ENCORE POST: WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST PEPSICO AND THE ONE THAT IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN TO YOU? PLUS OR MINUS 1.2 BILLION DOLLARS. OTHERWISE, THEY ARE ABOUT THE SAME.
If somebody takes default judgment against you, move quickly to open it, if you can.
ENCORE POST: Opening Default Judgments.
You are served by the sheriff with a civil complaint. The second page informs you that you have twenty days to file a responsive pleading or default judgment may be entered against you. But you don’t. You forgot.
ENCORE POST: Can You Name the Presidents Who Argued Before the US Supreme Court?
TO CELEBRATE OUR NEW LOOK, PITTSBURGH LEGAL BACK TALK IS REPRISING SOME OF THE BEST POSTS FROM THE LAST 18 MONTHS. THIS POST ORIGINALLY APPEARED IN JULY 2009. CONTRARY TO WHAT MANY MIGHT EXPECT, WILLIAM HOWARD TAFT, THE ONLY PRESIDENT TO ALSO HOLD THE OFFICE OF CHIEF JUSTICE, NEVER ARGUED BEFORE THE COURT. HOWEVER, ABRAHAM LINCOLN DID.
Let Me Tell You Something Really Important About Getting Sued.
Here’s something else you might not know: when the credit card issuer sells delinquent accounts in bulk to a third party, who then tries to collect them, the odds that the new plaintiff will be able to prove its case in court are greatly reduced. This is because card issuer gives minimal documentation to the assignee.
What is the Difference Between the Default Judgment against Pepsico and the One that is about to Happen to You? Plus or Minus 1.2 Billion Dollars. Otherwise, They are About the Same.
Posted by Cliff Tuttle (c) 2009
SUMMARY: If somebody takes default judgment against you, move quickly to open it, if you can.
Pepsico had a billion-plus dollar judgment entered against it in Wisconsin last month.
The way it happened sounds familiar enough. As a North Carolina Corporation, it has a registered agent there whose job it [...]
A meritorious idea whose time has come in Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania is one of those states that requires a certificate of merit, not just for medical malpractice, but in every case where professional liability is involved. This includes a wide range of licensed professionals, such as accountants, architects, dentists, lawyers, engineers, surveyors, therapists and veterinarians. It also applies to professional corporations, partnerships and other business entities formed by professionals to conduct their practice. And it applies to claims involving lack of informed consent.
What’s Wrong With This Picture?
oesn’t it strike you as very strange when settlement offers are communicated between litigants in the press? Except on Boston Legal, of course.
The Value of a Good Introduction.
If you read the immediately previous post about the complaint filed by the tobacco industry against government advertising regulation, you may have noticed something curious. The complaint contained an introduction.
In six fairly succinct paragraphs, the plaintiff tobacco companies presented their argument in summary format. But it was more than a mere summary. It was a mini-brief of their case, one that was intended to persuade or at least enlighten the reader.
We lawyers are accustomed to placing summaries at the head of appellate briefs, but why not complaints?
I discussed the subject with an experience trial lawyer last night, who objected that summaries are not provided for in the Rules of Civil Procedure. Perhaps not, but what is the judge going to do about it? Strike it as impertinent? Most likely, he/she will simply read it. And most likely, this compact statement of the lawyer’s case will make an impression. When filing an Answer, insert your own introduction. But make it to the point, brief and persuasive.
Arbitration Exhibits, a Strategy.
Presenting exhibits in a compulsory arbitration can be a messy affair, especially if there are quite a few of them. They are lying about on the table, out of order, mixed with the other party’s exhibits and various other pieces of paper. Then, when the testimony is complete, the chairman usually tells you to take your exhibits with you. Thus, exhibits you hope they will review during deliberation are gone.
Pittsburgh Legal Newslog:CAN-SPAM Statute Does Not Create Private Cause of Action for Spam Recipients, 9th Circuit Says.
Posted by Cliff Tuttle
August 8, 2009 Jurist