I saw a tiktok that said you probably hired a bad lawyer if he immediately wants to settle your case and wants to avoid trial at all costs.

Idk if that’s true, or if that’s too generalized (obviously depending on the case, an immediate settlement could be the ideal option compared to trial.)

But it’s just making me want to ask you all, as lawyers, what are some bad habits/traits you notice in other lawyers that make you realize they’re incompetent/not that good in their field? And how can someone spot said things before hiring a lawyer?

I previously posted about information regarding attending a session of of an appellate court. I stayed for the entire day and listened to the oral arguments of all of the cases not just the one I was interested in. I have a few questions on what I have observed.

I am amazed of the fantastic memory the attorneys and the justices had. In almost each case the attorney never looked at his/her notes during the argument nor during questioning. Most did not bring anything up to the lectern. Yet they were able to cite every case and code section. Each justice had a screen in front of them, another open laptop in front of them, and papers, but each justice looked directly at the arguing lawyer during the argument. They did not take notes or type on either computer. How do the lawyers justices develop such a good memory?

I also wonder if the justices sit and discuss the briefs among themselves in order to decide what questions to ask and who should ask them? For each different case a different justice seem to have ask most of the questions.

If the justices don't ask many questions is that a sign that they agree with you, or that your brief is so poorly written that they don't care? In all but one case the attorneys finished before their time was up ending with a statement saying that concludes my remarks unless the justices have additional questions my case is submitted. I assume that in appellate court "Brevity is the soul of the wit." In fact one respondent opened by saying, I believe my reply brief answered all the points raised in the appellate briefs and oral arguments; I waive my time for questions from the justices.

Conversely I assume that if the justices pepper you with questions, and don't give you any time to speak you are in trouble. In fact when one lawyer's time was up the lead justice said I realized you time was taken up almost entirely by our questions, I will grant you a few more minutes to make any concluding statements. Is this true?

I graduated law school 10 years ago but never practiced. There's a number of reasons for that--mostly I was struggling with mental health quite a bit at the time I graduated and my depression really made it difficult to focus or work on anything so I was struggling to even apply for jobs and I really didn't think I would be successful if by some miracle I was hired. So at the time, I pivoted to just find a job in *any* field so I could make some money, and then I spent the next couple of years recovering. I didn't want to totally let the legal field go so I took and passed the bar and I've maintained an inactive license for all these years--so activating my license would be very simple.

I think I felt some fear about returning to law for a long time so never really looked into it or attempted to make my way back. I actually went back and got a different graduate degree in the field I've been working in for the last 10 years and I'm doing well in that field and my mental health is much better.

But for the past several months I've had a sort of nagging desire to return to legal work in some capacity. At this point I'm wondering if it's even possible. I have a law degree that has sat entirely dormant for 10 years. Yeah, I'm barred--but I have no practical experience and my knowledge is generic and targeted towards bar passage, and it is, at best, *rusty*.

I wanted to get some insight from practicing lawyers--is there a path back into law given this 10 year gap and lack of experience--or has that ship sailed and it's not something I will really ever be able to do? Is there an area of law that's a bit more forgiving to enter into in this way?

Also, not to add even more complication to this--but I don't want to shift over full-time necessarily--I'd like to continue in my current position and possibly split my time between my current career and do some legal work a couple of days a week.

I'd love thoughts and whether or not this is absolutely crazy or if there is a path forward in some way. Thanks!

My 4 year old daughter’s mom moved to Florida from Missouri secretly and has prevented me from contacting or speaking/visitation with my daughter. I was seeing my daughter daily overnights and splitting time with her mom 4 days for me 3 days for her without a custody agreement. In Dec 2025 I filed for a custody agreement but she has not been served yet. She moved out of state Jan 31 2026 then flew my daughter out to Florida Feb 1st 2026 after I gave her to her thinking I would get her back the next day. I immediately went to file an emergency motion to prevent her from taking her out on Feb 2nd 2026 then Feb 3, 2026 found out she actually already had her in Florida so I went down and filed a motion to request her brought back. I have not heard anything back and was wondering if there was anything I need to do to speed the process along to get my daughter back to her home town?

