Wordsmith.org: the magic of words

Wordsmith Talk

About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us  

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
#40616 09/08/01 01:03 PM
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
W
wwh Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
W
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Just to be mischievous, "barrator" was Today's Word about six months ago, and I posted a note about "barratry" in marine law. But I won't say YART!


#40617 09/08/01 09:28 PM
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
tsuwm, here's a sentence from your link: We have expanded damage theories to the point where we are willing to mulct defendants of amounts that all previous American generations and the citizens of all foreign countries would consider fantastic.

Would you, or someone, please tell me about the word mulct, and one word you just used, faineant?



#40618 09/08/01 09:59 PM
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
mulct - 1) to punish by a fine 2) to deprive or divest of
faineant - one who does nothing; an idler [F, do-nothing]


#40619 09/08/01 10:09 PM
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
W
wwh Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
W
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Dear tsuwm: in Boston newpapers, the verb "mulct" was often used in its second meaning "to extract money from somebody, by fraud or deceit". I never saw it any other way.


#40620 09/08/01 10:15 PM
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
>I never saw it any other way.

you see how words get distorted from their original meanings? <EG>


#40621 09/08/01 11:47 PM
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Given this insider's perspective, Ted, is there any chance that you may have access to, or know how to gain access to, records that would clarify the civil suits mentioned by wow? It is civil suits of this sort that have contributed more to a sense of astonished disgust at the US legal profession, at least from an outsider's perspective. The odd instance of jury nullification, like the two shocking decisions in the Rodney King and OJ criminal trials, are less of a threat to the reputation of lawyers than the apparent absurdity of judgements like those mentioned by wow. Here in NZ, the perception of the law in the States is simple: "You can sue for everything, and win." Even from 10,000 kilometres away, US lawyers are held in low esteem largely because of this perception. That, and the naïf misunderstanding that "The Law" is about upholding Justice.


Max--

I certainly have a some access to legal things like that, having at one time been a paralegal, but finding those lawsuits is the next thing to impossible. When I first saw the cases Ann presented, I googled the names given and came away with zilch. There are quite a few cases that show up if you google the name of a plaintiff or respondent, but there's no way that I know of to systematically search all courts of record everywhere to try to find those particular cases. One would need the name of the respondent, the court, and hopefully a docket number.

One of the things about juries that many people do not realize is that jurors are not arbiters of law, they determine what the facts are. Take a criminal trial, for instance. If a jury finds you guilty, they have merely agreed that the fact of your guilt has been established beyond a reasonable doubt. They do not establish whether the law that makes a particular act an offense is valid. That's what judges are for.

You mentioned jury nullification. Yes, that does happen, though I question whether it happened in the OJ case.

BUT! If an attorney in closing arguments mentions to the jury that they should acquit because the underlying law is a bad law the judge will be all over her like white on rice. That's a big no-no. It would almost certainly be a matter for the judge to consider as contempt of court, and I suspect it might even lead to consideration of disbarment if the abuse was flagrant enough (or repeated).

As to the perception in NZ, yes, anyone can sue for anything. But with rare exceptions the plaintiff does not prevail unless there's a preponderance of the evidence establishing liability on the part of the respondent.

I could in theory put together a class of Adams fans and sue you for denigrating your namesake. It would go at least as far as docketing the case, but a judge would almost certainly throw the case out as frivolous and give me a very stern warning to never pull that crap again. But I probably would have to do it on my own, which is called proceeding pro se. I doubt if I could find a lawyer who would touch such a case. As to pro se things, I have personally seen instances where nut cases who filed one lawsuit after another were barred from filing a case in a particular judge's jurisdiction without having an attorney representing them. There have been quite a few instances like that to the north of here (I'm in the Denver area and am thinking of Montana and Idaho) where right-wing "patriots" file multi-million dollar liens against the property of anyone who disagrees with them, usually the sheriff, county prosecutor, and local elected officials. It's called abuse of process, and people do occasionally go to jail for it.

But in the final analysis I believe that what's wrong with our justice system isn't lawyers, it's greedy plaintiffs.

One last thought. In those cases Ann cited, it's remotely possible that those were default judgments, which are rendered more or less automatically when the respondent doesn't show up in court to put on a defense.

TEd



TEd
#40622 09/09/01 04:56 AM
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,409
M
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
M
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,409

#40623 09/09/01 09:22 AM
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
I just love unreported court cases. You can argue them over for ever and a day and no one can say whether your view is right, wrong, or even relates to the case under discussion. Until my other half completed her law degree, I wasn't even aware that not all cases aren't reported!



The idiot also known as Capfka ...
#40624 09/09/01 11:50 AM
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 387
J
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
J
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 387
I read somewhere that the US graduates more lawyers in a year than the total number practicing in Japan
In Japan, they have people who do basically the same things as lawyers over here, but the Japanese don't consider them lawyers. If we counted them, Japan and the U.S. would have a very close number of lawyers.


#40625 09/09/01 12:58 PM
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065
B
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
B
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065
In reply to:

I wasn't even aware that not all cases aren't reported!



Err, CK I think this means you thought all cases were reported, but I'd hate to have to convince a jury of it.

Bingley



Bingley
Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  Jackie 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,361
Members9,182
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
Newest Members
Ineffable, ddrinnan, TRIALNERRA, befuddledmind, KILL_YOUR_SUV
9,182 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 670 guests, and 1 robot.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days)
Top Posters
wwh 13,858
Faldage 13,803
Jackie 11,613
wofahulicodoc 10,557
tsuwm 10,542
LukeJavan8 9,919
AnnaStrophic 6,511
Wordwind 6,296
of troy 5,400
Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site. Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.

Home | Today's Word | Yesterday's Word | Subscribe | FAQ | Archives | Search | Feedback
Wordsmith Talk | Wordsmith Chat

© 1994-2024 Wordsmith

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5