Lawyer: "You've Just Proved My Case."

lawyers has there ever been a time the opposing council accidentally proved your case for you and what happened my opposing counsel made some off-the-cuff remarks about how their client had to go to another remote office to get all the records they wanted to use against my client that let me know the witness they were trying to use to introduce the records as evidence wasn't actually familiar with the records or the records keeping process in the jurisdiction we were in records were exception to hearsay rule but you needed someone familiar with the creation and maintenance of the records to get them admitted i attacked the witness qualifications to get the records admitted and ended up getting the records excluded i then made a motion for a directed verdict on the ground they couldn't prove the case without the records and won all because the opposing counsel complained that their witnesses had to go way out of their way to get records for the court ial not my case but i was in the courtroom watching a trial pro se defendant who was accused of flashing a guard and masturbating till well you know as a pro said defendant he defended himself at trial without an attorney prosecutor was doing well proving the case when the female deputy was on the stand the defendant asked her one question if you saw me do what you claim i did then how big is my dong the deputy responded by raising her hands and estimated about 15 inches the guy grinned turned to the jury nodded said yeah that's right and sat down obviously he was convicted he was doing a 10-year prison sentence so this conviction wasn't of much consequence but i'll never forget it i think that guy may have been innocent but went down for an even greater cause i had a hearing where the opposing party offered an updated contract that my client supposedly signed except it was a horrible copy and barely readable then he assured the judge that the new contract was exactly the same as the old contract except for the party name at the top the original contract was in his mom's name the new one in his name and the data of the contract itself he made that assurance multiple times after he exhausted himself saying how everything was the same i then pointed out to the judge that half the provisions were different in that my client had never signed that form the judge asked if we were really accusing him of forging my client's signature since that's a serious accusation i held up the guy's prior conviction for contract fraud and said i absolutely am your honor we won hands down no further argument needed ro those guys were either incredibly stupid or stupidly confident in their skills of trickery my dad is a lawyer it's happened several times that the defendant submits or provides video evidence of assault or unlawful entertainment but assumes it will go unnoticed in 50-plus hours of footage my dad watches everything he got a multi-million dollar settlement from a major casino after pointing out a moment that proved video doctoring there was the car one two he had a bunch of recordings and found a spot in the recording submitted by the other side where they are discussing what they need to show and how they will prove it if i recall correctly he played the recording and caught as a surprise they had nothing to say and he won after like four days of back and forth i believe you have to get to a point where that evidence would come up that's why he couldn't stop there my dad is a total badass ional was in court for a friend the guy in front of us was contesting a ticket his defense was that he was passing a car at a time and they got the radar reading from the car he was passing not from him he didn't win that appeal [Music] plaintiff was claiming insurance money because he accidentally chopped off his fingers while cutting bamboo with a machete and the insurance company our client refused to pay the insured amount during the hearing the plaintiff attorney began to demonstrate with a rolled-up sheet of paper how his client was cutting the bamboo when the accident happened no matter how he tried he could not reproduce the position of the fingers with the alleged cut of the machete the only possible match would be if the plaintiff had deliberately extended his fingers over a plane surface and hacked his own fingers based on this disastress performance the judge determined an expert opinion and later dismissed the case due to deliberate self-mutilation while he was a jerk one has to wonder what sort of trouble he was in to chop off his own fingers for insurance money i do only civil litigation you would think it would generally be a battle against equals professionals v professionals it's not i face a fair amount of parties representing themselves pro often otherwise smart people who wouldn't think to do their own plumbing or operate on their own appendix but have no qualms about appearing in court on their own behalf surprisingly they don't know what they are doing s one of my favorites from a deposition we didn't pay company x's invoices because we heard they were going through bankruptcy they weren't and b it wouldn't be a valid defense to non-payment if they had been it happens more often than you would think one attorney that people continue to hire brian is sort of a legend as opposing counsel four times and six years he has lost cases against my firm where he could have won this is civil litigation but the guy has a knack for spoiling his momentum one in particular the evidence pointed to our client was at fault and we were asked to settle brian introduced a witness and voicemail to the record we had no knowledge of these and asked to review upon review we were confused as the voicemail had nothing to do with proving their case and made the plaintiff look like a lunatic it was full of incoherent rambling and swearing we allow the exhibits to be entered and they went over as we expected and we won the counter claim not an attorney but i did an internship at the city's attorney's office one summer leading to not wanting to be an attorney man was suing the city for evicting him from a public housing development claims he doesn't speak english and forced the city to hire an interpreter for the hearing city says he was evicted because he was raising chickens in the apartment his attorney insists that's absurd no one would do that pushes for proof the chickens were his clients judge wasn't convinced about the proof everything looks like it is going well for the guy until it comes up that the chickens were given to a farm for slaughter guy jumps up and starts yelling give me my chickens back in english judge starts laughing attorneys start laughing case is dismissed it's quite a sadistic picture poor guy is devastated after learning that his chicken children have been sent to slaughter judge laughs attorneys laugh man now evicted seen not a lawyer went to court yada traffic light out cops everywhere