Search Results

Occasionally in the law, the irresistible force meets the unmovable object.

Remember when your kid wanted to throw a birthday party, and they had to invite the whole class? You know, because it was the right thing to do? Yes, even that kid that no one liked got an invite, and the party went off without a hitch.

Occasionally in the law, the irresistible force meets the unmovable object.

Occasionally in the law, the irresistible force meets the unmovable object.

Ads for personal injury lawyers (and there sure are a lot of them), use some version of “we don’t get paid unless you get paid”.  One variety is “you don’t pay us, unless we win.”  Which brings up two questions:   First, who is in this “we?”  And second, how do you define “winning?”

Much as I like to vary topics in my monthly column, the recent Wisconsin Supreme Court election presents too much fodder for comment and is too important to simply let it go.

Few recent trials have attracted as much attention in the non-legal world than the Brooks trial in Waukesha.

In 1975, The United States Supreme Court held that a criminal defendant has a constitutional right to waive counsel and self-represent in a criminal case. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975). While the trial court has a responsibility to discourage self-representation, it cannot prohibit it. The result can be (and usually is) the circus occurring in the Waukesha trial of the Christmas parade driver Darrell Brooks.

Perhaps the most common question asked of me by friends, neighbors and family regarding the legal system is “How do I get out of jury service?”

Though I try to discuss new topics in each of my columns, every once in a while, there is something which merits further discussion.