own officer corps; and in Israel, Iranian proxies and hard-core terrorists are emboldened to plant bombs at Jerusalem bus stations and fire mortal shells into southern Israel from Gaza. Egypt is slipping out of control; as the Israel-based strategic analyst reports, Mohamed AlBaradei, the poster-boy for Egypt’s supposed democratic revolution, fled from a polling place during Egypt’s constitutional referendum last week when Muslim Brotherhood thugs mobbed him.

The problems of the Arab world simply are insurmountable; Egypt cannot get there from here with a 40% illiteracy rate, a mass of unemployed and unemployable graduates from government diploma mills, and a massive dependency on imported food. The United States cannot fix the problems of a broken culture; it can reward friends and punish enemies, and contain strategic threats before they hurt us. But the Obama administration is committed to a Quixotesque campaign for Muslim democracy, a romantic, sentimental exercise guaranteed to sink our influence in the world.


--What on earth is the attraction to Islam?--

The western left is attracted to Islam in the same sense that Hitler was attracted to Stalin; which is to say not at all.
They hate each other, but make common cause because there is a common enemy they hate even more; western civilization.
They both believe, with equally religious fervor that once the Great Satan of western liberty is defeated they will then turn and vanquish their current ally and if not at least each will coexist in an uneasy detente within their respective spheres of influence. That last fantasy is more often indulged by the comfortable western lefty than the worldwide caliphate-minded muslim.

Danube of Thought


Orders for long-lasting goods unexpectedly fell in February, reflecting declines in demand for capital goods and military aircraft.

Bookings for goods meant to last at least three years dropped 0.9 percent after a 3.6 percent gain the prior month that was higher than initially reported, the Commerce Department said today in Washington. Orders excluding transportation equipment fell for a second month and demand for business equipment declined.

Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet


My first years trying cases were in the labor and employment area.

Many judges had very strong views either pro labor or pro management back then; In this area, they were at least as set in their ways as judges are today.


You haven't lived until you try a case in one of Georgia's outlying counties. There is generally one trial judge for a three or four county circuit. Unless you have local counsel from the circuit, your goose is cooked and even then it is hard to win anything.

Typical final argument goes like this: "Members of the Jury, I'm not going to let those damn Atlanta lawyers come out here in Jerkwater Podunk and try to tell us what to do and neither are you."


you are watching the players get into position

I totally agree with Hagee on this.


Janet, you've been so pleasant lately I don't have the heart to rag you on this. Have a nice trip.


--In CA they have a rule under which either side can reject, without explaining why, the judge who is initially assigned to a new case. Good rule.--

Don't remind me, DoT.
The local superior court judge is a friend/acquaintance and occasionally goes to our church.
In our epic battle with my nitwit brother she was assigned the case and he had already used his peremptory challenge on another judge so tried to have her disqualified on the basis of her knowing us. He failed and we eventually won the case but she is such a cut-the-baby-in-half, make-sure-you-look-fair, indulge-any-kind-of-misbehavior wimp that he managed to drag what should have been a two year case with a referee into a five year marathon in which all of our property was tied up in court through the biggest land rush in history. Cost us a million or two, all told, which we could ill afford to lose.
I can separate the professional from the personal so she's still a friend but I wish we'd used our peremptory challenge too.

Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)

I always found knowing the clerk - and him liking you was nearly as valuable as a friendly judge.


I did, to, Jane. In fact, the more the court personnel like you the better it is for your clients.

hit and run

every litigator knows what it's like to get home-towned out of a slam-dunk case.

Including the highly decorated small claims litigator,and my dear friend,sylvia.


A conservative group has sued HHS over their failure to provide FOIA info to reveal the reasons for the Obama issued waivers.

I think that is Rove's group, Jane. Crossroads GPS.



Japan 4Q10 before the earthquake posted -1.3% GPD and the Chinese were running a modest trade deficit. Not to dissimiliar to the beginnings of the "great recession".

Danube of Thought

I always loved it when my opponent would introduce himself to the jury and then say, "and over there is my opponent, Mr. Danube from L.A."

I once represented Nissan in an employment discrimination case brought by a Hispanic guy in El Paso in the federal court there. I walked into the judge's chambers for a pre-trial meeting to find my opponent already there, and he and the judge were laughing so hard about something they almost had tears running down there faces.

A few minutes into the meeting the judge says, "Waaal, Mistuh Danube, I assume youah not gonna want yoah opponent heah to say sumpin' lahk, 'ladies and gennuhmen, ah doan want yew to confuse the defendant heah with the fellers that done bombed Puhl Hahba.'"

We settled.



You do know (and I'm sure you do) that Spengler is a jew who happens to at times study catholicism.


The Fourth Horseman of the Apocalypse rides in Egypt.

(It's a reflection on the window IMO)

Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet

DOT: It was always great to work with a sophisticated client who could understand the practicalities of the situation.