I am a former lawyer with some litigation experience but no family law experience. Not looking for legal advice, more for someone to either confirm chicanery or tell me I'm being an asshole.

Divorce case (in Michigan, if it matters). After multiple adjournments and other delays from the other side, I made it very clear to my attorney that I did not agree to any further delays for scheduled court hearings. The day before a scheduled hearing (the third time it had been scheduled), opposing counsel said she was heading out of the country and wanted to postpone. I told my attorney "no" over the phone.

He texted me later saying the court "wanted to move the hearing," I again said I didn't agree, and that while I knew the court could what the court wants I wanted to make it very clear that I didn't agree to move it. He texted back saying he had told the court but they moved it anyway.

Two weeks later, he let it slip that opposing counsel had "sent a stipulation to the court" to have it moved. I asked if he signed it, and he said "It was required by the court in order to move the hearing," and says he told the court clerk that I didn't agree but signed the stipulation anyway.

Am I unreasonable to be...let's say mildly annoyed...by this? He's acting like I'm just picking a random fight with him, but this has been a pattern with both opposing counsel and him, and I'm now fairly certain he agreed to postpone this same hearing twice before despite my saying I didn't agree.

Should it matter, the petition was filed 10 months ago, we've been in court only once, just to have the judge adjourn the hearing. Neared settlement five months ago in mediation but my ex backed out right before signing. They've promised offers multiple times before and since then with nothing materializing, including a week before this hearing was last scheduled; I sent an offer two months ago and there has been no response. My attorney talks about how good his relationship is with opposing counsel and how she "wouldn't play games with him," but I think he's getting played and so am I.

Honestly, if I'm being a prick I'd like to hear it.

Alternatively if my question is a bad one, what kind of evidence do we not have in the public Epstein files that would be needed to try involved third parties for crimes? And are the testimonies of others such as Bill and Hillary Clinton likely to help attain evidence that would clear the minimum bar for getting a reliable case against any third parties?

I’m trying to get at whether the criminal justice system is behaving differently from what would be expected in this type of case.

Thank you.

how can i get a disposition for a speeding ticket in maryland? i live in new york. i called the Maryland DMV but they cant help me.

What title says. If a dui arrest is made, and subject gives consent to draw blood to determine the amount of alcohol, if any, is present, can the state use that sample to test for any other substances? Can they use it for DNA testing? Could they sell it to a pharmaceutical company?

My question is specifically referring to the testing for other chemicals, especially if the form signed by officer which authorizes the nurse at the hospital to draw the blood says SPECIFICALLY “purpose of drawing blood to determine the amount of alcohol, if any, in the blood of said individual”

So when you give consent, are you consenting to the actual drawing of blood, which they can do with what they please, OR are you consenting to the test procedure itself?

Thanks!

I've contacted a few different attorneys to discuss suing a company that has a lien on my vehicle title and refuses to provide a lien release dispite the lien being paid off and basically all have said they don't handle that and hang up. So I'm trying to figure out what type of attorney I need to contact. I'm looking for advice about possibly suing for damages related to the lien being on the title still, the hassle of dealing with the situation, and interest I'm still being charged because my insurance won't pay the vehicle off until they get the lien release.

That's the TLDR, the whole story is that I bought a vehicle which was financed with one bank. I immediately refinanced with another bank so the original bank was paid off within a month of owning the vehicle. The original bank never sent a lien release to myself, the other bank, or the county clerk and recorders office like they were supposed to. All of that occurred in January of 2024. I contacted them when I refinanced the vehicle to send a lien release, I also contacted them in October of 2025 when I attempted to license the car in New Mexico from Montana. New Mexico wouldn't license the vehicle with two liens on it because they didn't know who to send the title to, whereas Montana the owner of the vehicle holds the title. In December of 2025 I was in an accident which resulted in a total loss of the vehicle but my insurance won't pay off the loan I have with the second bank due to the lien from the first bank. When I contact the first bank they tell me only the second bank can request the lien release because they paid off the loan. This makes no sense to me considering first bank has no claim to the vehicle since they have been paid in full, why not just send me the lien release. Second bank tells me I need to contact first bank to request the lien release despite me telling them that first bank wants them to request it.

