alkemyst
No Lifer
- Feb 13, 2001
- 83,967
- 19
- 81
When my wife was represented in her case where another driver struck her and broke her neck...the attorney her parents swore by had thousands and thousands of dollars billed in phone and copy time. They made so many fcking copies I have no idea what the plan was other than 'Hmm, for a $0.05 copy, plus $8/hr in temp work I can bill at $150/hr + $x.xx per copy'
On top of there base fee for the first million not going to trial and their 'costs' they walked away with 50% of the award which was the limits of the lady's policy. We didn't net enough to cover all the surgery even though the surgeons had waived their fees. It was suggested we should sue the town and pursue that angle for more money...we elected not to.
The funny shit about all this is only in law does the customer that gets the merchandise pay for everyone else's way. The second thing of it that's funny is many of the firms that talk about this (and that the money doesn't matter) only take the cases they know they have a good shot of winning.
How many cases has your firm taken that they lost (percentage)? How much have they netted prior to principal's payouts?
I'm not going to read the other 9 pages of this to see if this has been brought up yet, but was this point ever considered during the hearing:
They were told that a 'black van' could be associated with the robbery. 'Black van' sounds a lot like 'black man'.
Anyway, nothing much disgusts me more than real genuine racial hate crimes, however, I honestly don't think they hardly ever happen anymore - at least in comparison to the number of phony hate crimes that are reported simply because a minority wants to get out of a crime the comitted and make some money in the process.
Here in Cincinnati there was a riot 2-3 years ago over the police shooting of a black suspect that was running from police - he was fired upon while reaching down to pull up his pants because no one under the age of 30 in this city knows where the waistline of their pants belongs. The police thought he was reaching for a gun. He died, and it was reported that he had several warrants out for his arrest for misdemeanors and failing to show in court. Thus, blacks in Cincinnati rioted, gutting stores all over the city.
Yes, they gutted stores. Quite possibly the best way to express their anger over police crimes, no?
They were told that a 'black van' could be associated with the robbery. 'Black van' sounds a lot like 'black man'.
Anyway, nothing much disgusts me more than real genuine racial hate crimes, however, I honestly don't think they hardly ever happen anymore - at least in comparison to the number of phony hate crimes that are reported simply because a minority wants to get out of a crime the comitted and make some money in the process.
Here in Cincinnati there was a riot 2-3 years ago over the police shooting of a black suspect that was running from police - he was fired upon while reaching down to pull up his pants because no one under the age of 30 in this city knows where the waistline of their pants belongs. The police thought he was reaching for a gun. He died, and it was reported that he had several warrants out for his arrest for misdemeanors and failing to show in court. Thus, blacks in Cincinnati rioted, gutting stores all over the city.
Yes, they gutted stores. Quite possibly the best way to express their anger over police crimes, no?
Not trying to troll...
He ran from the police. Don't do that. Purely his own fault and his decisions that lead to this course of action.
How many times must one repeat DON'T RUN FROM THE COPS! He chose his own path and chose the wrong one.
He ran from the police. Don't do that. Purely his own fault and his decisions that lead to this course of action.
How many times must one repeat DON'T RUN FROM THE COPS! He chose his own path and chose the wrong one.
Yep, he played the victim mentality perfectly. Complete with the emotional tugs that somebody with a brain can see right through.
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 66
- 91
With all due respect, I am entertained by the idea that a complete stranger on the Internet, who knows nothing about the case other than the skeletal details I posted and that are contained in the newspaper articles, with no psychological training, believes he is better qualified than four separate psychologists and psychiatrists (one of whom was paid by defense counsel) when it comes to diagnosing my client. Al just isn't a liar or an exaggerator, period. He may be a person with a heightened sensitivity to police abuse by virtue of seeing his friends and neighbors beaten and lynched in Birmingham as a kid, but that doesn't make his complaints any less legitimate, nor does it reduct the cops' culpability in this case.
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 66
- 91
Originally posted by: TallBill
Don Vito, a lot of people posted negative stuff in this thread because your first post didn't provide to many details. Anyways, thats what, two big wins for you this quarter?