Some entrepreneurs didn't always understand that a bad settlement is much better than a runaway verdict. They think that your settlement suggestion is a sign of lack of zeal for their team. I found as I gained more trial experience, I knew much better when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em and how to get my point across to my client.

The case that solidified my philosophy happened to me over 20 years ago. I represented a very successful, wealthy and well connected east coast developer who built a bunch of high rise condos on the Delaware shore. All of the buildings developed leaky or deteriorating roofs, windows and siding shortly after they were occupied. The owners sued my client and his companies in Wilmington, Delaware State Court (where he had no influence whatever).

While investigating the case, I began talking with the other side to find out what they really wanted. The answer was $2.0 mm for all seven buildings. When I presented the offer to my client he didn't allow a counteroffer, but fired me because I was "disloyal" to even suggest settlement. He then hired one of my younger partners who he felt would be more aggressive.

Result: After paying our firm over $3 million in fees and expenses, on the eve of trial he settled for $15 million for all the buildings. In a case he could have wrapped up for $1.5 million, he was out of pocket $18 million. There was no insurance. Neither he nor my partner were available for comment.

Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)

Well I just reiterated much of this conversation on the air So DOT and JIm are now famous in MA - altho no one knows your names.

Altho I didn't do much work in district court I knew most of the Judges and personnel. I also know who they believed were honest lawyers and who they thought were liars. It was always a joy to go up against someone considered a liar, cause it was a virtual slam dunk -


You do know (and I'm sure you do) that Spengler is a jew who happens to at times study catholicism.

This sentence is punctuated as a declarative sentence, although syntactically it appears to be some sort of interrogative sentence--if I've captured the inflection of it. I'm not sure how to take that but--since you've refrained from calling me the usual names--it seems you really want some sort of response, so I'll try to accommodate you by answering what I see to be the substance of what you're saying.

Yes, I'm aware that David Goldman aka Spengler is a Jew of some sort (Conservative?) and I'm also aware that he claims--contrary to all evidence--that Zionism is hard wired into the theology of Christianity, and especially Catholicism. When you say that he "studies" Catholicism I think what you should mean is that he studies it to the extent necessary to pick up some Catholic "buzz words" in the hope of making a plausible sounding (to him) case for his pet thesis. OTOH, I think there's much to recommend another of his pet theses, namely that Protestantism is basically what he calls a "Judaizing heresy" of Catholicism.

Mark Folkestad

Wisconsin appeals court just passed the new union law case on to the state supreme court. No details yet on how fast it will be heard.


I think there's much to recommend another of his pet theses, namely that Protestantism is basically what he calls a "Judaizing heresy" of Catholicism

David Goldman is writing a book so his on line musings have been rolled back. But he does find time to appear on Kudlow's show.

Expect you feel Spengler doesn't "cotton" too much to Protestantism:)


Goldman cottons to any point of view that he thinks can be molded to support Zionism. His description of Protestantism, especially in its more radical forms, as a "Judaizing heresy" is not intended as pejorative, merely descriptive. OTOH, I suspect he sees Evangelicals as, in the long run, too disorganized. That's why he's set his sights on a big, seemingly hyper organized outfit like the Catholic Church. Anyway, that's my explanation for his obsession.


And you do know that he once advocated the USSR and the USA teaming up to nuke Israel if it ever got nuclear weapons. Note the declarative form of the sentence.

Sara (Pal2Pal)

And you thought you knew how the Internet got started?


Note the declarative form of the sentence

Thanks for your lesson.


Not a lesson. I've noticed that in the last years it has become common for people, young people in particular, to speak declaratively while using a voice inflection that signals a question--rising at the end. To me it seems to signal a general attitude--an attitude that I deplore--of reluctance to speak straightforwardly, to always hedge just a bit.

Sara (Pal2Pal)

Anduril: Are you sure it isn't just a regional thing. I grew up in Western PA where this is very common. I had no idea it was confusing or signaled anything, until I moved to New York and new friends commented on the inflection/question thing. When I get on the phone with friends or relatives in PA, I fall right back into the dialect. One day I was having a tiff with my daughter, who was ignoring a question and she, in total defensive mode, said, "We learned questions should start with words like who, what, where, when, why and how and yours always make a statement." Again, not an attitude on my part, just the region where I grew up.


--When you say that he "studies" Catholicism I think what you should mean is that he studies it to the extent necessary to pick up some Catholic "buzz words" in the hope of making a plausible sounding (to him) case for his pet thesis.--

That's not accurate. Goldman has written extensively and admiringly about Catholicism and in particular the present pope and his ideas and writings in areas having nothing to do with "his pet thesis".


Phony Ideology claims to be be a reader since 2005 and says that we've never criticized Bush.

So not only is he/she on record supporting war when a dictator slaughters the people of a country he "rules", he/she is on record as a liar.

what next, PI?

The comments to this entry are closed.