400

Today is March 1, 2010 and this is post No. 400 on Pittsburgh Legal Back Talk.

Most blogs don’t make it to 400 posts. Its a lot of work. Its a lot of time that could have been spent doing something else. So why?

It brings happiness. That’s why.

Lawyers are reputed to be an unhappy lot. Many of us are withholding happiness until some stated goal is attained. However, and here’s the catch, when we start to get close we’ll sneak out in the middle of the night and move the goal posts. If you won’t allow yourself to be happy until you reach some goal, you will never be happy — ever.

Writing this blog lets me be happy, at least for part of the day, right now. That’s why I posted the last 399 times. That’s why I’m doing it now for the 400th. Pretty simple, huh?

It has also helped me be aware of other things that bring the same feeling. They can be as simple as watching a favorite television show with my wife. Or listening to Mozart. Or taking a walk with the dogs.

Happiness can be purchased a la carte. It isn’t an all or nothing proposition. It is a state of mind, a transcendental state of mind. It is so close that any of us can reach out to easily touch it. All we need to do is be aware, be mindful. It does not even require an absence of pain and suffering. Victor Frankel observed people experiencing happiness in a concentration camp.

In my case, with apologies to Charles Shultz, happiness is a warm blog.

CLT

Category: Uncategorized

#snOMGpgh on Twitter

If you want to hear others complain about the snow, or do a little yourself, check out the category known as #snOMGpgh on Twitter. If you’ve been on Twitter and wondered what the hash mark in front of words are about, click on one. They are key words. The tweets from everyone that use the key word (with the hash mark) are grouped together and you can read them all on the page for that key word.

Its a pretty clever word, or whatever you call it.

Pretty clever of those Pittsburghers, no? OMG. yes!

CLT

Category: Uncategorized

Advice for the Creative from Hugh MacLeod: “IGNORE EVERYBODY”

BOOK REVIEW: This book provides a short, entertaining and enlightening read that will make you laugh out loud.

If you are the creative type, you probably don’t have to ask for advice. It comes unsolicited.

If you are the creative type, you probably don’t get much advice you can use. Nobody knows enough about what’s in your head but you anyway.

So here’s a little book by cartoonist Hugh McLeod with advice you probably can use, starting with the title: Ignore Everybody. If you had been an early fan of his blog “gapingvoid“, you could have long ago read the whole book for free, one post at a time. I paid $14.37 to read it on my Kindle — a premium of $3.38 over the standard price. It was worth it.

Why ignore everybody? Because, says Hugh, they can’t help you. Initially, you don’t know if your idea is any good and neither do they. Moreover, they can’t even tell you whether your idea has commercial value. If they think they know, they’re probably wrong.

In fact, says Hugh McLeod, if your idea is a good one, it means that you will need them less in the future. Expect others to heap scorn on your idea. “Good ideas alter the power balance in relationships, ” he says. “That is why good ideas are always initially resisted.”

This is just the first of 40 nuggets — keys to creativity — set forth in the book. Hugh says these insights, hard won over a lifetime, were never available to him as youngster, so he’s passing along the experience to others.

Among his recommendations, while waiting to be discovered: blog. He argues that aspiring authors in search of a publisher should simply post their whole book on line and wait. That’s what he did. When the time comes, you won’t have been in the servile position of pleading for somebody to print your wisdom. Its already out there on the internet and its market appeal has been proven by the blog traffic. And the best part of all is that the publisher is coming to you.

Ignore Everybody is a short, entertaining and enlightening read. The cartoons are zany and will have you laughing out loud.

CLT

Category: Uncategorized

ENCORE POST: POOR RICHARD ON COURTS.

WHAT BETTER WAY COULD WE CHOOSE TO CELEBRATE OUR NEW LOOK THAN A GUEST POST FROM POOR RICHARD’S ALMANAC?