Yeah, I wasn't comfortable providing a lot of detail when the case was ongoing, and have been too busy to since.
We have had an extraordinary quarter. This case was tough, but our last case was nearly unwinnable - we won $2M on an oral contract with no written documentation whatsoever.
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 66
- 91
No, he wasn't fucked up - he was a highly successful businessman, a great husband and father, and a pillar of his community. He may have had a greater sensitivity to suffering from PTSD caused by an incident like this, but that doesn't mean he can't recover - the law says that a defendant has to take the plaintiff as he finds him (this is known as the "eggshell plaintiff" doctrine, and the name kind of speaks for itself).
so sick of the ptsd card
i'm not saying he didn't deserve to win, but everybody claims it for everything nowadays
i'm not saying he didn't deserve to win, but everybody claims it for everything nowadays
With all due respect, he played the victim card perfectly. Their statements were so perfectly crafted it's a lawyers wet dream. I'm really not trying to troll, but you are buying into the victim mentality and justifying poor decisions.
RAN FROM POLICE! STOP RUNNING FROM THE POLICE!!!!!!!
A liar Al may not be, a maniuplator he is. You can see from the words. Yes, he experienced some trama but only by his own actions/decisions. But it's his own damn fault. That's where consequences of your decisions come into play. Hell, just last saturday I had some cruisers run in on my vicinity! Did I run? NO! I had nothing to hide. Just went about my business, got into my car and left.
Sorry, I've been in the wrong place at the wrong time and I SURE AS HELL DIDN'T RUN. I have nothing to hide.
I cannot believe that as a lawyer you are playing the victim card as well. Seriously...think about what you perpetuating. A victim mentatlity.
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 66
- 91
Al didn't "run from the police." He was caught between two sets of officers with guns pointed, in the middle of a gas station. He moved 8-10 feet for cover, huddled over with his hands over his head. It seems to me anyone with half a brain would do the same thing. He stopped as soon as he was told to, and got on the ground as soon as he was told to. He did nothing to justify the officers' actions, all of which occurred when he was lying face down on the tarmac.
The bottom line is that you don't know Al and I do. You sure as hell don't know more about him than the four doctors who have diagnosed him with severe, chronic PTSD.
Jesus Christ, hyperbole much? Who'd he see get lynched? Let's get a name. There hasn't been a single reported lynching since the early 1960's, and hardly any at all since the 30's.
It's bad enough you're expecting us to take your word as a lawyer, AND as the lawyer who represented this guy to his huge paycheck, but you just flushed the last residue of your credibility down the toilet with that comment. "Oh but expert doctors said he had PTSD!!!" Yeah, I'm sure it's much more likely your client was traumatized by a lynching than it is you simply paid 400,000 dollars in "legal fees" to buy some expert witnesses. I'm sure that's never happened before.
You and your client are a couple money-grubbing opportunists who saw an oppurtunity for a huge paycheck. Nothing more.
hahaha! jealous much?
OP, i honestly don't know what more you can do to prove your case. you've already mentioned expert testimony that WASN'T EVEN HIRED BY YOU.
i would LOVE to see what Agentbolt would say if this was a best friend of his or a close relative.
Agentbolt, you do realize that one purpose of showing Mr. Hixton as a successful person was that he was that much worse off as a result of the attack (his forgone income was more than someone like you, probably).
at the same time, OP, i dont think you should argue that you know Mr. Hixton and the other members don't. you did post this thread in a forum of strangers to see their reactions. you got them.
file this away as an interesting experiment.
file this away as an interesting experiment.
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 66
- 91
I'm not interested in dignifying your post with a response. I don't respect this kind of categorically insulting post, which is, more or less by definition, a product of ignorance. I may personally see no profit from Al's case - I am a salaried associate - but in any case I know he is for real and a man for whom I have great respect and fondness.
