But, that’s a very stupid and ignorant point. Typically, those instances you’re discussing are between two people without witnesses. In the absence of physical evidence it comes down to he said/she said. We have a concept in criminal justice called “innocent until proven guilty.” If you cannot tip the bar for guilty…

So... you think it’s ok to judge someone solely based off someone else’s singular opinion?

We do have a concept called “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” Considering most of these issues take place between two people with typically few witnesses, it’s hard to get a conviction.

Yeah... fuck that whole “innocent until proven guilty” concept. We definitely should believe accusers 100%. It’s not like the Founders saw any problem with that concept at all.

There was definitely a reason why always called the quiet kids in law school the sandbaggers. They were quiet the entire time, no one really knew if they were smart or not, then they’d ace all the tests.

Not raising your hand out of fear is a silly thing at any age.

Absolutely. This was exactly me growing up. I would absolutely not raise my hand unless I was 100% sure I was correct. Even then, I really didn’t do it. That continued through law school. It wasn’t until I was doing my LLM in Tax and had been practicing for a couple years that I started raising my hand. Even then, it…

It depends, we may be reaching the statute of limitations on some of those charges. I don’t think NY would want to wait until the conclusion of the federal trial. I’d probably indict him and then ask for the judge to suspend the hearing until the federal matter is resolved. But, I wouldn’t want that statute of…

I agree with this, but the indictment, which I read through, is all federal crimes. Unless Schneiderman comes out with his own indictment, it’s all federal. However, being a NY resident I can definitely say, if any AG is going to do it, it’ll be Schneiderman. That guy has been taking on huge players for a long time…

I would agree that not EVERYONE who moves to a city works in a city (want is not an issue, because it’s more of a need based decision). But, it is nearly axiomatic that if you move to a large metro region, you’re probably working in the city, because that’s where most of the jobs are.

I agree but every real gain that workers have had over the last century, especially the labor laws that have been enacted, is because of unions.

Yeah, basically. It’s “what would the hypothetical reasonable person do in the same or similar circumstance.” So, it’s objective, and that objective action is compared to the actions of a party to a suit.

And I love you transaction guys. If it wasn’t for your shitty, mindless drafting there wouldn’t be so many disagreements and I wouldn’t have so much work. I wish you were in my jurisdiction. I can tell you would get me sooooo many billables.

There are only 2 good tax LLMs. And I totally believe you are a tax attorney by your inability to carry an argument.

I don’t necessarily disagree but I would point out that the problem, in this case, is an environmental problem and not a fundamental problem with unions.

If it’s possible to craft laws to limit corporate abuses then it is possible to craft laws to limit union abuses

I promise you, I’m one of the most liberal people you’ll ever meet. But, unlike you apparently, I don’t have blinders on. Believe it or not, liberals can do things that are just as bad as Republicans. People can be bad, regardless of their beliefs.

Corporate and tax attorney, not a paralegal. Magna from law school, #1 from Tax LLM from a top 5 university. Former federal district court clerk.

Well... that’s kind of the point. If I “worked in the suburbs” my commute would be like 5 minutes because I live in the suburbs.

So... waahhhhhhh. That’s your opinion, whining? Keep studying, maybe one day you’ll be an actual lawyer.