The following observations on the Courts appeared in Poor Richard’s Almanac in 1742. Remember that the Almanac was written in the persona of a fictional character, Richard Saunders, an astrologer/philosopher, who explained the existence of the Almanac in the Preface to the first, in 1733, thus:

“The plain Truth of the Matter is, I am excessive poor, and my Wife, good woman, is, I tell her, excessive proud; she cannot bear, she says, to sit spinning in her Shift of Tow, while I do nothing but gaze at the Stars; and has threatened more than once to burn all my Books and Rattling-Traps (as she calls my Instruments) if I do not make some profitable Use of them for the Good of my Family. The Printer has offer’d me some considerable share of the Profits, and I have thus begun to comply with my Dame’s desire.”

Bear in mind, the views expressed below are those of Richard Saunders, not necessarily Benjamin Franklin. Courts were rather unpopular among farmers, who were the Almanac’s target readers and it is not surprising that cutting criticism of courts and lawyers became a regular feature in Poor Richard’s Almanac. However, they are not necessarily not his views, either. Dr. Franklin was known to be coy that way.

COURTS

“Honest Men often go to Law for their Right; when Wise Men would sit down with the Wrong, supposing the first Loss least. In some Countries, the Course of the Courts is so tedious, and the Expence so high, that the Remedy, Justiceis worse than Injustice, the Disease. In my Travels I once saw a Sign call’d The Two Men at Law. One of them was painted on one Side, in a melancholy posture, all in Rags, with this Scroll, I have lost my Cause. The other was drawn capering for Joy, on the other Side, with these Words, I have gained my Suit; but he was stark naked.”

Or consider this doggerel appearing in 1744:

“Two Travlin’ Beggars (I’ve forgot their name)
An Oister found to which they both laid Claim.
Warm the Dispute! At length to Law they’d go,
As richer Fools for Trifles often do.
The Cause two Petty-foggers undertake,
Resolving right or wrong some Gain to make,
They jangle till the Courts this Judgment gave,
Determining what everyone should have.
Blind Plaintiff, lame Defendant, share
The Friendly Law’s impartial Care;
A Shell for him, a Shell for thee;
The MIDDLE’s Bench and Lawyer’s Fee.”

Some cynics may say not much has changed since the days of Poor Richard.

CLT

Category: Uncategorized

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.

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 is to accept service of the complaint and forward it to the corporate legal department. This it did, although only after a considerable delay. Then the complaint ended up on the desk of the secretary of one of the top in-house lawyers who was very busy getting ready for a board meeting. Of course, the registered agent was responsible for the complaint arriving on the eve of default judgment, but you know who caught the blame.

This is the kind of thing that has happened in one way or another to everybody who has been around for a while. Often, with prompt action, the default judgment can be opened. As a matter of fact, the Wisconsin court recently opened the Pepsico default judgment. You can probably have yours opened, too, provided you look sharp and do a few things right.

I posted on the subject of how to open a default judgment earlier this year. If you’d like to read the post, send me a comment and I’ll tell you how to find it. But don’t wait too long. You only have 10 days to open judgment.

CLT

Category: Uncategorized

The View from Foggy Goggle.

EMS professionals have commented on both sides of this issue on three prior posts. This post focuses on one of the issues raised in the comments.

If you’ve been reading the comments to our posts on the Mitchell case, where a City resident died during the great snowstorm of 2010 after repeatedly calling 911, you may have been puzzled by references to “Foggy Goggle”. Well, you need wonder no more. That’s the pub at Sevens Springs Resort, a ski venue in the Laurel Highlands, where Mayor Ravenstahl is alleged to have celebrated his 30th birthday party. The question asked obliquely by the commenters, is whether the guest list included members of the senior staff of City government, including Public Safety Director Michael Huss. In other words, was the City’s abysmal response to the onset of snow on Friday afternoon and evening due to the absence of not only the Mayor, but also other key leaders needed to jump-start the City’s emergency response. In other words, with a record storm approaching, was leadership left by default in the hands of subordinates, while their bosses went to a party?

Its a fair question and ought to be answered. Its time to lift the fog.

CLT

Category: Uncategorized

ENCORE POST: Opening Default Judgments.

This Post first appeared on February 9, 2009. PLBT is bringing back some of the best posts of the past 18 years to celebrate our new look. This post, on how to open a judgment, is worth repeating.

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.