handing out tickets i get one for rolling through a red light though i had stopped i stated it was possible the officer just didn't see me stop and asked if any other officers were witness officer replied every cop in our department was there handing out tickets judge said none of you thought to direct traffic seems like you handed out enough tickets that you recognize the down light was a problem dismissed judge dismissed every one of the tickets that were contested in the room from that day one cop wasted half the forces night i hope he never lives it down not a lawyer but represented myself against an employer who terminated me i spent hours upon hours day after day preparing for this case i printed out emails recorded telephone calls mountains of evidence i wore my best suit and nervous as all frick showed up ready to plead my case when i get there my former employer opens with we terminated woe milkerson for truancy he was supposed to report to work after his doctor's appointment but did not show up until 3 p.m there's an awkward silence the judge says but in your written statement you claim he didn't report to work until 12 pm in the time card you presented to me it shows that whoa milkerson reported to work at 10 30 a.m in more silence i won opposing council introduced a highly relevant and bloody crucial piece of evidence during the cross-examination itself we were really p and we had every right to argue that this was deliberate suppression of relevant documents during discovery but rather than object to its admissibility we asked for our lunch break to commence earlier so we could take instructions from our client as to how to proceed which turned out to be a darn excellent course of action the document prima facial looked supportive of the defendant's case but it actually in substance was pretty damning for them we basically came back from the lunch break to rub the defendant's witness face in it and the witness was so shaken he broke for lack of a better word to describe how he couldn't carry on his bulls and completely admitted to his negligence on the stand he admitted as well that he copied the expert's opinion instead of giving his own independent evidence it was a beautiful trial my father is a physician and occasionally serves as an expert witness in some cases involving insurance payouts for car wrecks he had just spent some time explaining all of the different forces involved in the accident and how that could translate to years of back problems his specialty he was quite technical in his explanation and the opposing attorney thought that my dad was overreaching his expertise and was talking more as an engineer rather than a doctor so he asked him if he was an engineer my dad responded that yes he was in fact an engineer as he had a bachelor's in engineering from before he went to med school it apparently didn't completely resolve the case but the attorney did have to backtrack quite a bit and it really strengthened the patient's case that the insurance company should continue paying for treatment your dad is basically a rocket surgeon now but work with lots we deal with car accidents and this particular girl was claiming severe whiplash and lower back injuries from a minor rear-end accident some of her injuries were legitimate but she was claiming that her life was ruined and she was unable to function in society she worked as a physical therapy age studying to become a pt so she knew just what to say but she didn't know what not to post on facebook she claimed she was in constant pain after the accident and couldn't go to the gym the day after the accident there's a pic of her lifting weights hashtag accident can't hold me back she claimed a month of lost wages but there she is in a patient graduation from treatment photo on her works website the week after tge accident she missed zero days off work she claimed that she couldn't travel anymore and guess who had photos of vegas strippers all over her instagram for her sister's 21st birthday she asked for 200 k and she got 9 k for the legitimate injuries and mediation as the mediator laughed at her facebook feed not a lawyer but a relative of a retired prosecutor relative was working misdemeanor criminal court cases get called in alphabetical order and two women named catherine smith and catherine smith were scheduled to have their hearings before the judge not their actual names did you get the point both had similar crimes but slightly different so the bailiff announces the next case to the courtroom catherine smith for one count of possession of c with the intention to sell and one count of prostitution so catherine smith stands up and indignantly cries whoa whoa just wait a second where the heck did the prostitution charge come from i may deal crack but i am not a w easiest drug dealing case my relative ever prosecuted jesus christ that sounds like it'd be a scene out of a comedy movie a while back i was prosecuting an illegal discharge of hazardous substances at a recycling facility specifically the charge was for illegal storage and disposal of crt glass which contains lead cadmium and a few other has substances to demonstrate that the owner had no idea that he was receiving crt glass the defense attorney introduced shipping manifests that lacked the term crt monitors or any other word that indicated that material a close inspection of the manifests however indicated that the defense attorney had just control plus f the documents for certain keywords because what the manifests also demonstrated was that this facility as well as two additional facilities owned by the defendant had been accepting asbestos hexavalent chromium and various other hazardous substances that the facility was not authorized to take that attorney literally handed us the case on a silver platter we found emails linking the defendant to knowledge of the crt disposal as well so we even convicted him on our original charge i represented a client who was defrauded into purchasing a bad business the defendant was not willing to settle and all settlement talks eventually halted also the defendant's attorney was pretty slimy and told me they didn't have a lot of the records i was requesting because her computer crashed and had to be formatted the defendant got a new attorney a year into the case and her new attorney told me about all of these records his client had several of which proved my case and were supposedly destroyed in the computer crash his client was clearly not happy a settlement was reached shortly after lawyer here had a trial where the basic elements of the claim against my client amounted to one that he abused opposing party and two that she was in threat of future abuse all nonsense but that's what they needed to show we get to trial an opposing party who was supposed to be unrepresented shows up with five lawyers two advocates and two interpreters but this is a family law issue and these lawyers are from a business