Wahhhhhhhh!!! Wahhhhhh!!! You're a typical, sneaky lawyer. You got up your pedestal, spouted some predictable righteous indignation, and completely and utterly ignored the meat of my statement, which was that you're claiming your client saw someone get lynched when that's clearly not even true, simply to curry favor with the ATOT contingent who wants to see cops get burned.
For the record, you're a salaried lawyer instead of a partner who came into an internet message board to solicit opinions about a case they don't have nearly all the facts to. That, and the fact that you've already been caught in a lie once in the past 10 minutes, should be all the proof needed to show that you're clearly a crappy lawyer.
Enjoy your cash windfall, guys.
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 66
- 91
My use of the word "lynched" was ill-chosen. Your extreme, insulting language is hard to respect, though, and honestly I see nothing at all in your post that suggests your opinion is based on anything but a dislike of lawyers.
Your use of the word "lynched" was a blatant lie, and you're an idiot if you expect anyone to believe a trial lawyer would let a word slip like that without realizing what people would take from it. Don't try to play it off as some innocent, understandable mistake.
I have nothing but respect for most lawyers. I've never even said I think the cops were in any way justified for what they did. Look at this logically.
Lawyer for the plaintiff spins sob story about successful black man who escaped the horrible racist past of lynchings and systematic beatings by policemen and became a success, just to be viciously beaten again by the same evil police force, which ruined his life, caused him to start shunning his family and friends, and wah. wah. wah.
Said lawyer then takes personal offense to anyone who suggests he could be faking it, claims that his client was never interested in any money (despite the fact that you've remained steadfastly silent when people suggest he do something other than simply keep the money, considering he's already well off and doesn't need it, AND the fact that the police department takes the same financial hit either way), and invents hyperbole-crammed stories about his client witnessing traumatic lynchings in order to get some random Internet people on his side. You're going to have to forgive me if I'm not terribly impressed with you thus far.
:thumbsup:
The article indirectly inferrs that you'll be walking away with something like 200k. :Q
Nice!
:thumbsup:
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 66
- 91
I have no problem with you judging me - I opened myself up to that when I started this thread. I take exception to your judging Al, who is a tremendous man who's been through a lot. I can't speak to what Al should do with the money, but he is not a wealthy man, and it is far from clear to me why he and his family shouldn't benefit from this money when it could put all three of his kids through college.
I admit the word "lynching" was poorly chosen, but the films of dogs and rubber hoses being used against civil-rights protesters were taken largely in Al's neighborhood, during his childhood, and he has seen things no American should.
As I said, I don't care if you think I am history's greatest huckster - I have worked hard and sacrificed for my country and my clients, and I am comfortable with that, imperfect as I may be. Al, however, is a hell of a man and a great father, husband, and neighbor, and I can't respect your insults directed toward him.
Look, I understand lawyers invented the straw man argument, but seriously, stop. Your responses are only tangentially related to what I'm posting. Look, I'm going to stop attempting to to scrutinize "Al", as you insist on calling him. I don't know him, I wasn't there for what happened, etc... I think it's just as likely he got beat up by some scumbag cops and saw a huge paycheck as it is he's seriously crippled emotionally for life from this, but whatever. The point is, I don't know.
What I DO have a very clear picture of is what kind of lawyer you are. This is the second time you've used the phrase "ill-chosen" to describe your blatant lie about what your client has been through. You said he saw someone get LYNCHED to back up your claim that he's had a horrible childhood at the expense of evil Whitey, you're either the world's WORST attorney and a complete and utter moron, or a liar, if you somehow think you can just say stuff like that without it having a huge effect on your credibility. You can keep playing it off as some innocent, simple mistake all you want. Nobody's buying it.
A trained Orangutan could've won this case, based on what you've told us. Not only did the cops blatantly go out of bounds, but they (badly) covered their tracks trying to make the case go away, making it even MORE obvious they were in the wrong. So people can give you all the "congrats" they want, from everything you've told us, someone who even merely stayed at a Holiday Inn should've been able to win this case handily.
So, whatever. Al's now a rich man and you, at the very least, exposed some crooked cops, so thanks for that.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
Facebook
Twitter