A notice from the Plaintiff’s attorney come in the mail. You have failed to file an answer in the alloted 20 days, it states, so you must file a responsive pleading within ten days or default judgment may be entered against you.

Ten days passes and you still haven’t filed anything. You’ve been busy.

Then, you receive notice of default judgment from the Prothonotary (or Department of Court Records in Allegheny County). Damn, too late!

Maybe not.

Get to a lawyer right away. He/she may be able to save you from your procrastinating ways by promptly filing a petition to open the judgment, together with that answer you didn’t get around to filing.

Under Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 237.3, a court is required to open judgment if you follow a few simple steps. (1) File the petition to open the judgment; (2) file a verified answer at the same time that (3) asserts a meritorious defense.

It must be an answer, not preliminary objections. If you want to file PO’s, you must satisfy the tests developed by case law. See the official notes and comments. As noted in a Lycoming County Common Pleas case, Grisewood v. Grindmaster, a Commonwealth Court case (Peters Twp. San. Auth. v. American Home Land Dev.) holding that preliminary objections could satisfy the requirements of Rule 237.3 was made obsolete by the revision of the Explanatory Comment in 2001.

Under rules developed under common law, it was also required to state a reasonable defense for the late-filing or non-filing. However, in the case ofAttix v. Lehman, the Superior Court held that this was not required under Rule 237.3.

The Superior Court also held in Boatin v. Miller that failure to comply with unrelated local rules did not affect the operation of Rule 237.3, providing all of its requirements were met.

AS you may have noticed, Rule 237.3 can also applied to vacate judgments of non pros. However, as illustrated by the case of Kruis v. McKenna, there can be complications as other Rules come into play.

The foregoing is intended to be only a general introduction to the subject of opening judgments. If you are a non-lawyer and have recently (less than ten days recently) had a default judgment entered against you, do NOT attempt to prepare your own petition to open. Run, don’t walk, to a qualified lawyer. There isn’t a third chance.

CLT

Category: Uncategorized

The Need for Evidence Before Assessing Guilt.

THE QUESTIONS RAISED BY THE DEATH OF CURTIS MITCHELL, WHOM PARAMEDICS DID NOT REACH IN THE SNOW EMERGENCY, CONTINUE TO CRY OUT FOR ANSWERS. HOWEVER, IT IS BECOMING INCREASINGLY CLEAR THAT HARD EVIDENCE , NOT POLITICAL RHETORIC, IS NEEDED.

Rogue Medic raised several important points in his comments (see below: MEDIC’S PERSPECTIVE) that ought to be explored before conclusions are drawn on the Curtis Mitchell case. How were the decisions made and by whom? If the medics followed established protocol or if the dispatcher ordered the medics to leave or answer another call, the medics can hardly be blamed for for following orders, or for the consequences that follow. Rogue Medic laid out a scenario that, if borne out by the facts, would seem to exonerate the medics.

We need facts, based on solid evidence — not the kind presumed in political rhetoric spread about by persons who have no personal knowledge of how these 911 calls were handled. That means sworn testimony by the participants, together with verified documentary evidence. In other words, there has to be a hearing, conducted under rules of evidence to insure due process to those accused of malfeasance. Nothing less will suffice.

When that occurs, the answer will most likely not be as simple as talk show hosts and their callers now assume. Each of the ten calls to 911 is a separate incident and the explanation for the outcome of each is likely to be different. But that’s what happens; facts can be messy. Truth can be hard to find.

No one would deny that the medics who may be accused of neglecting their duty are entitled to due process. It is a constitutional right that we all enjoy. Perhaps, as a result of these hearings, the finger of accusation will turn next to someone else. That person, too, deserves due process. It is the American way of justice.

So, lets be patient and see what develops under the law. Justice demands it.

PS: If you thought this post was going to be about the Pittsburgh police officers accused of beating an unarmed teenager, you’re party right. The same principal applies.

CLT

Category: Uncategorized

ENCORE POST: Sermon from the Foothills of the Beer Summit.

