Lawyers Are Sharing The Moments They Knew People Had Messed Up Big Time (30 Stories)

Not a lawyer, but my cousin is. He had a deposition via Zoom during this pandemic, and the Plaintiff's counsel shared his screen to present an exhibit. My cousin notices a tab on the guys internet browser, showing that he was trying to look at my cousins Facebook profile (which is set to private). Deposition ends and he says "So! Once last question. Do you like my profile picture?" Plaintiff's counsel immediately hung up the call. Maybe not the biggest f**k up, but gotta be pretty embarrassing.

When my client filed a restraining order against his ex and then asked me to leverage the restraining order just so he could get back with her. In our state, if you do this, you’ll have to pay the other persons attorneys fees.

I was in a small claims action with a former employer. He tried citing his own lawyer as an authority that the judge should defer to. The judge was not amused. I won

I once had an idiot client who put out a public statement announcing that a subordinate had resigned. Then the subordinate announced that he had not resigned, and furthermore, had no intention of resigning. Then my idiot client put out a public statement announcing that he had fired the subordinate. Then I had to advise my idiot client that he didn't have the right to fire the subordinate. Then I had to explain to my idiot client that he couldn't fire the man because he is not my idiot client's subordinate at all; in fact, he was hired by, and worked for, a completely different subsidiary - over which my client had no authority. So I got my idiot client to put out a public statement saying that his boss had fired the subordinate. Then my idiot client's boss blabbed to everybody that he had not fired the subordinate, and that he had thrown the whole matter back into my idiot client's hands. And now, dammit, I have to spend the next four months boning up on all the statues and case law pertaining to obstruction of justice.

A doctor testifying under oath that he deliberately chose not to inform a pregnant woman of a positive test result for a really severe genetic disorder, because he figured because she was a member of his church she wouldn't have considered aborting the pregnancy under any circumstances.

A primary care doctor who received a complex and technical test report from a genetics lab, and simply forwarded it to the patient (who didn't really speak English and wasn't medically educated). She testified that she "performed the minimum required diligence" which is not what you should say and expect a good outcome

My parents were going through custody of my siblings and I. Each of us kids had to speak alone with the GAL where he asked us very weird questions: he asked my 6yo sister which parent she loved more and tried to get to insinuate that my mother was an alcoholic who never did anything for us. My mother was the model parent who single handily raised five kids and her man child ex husband. The GAL was required to speak with three well know friends from mom and dad to gauge how they were from out side sources. The GAL only spoke with one of my moms sources for less than 5 minutes on the way to a court hearing. My dad needing up winning residential custody of all 5 of us. Years later, My sisters and I have heard from all different people that the only GAL in the area now has a terrible reputation and no one will go to him bc he was taking payoffs. My dad bribed him to take us away from our mother.

My roommate was on a scooter and rearended by a USSA member. Obviously, it was the fault of the guy that hit her. She took him to court to pay for her damaged scooter and her $8k ER bill. She argued that he should pay since he was rich instead of bringing the police report or ER bill to court. She of course lost. Courts only care about proof.

I was reviewing some documents of a case involving work-related death benefits. Naturally, the deceased's heirs were claiming the money as they were the beneficiaries. Basically, the heirs just had to prove that the deceased's death was work-related. I noticed that the official certificate of death said the guy passed away on January 1 (for example). But the heirs had submitted hospital records that the deceased had been admitted to that hospital in February. (the dates were so radically different that it could not have been a typo). This was the turning point when their credibility was wiped out, and I knew that the claim was bullsh*t. When the court eventually rendered judgment, the case was dismissed. The heirs never appealed, or otherwise. I think they knew their case was f**ed.

I was trying a case where my client was charged with being a felon in possesson of a firearm. Prosecutor has to prove a) he had a gun and b) he is a felon. A) is not in dispute. The way to prove b) is to bring into evidence a certified conviction and sentencing order.

This guy had been convicted of several felonies in another state and one in my state. The prosecutor was having some issues with getting a certified out of state order and just relied on the single in state order which was provided to me in discovery. My client pointed out to me that neither the DOB or SSN on the order was his.

At trial, when the prosecutor tried to introduce the conviction order, I objected on relevance. The name was the same but DOB and SSN was different than what was on the indictment. The judge agreed and refused to let it into evidence. Not guilty.

In one where I was a jury member, almost all the evidence was on camera. One lawyer was trying to make his case on the fact a mandated sweeping security check wasn’t done on time and if it had it would have potentially prevented what happened to his client. After him drilling in this point endlessly, the opposing counsel asked to see footage of around the time of the missed sweeping check.

The video showed a specific visit to the client. A personal visit is far better than a sweeping check. First lawyer was not such a smug guy anymore.