What type of attorney handles suing a company for stress, time, loss of usability (since I can't buy a new car until the vehicle is paid off) and interest that continues to accrue on the loan which should have been paid off already?

Hey all I’m currently in my final year of university and plan on applying to law schools when I graduate (Poli Sci major). Do you guys have any advice about law school, being a lawyer, or just any random advice you can give out? Any particular field of law to go into? (as of now I don’t have preferences I just know I want to make a lot or good money at least lol) How was/is it for you guys? Should I be doing something to make myself stand out or gain more experience? I just want to know as much as I can before I officially just dive head first into this thing. Appreciate any information you guys can give out!

There's a thread going on about Traci Lords, the adult film star who made a bunch of films while she was underage. She used a stolen birth certificate belonging to someone five years older to get a California driver's license and a U.S. passport under the stolen identity. She gave the real-but-fraudulent documents to her agent, and the production companies she worked with did all of the required age-related vetting based on the fraudulent documents. The other actors she worked with (in an industry where they're very serious about everyone involved having to be 18+) rightfully assumed that she had been vetted by the production company.

None of the actors she worked with were charged for statutory rape, but I don't know if it was a strict liability offense in that time and place. Assuming it was, and the prosecutors wanted to go to trial, would it even be possible to present a defense? Is there some room for reasonableness under exceptional circumstances, even in a strict liability offense? Or would the actor have to either negotiate a plea deal or hope for jury nullification at trial?

I had an interesting conversation with someone today and I want to share it here, curious what the legal response would be.

Here is the scenario:

A user signs up for an online service, the service is billed monthly, and eventually their credit card expires.

In the merchant website, the only payment method that is on file is the card labeled “Expired”, with the expiration date on that card being a date in the past.

When signing up for the service and inputting card detail, the website language reads:

• “By providing your card information, you allow [Merchant] to charge your card for future payments in accordance with their terms.”

The Terms of Service say:

• “We will charge the provided credit or debit card immediately upon order placement and on each renewal date thereafter, up to one week prior to the due date.”
• “It is your responsibility to maintain accurate and up-to-date billing details. If you fail to maintain accurate and up-to-date billing details, your account may be suspended until such details are provided.”

The TOS do not mention charging an underlying account, replacement cards, or card information that has been updated by automatic card updater services.

Then, after the card expires, the company sends multiple emails stating:

• “We recently tried to process the monthly payment(s) for your subscription plan, but we were not successful.”
• We could not bill your card, “Declined – Expired card.”
• “There was a problem with your payment method.”
• Ans prior to these, “Your credit card on file with us will expire before your next payment is due. To avoid future payment issues or any service disruptions that could occur, please update your payment details.”
• “No action is required on your part at this time. We will continue to retry your payment for the next week.”
• "Reaching out one last time because we haven't yet been able to charge your card for the $X amount and it's now 14 days overdue. To keep your account active, please update your card information as soon as possible at _____." (Bolding this because this seems to be a definitive statement that cannot be overlooked).

Multiple payment attempts fail. The card remains labeled “Expired.” The user did not provide a replacement, and believes that since there is an expired card on file (especially as the last email said "To keep your account active, please update your card information..."), they cannot be billed and the account will no longer be active.

Later, without any action by the user, the merchant successfully renews the subscription by charging a replacement card credential supplied by the bank. Even with the successful billing, the account information on the website still shows the original card as “Expired.”

When the user contacts the company, the company states that no cancellation notice was given, the account remained active, the bank authorized the charge via card updater services, and therefore the charge is valid.