As we celebrate our new look at PLBT, here is a post written at the time of the “Beer Summit”. The President invited Professor Gates and his arresting officer to the White House for a beer. That’s fine if you are a celeb. But for the rest of us, don’t do anything to provoke the police, unless you love pain, jail and legal fees.

Perhaps this has been stated elsewhere. But I haven’t seen it in anything I’ve read, so I’m saying it now.

“Skip” Gates, a Harvard professor who is on a first name basis with the President of the United States and has a world class academic reputation couldn’t do it. Neither can you.

No matter what the situation, hold your temper when in the presence of a police officer. Speak politely and quietly. Do not become indignant, even if the officer’s conduct is outrageous. Do not attempt to take control of the situation in any way.

Otherwise, please carry a lawyer’s card in your wallet and call him or her from jail.

End of Sermon.

Category: Uncategorized

Medic’s Perspective on Mitchell Case.

Here is a comment made by a reader who calls himself “Rogue Medic” concerning the PLBT post (immediately below) commending Public Safety Director Michael Huss for apologizing to the family of Mr. Mitchell and stating the response to the 911 calls was unacceptable. Rogue Medic says that Huss blamed the medics for decisions to abandon the calls when those decisions were communicated to them by the dispatcher. The comment responded to the following statement in the post:

Rather than make excuses, the City’s Public Safety Director apologized to the family and stated flatly that this performance was unacceptable.

I only see excuses from Public Safety Director Michael Huss. He claims that it was not his fault, because it was the fault of the medics. As if they were being lazy, in stead of running from patient to patient and digging themselves out of the snow every time they were stuck on streets that were not plowed. The decision to nothelp EMS get to patients was not made by the medics.

Each time the ambulance became stuck in the snow about a quarter of a mile from the patient’s residence.

Each time the ambulance was canceled by the caller or the 911 center.

First call. Medic 5 was dispatched. The 911 call was placed at 02:09 02/06/2010. The response was canceled by the caller at 03:57 02/06/2010.

Second call. Medic 8 was dispatched. The 911 call was placed at 04:53 02/06/2010. The response was canceled by the caller at 06:23 02/06/2010.

Third call. Medic 7 was dispatched. The 911 call was placed at 11:18 02/06/2010. The response was canceled by dispatch at 21:31 02/06/2010.

How is being canceled behavior that deserves blame or punishment?

6 medics, several supervisors, and others, made requests for assistance and snow plows in three attempts to get this patient to the hospital. Each time the medics were canceled.

Do not praise Public Safety Director Michael Huss for scapegoating the medics in his fraudulent apology.

Where was Public Safety Director Michael Huss while the medics were trying to get to Curtis Mitchell to keep him from dying?

HOT TOPIC: CLICK ON COMMENT BUTTON TO SEE COMMENTS ON THIS POST BY PARAMEDICS.

Category: Uncategorized

« go back — keep looking »

Welcome

CLIFF TUTTLE has been a Pennsylvania lawyer for over 45 years and (inter alia) is a real estate litigator and legal writer. The posts in this blog are intended to provide general information about legal topics of interest to lawyers and consumers with a Pittsburgh and Western Pennsylvania focus. However, this information does not constitute legal advice and there is no lawyer-client relationship created when you read this blog. You are encouraged to leave comments but be aware that posted comments can be read by others. If you wish to contact me in privacy, please use the Contact Form located immediately below this message. I will reply promptly and in strict confidence.

Pittsburgh Legal Back Talk

Legal topics of interest to lawyers and consumers with a Pittsburgh and Western Pennsylvania focus.

1410 Posts and Counting

Categories

400

#snOMGpgh on Twitter

Advice for the Creative from Hugh MacLeod: “IGNORE EVERYBODY”

ENCORE POST: POOR RICHARD ON COURTS.

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.

Pepsico had a billion-plus dollar judgment entered against it in Wisconsin last month.

The View from Foggy Goggle.

ENCORE POST: Opening Default Judgments.

The Need for Evidence Before Assessing Guilt.

ENCORE POST: Sermon from the Foothills of the Beer Summit.

Medic’s Perspective on Mitchell Case.

Welcome

Recent Posts

Posts You Might Like

Subscribe to our feed