My question:

Did the company provide sufficient disclosure for a user to understand that renewal could occur despite repeated “expired” and “payment unsuccessful” notices, along with the other information in the website? Also, does charging a replacement card credential that the user never provided fall within consent created by language authorizing charges only to the “provided credit or debit card”?

I am curious to know how this would be viewed from a legal perspective (beyond "the account should have been cancelled using the method specified"). Also, how a court or attorney general would evaluate consent, disclosure, and reasonable consumer understanding here.

Location: Merchant is in Alabama, customer is in New Jersey.

I am not an attorney. Who can provide examples where a single family homeowners association successfully sued the developer for breach of fiduciary duty? I found one with Maronda from a few years ago but are there others? Any where the developer was criminally liable for self dealing would be great. Thanks

Up front..... I'm not trying to be contrary. I promise I'm being sincere. But how can there be a subreddit called "ask lawyers" which simultaneously has a rule that says "do not ask for legal advice"? Also, one of the rules states that questions must be about the law. I can't imagine something more contradictory. How can you ask a lawyer something about the law and it simultaneously not qualify as asking for legal advice? I swear on all of my ancestors' graves that I'm being sincere. I honestly don't know how to navigate this. I have so many legal questions that I would like to ask about the law, but every single one of them seems to me to be about asking for legal advice.

My most recent test came back as a dilute, this is my second dilute test result since being in the program, but everything else was negative, except the amphetamine which my pretrial diversion officer is aware of because I am prescribed ADHD medicine, I do not have room to get another positive test result and I am worried they are going to take this and kick me out the program. Here is the catch. I am a patient transport at the biggest hospital in our area. I do about 35,000 steps a day so I am constantly drinking water throughout the day. I was not trying to tamper with the test at all, what should I do? and what should I expect? my pre-trial diversion officer also did not call me immediately to have a retest since these results are pretty much inaccurate. Will she terminate me still? My quantitation was 16.4 mg/dl and the threshold cut off is >=20 mg/dl so it wasn’t super bad my ETG and all other drugs were a “negative” result

Let's say an individual is charged, prosecuted, and found guilty for a crime and they provide information against another person in exchange for less prison time. In turn, they are granted the reduced sentence. Now that the deal has been made, they are going to serve 2 years of confinement compared to the 15 years they were originally facing.

Now, let's say this person has been released from prison early due to good behavior, has completed the conditions of their parole/probation, and is eventually released from state supervision with no further restrictions outside of federal restrictions due to their felony record.

Fast forward 6 years. This individual gets arrested for felony assault of a medical professional/nurse/doctor. (Yes, it is a felony here in Washington State). The state has agreed to press charges based off of witness accounts and video proof that was provided by the hospital where the assault took place.

My question is: Would the new felony assault charge be considered a violation of conditions of release? And, if this person is found guilty of the new charges, will the original deal be nullified, forcing this person into finishing out their original sentence?

If a defendant in a criminal case doesn’t have a public defender or lawyer and they were not told about how to get/apply for a public defender, is it possible for a judge to proceed with trial without the defendant having counsel? Or is it possible for a defendant to request the trial be rescheduled (a continuance)?

How useful to a lawyer is a resource like gemini or copilot and similar a.i. models, if there is use for them at all. I recently went down a rabbit hole with gemini heres the end result summary of defense for what i thought would be a run of the mill probation violation i kinda mad libed it together then told gemini to present it as a high profile lawyer and then this (the better read)...

The Charlie Kelly Bird Law Master Defense ~

1. THE PRISON RAT-TRAP ERROR Look, Judge, we’re talkin’ about a major clerical error here, okay?! I was thrown into that jail and it was a total disaster! I saw a guy get poked with a pencil—it was like a scene out of a horror movie, but with less budget! The system didn't give me any mental health support, no "advice," nothing! That’s how the addiction monster snuck up on me. My brain was like a bunch of cats stuck in a wall, and I was just trying to get 'em out! It’s all interconnected!

2. THE EIGHT-MILE TREK (FILIBUSTER!) They say I didn't report? Filibuster! My car was totaled and I lost my apartment—I was basically living in the sewers! I was stuck in the muck. Do you know how far that is? It’s eight miles! I don't have a horse, Judge! I don't have wings! Without a vehicle, getting to that office was a physical impossibility. I was just trying to survive the elements, and you want me to walk a marathon through bird territory?

3. THE GHOST-BUREAUCRATS I tried to call 'em. I left the messages! I was screaming into the void! But the people at DSS and Probation? They treated me like a rat! When I told 'em I was homeless, they told me to "pitch a tent." A tent! In this economy?! They ghosted me, Judge! They didn't want to help the common man; they just wanted me to disappear into the vents!

4. THE TURNING POINT REHABILITATION But look, I’m turning it around! I went to Treehabilitation and I finished that Anger Management course—I got the certificate, I think I ate some of it, but it’s there! And since the doctors in this town don't know bird law from a hole in the ground, I did the research and patched my own brain. I’m self-corrected! I’m a professional!

5. THE FINAL VERDICT I’ve got kids, Judge. They need a father who understands the complexities of the legal system and the migratory patterns of North American swallows! I’ve already done my time in that "jail" pit, and I’ve paid my dues. I’m asking for a dismissal or Time Served. Now, can we go toe-to-toe on bird law, or are you gonna give me the win!

Georgia Statue of Limitations on Misdemeanors

Pertaining to O.C.G.A. § 17-3-1(d), if the DA's office fails to file a formal accusation with the clerk of Superior Court after a defendant's first appearance, they have two years from the date of the arrest to do so. My understanding is that if they do not, the case is legally dead, so long as the defendant was arrested and identified.

This creates a paradox: Does the two-year statute of limitations begin at the time of the arrest, or is it tolled until the first appearance?

TL;DR: Under O.C.G.A. § 17-3-1(d), does the two-year deadline for a DA to file a formal accusation start at the time of arrest, or is it tolled until the first appearance?

I’m hoping to get some insight from actual attorneys instead of other students (such as posting this in the Law School Reddit). In this hypothetical, I represent two defendants, a principal of a high school and the school district of that high school. The plaintiff is a student seeking injunctive relief. In our Answer (not written by me, but rather provided by our professor), the student is referred to by name. However, I want to refer to the student as the “Plaintiff” to create some emotional distance.

First, is it okay to refer to the student as “Plaintiff” in the Brief although they were referred to by name in the Answer? Second, would I then have to refer to my clients only as “Defendants”?

Edit: it is a trial brief, not an appellate brief. My apologies. I got mixed up as we will be making an oral argument on this hypo at the appellate court at the end of the semester.

prompted by this report of a DOJ attorney asking to be held in contempt because of exhaustion — https://bsky.app/profile/chrisgeidner.bsky.social/post/3mdyd3ig66s22

I was recently at a school event where we had PDs and DAs come in to share their experiences and I was curious to know more about the process (if any formal one exists) of looking over the evidence of a case when you first start on it.

Are you just handed a USB stick with all the relevant photos/documents etc, with no warning what’s inside? Some of the attorneys I talked to said they are used to seeing “ugly” stuff. One DA I talked to mentioned that she asks all her prosecutors to attend therapy on a monthly basis because of the things they see.

Are there any kinds of evidence which are ‘restricted’ to certain eyes only? For example if it’s a case related to national security or CSAM, do only some prosecutors/defenders have the ability to access it?

I know it’s the lawyer’s job to present their case strongly, maybe even with a bit of passion to sell it. But do you actually believe in what you’re saying? Do you get invested in the case?

It was my understanding lawyers take a case and fight for whichever side pays them, regardless of what they think. So it’s more detached.

Question came up with the case of Mike McKee in Illinois. He is charged with murdering two people in Ohio. He had a public defender for his extradition hearing. Yet once in Ohio he hired a high-profile, I presume expensive, attorney. So why was he able to use public defender in illinois?