law firm i'm curious where this will go they put on a case that never once mentions any abuse or threat of future abuse and end by proving that she had secretly moved to another town prior to filing the motion meaning that he couldn't pose a threat to her because he didn't know where she was i just pointed out to the judge that there was no need for me to put on a case wtf school lawyer here had a student claim she aggravated an injury at school because the teacher hadn't followed the doctor's orders when the doctor got on the stand he testified that a few weeks after filling out the school form which we had he'd spoken to the mom on the phone and ordered some changes to the student's routine then mom testified that she'd emailed this new info to the teacher except we had all the emails and none of them said anything about the doctor mom backtracked and said she must have forgotten because she'd been busy at work and then at closing argument the family's attorney explained to the jury that schools are subject to a heightened standard willful and wanton not negligence and so it was their job to determine whether the school had disregarded a known danger naturally we argued that the school couldn't well disregard a known danger if no one had ever told them about the new routine in the first place the jury agreed not a lawyer my wife got hit by a drunk driving teenager years ago parents have dollar sign dollar sign dollar sign dollar sign and friends with the cops so they get it hidden that their daughter was super drunk she couldn't even stand up according to some nurses who lived across the street and responded right away their insurance refuses to pay without evidence wife tells lawyer to take it to court in their position the teenager freely admits she was drinking says it totally changed her life she couldn't believe she almost killed someone she's never touched a drop since and really sorry for all of this that her parents have done insurance company lawyer looks at wife's lawyer and says we will give you a call tomorrow row can't believe that apple rolled that far away from the tree that said one could argue parents protecting their child is a good thing but at this point as was only about money so yeah frick them my wife is a court clerk she told me a story a court clerk friend of hers told her de has a shaky case at best against a defendant police were trying to pin a drug charge on a guy with literally zero evidence the report read that a certain amount of weed and m were found and recovered in the defendant's car but the evidence was lost guy maintains his innocence and has no priors the defense attorney is destroying the offices on the stand for inconsistencies between their accounts and poor documentation on the official police report the prosecution's ace in the hole was a part of the police report that read something to the effect that the police k9 said there was marijuana in them and in the car rather than saying something like the police k9 alerted the officers to the presence of drugs it left the defense attorney no choice but to call the police canine to the stand to confirm its testimony da drops the case yes i used to videotape depositions many years ago client was suing insurance company for two years back wages after an injury conversation went like this insurance lawyer it says you're asking for and twenty thousand dollars for two years back pay client yup 60k per year ill well we have your previous tax returns those are only 30k per year client's lawyer i'd advise you to client i know i only put that on my tax form i actually make much more the insurance lawyer very calmly asked to go off the record he said well your client just admitted to tax fraud on video this case is pretty much done now and i don't want to put you out but i need to figure out whether or not i'm legally compelled to tell the judge or irs about this we'll be in touch tldr guy suing for back wages admitted to tax fraud on video deposition did work experience at a trial where the victim flat out stated that the defendant was innocent turns out she's pretty bad at english so when she gave her account it appeared that the defendant had committed a crime they then gave her a witness statement to sign she can't read no good so just signed it anyway this all came out of testimony whilst the prosecution lawyer desperately tried to get her to rephrase what she said funnily enough the trial wasn't immediately thrown out so they brought more witnesses in to testify all backing up the wrong account of what happened comma this all came out of testimony whilst the prosecution lawyer desperately tried to get her to rephrase what she said funnily enough horrifyingly enough the trial wasn't immediately thrown out so they brought more witnesses in to testify all backing up the wrong account of what happened ftfy a barrister friend told me about a case observation she witnessed during her training a guy was up for freaking a minor and he adamantly insisted to his lawyer that his defense was that he had never even seen the girl yet alone met her this despite witnesses in the bar and incriminating cctv footage showing someone who looked like him leaving the bar and going to his car in the car park when he was questioned he steadfastly stuck to his story when the questioning ended there was a pause and he yelled at the judge there was no way i could have know she wasn't 16 when she sucked me off literally blowing his whole case accidentally proved not often made tactical errors often arguing a case on a voter recount in front of a judge judge says i'm going with x that's in my favor so i shut up opposing counsel in arguing a different point later suddenly goes back to the earlier point and belabors it client also a lawyer says to me don't say anything i whisper back don't worry wasn't planning to judge begins rubbing his nose and looking irritated after a few minutes cuts off opposing counsel saying i already ruled on this point mr smith me anything to add i replied in the negative and won my motion would it have come out differently i don't know did opposing counsel make it easier for me absolutely ial this was a restraining order case my dude had allegedly been within 500 feet of his ex at trial it came out that she had told my guy that she had told him the restraining order was dropped hence he couldn't have violated the restraining order willfully judge got furious and dismissed the case it's amazing how many people miss that part of the restraining order usually reinforced by the judge it goes both ways and if you intentionally violate the order you can be in trouble too not a lawyer i know but my parents were in a lawsuit where this happened they owned a business and on the other side of it were businesses as well their neighbor to the left sued us claiming that we had been using their property without paying them or without permission that we were essentially trying to adverse possess it we got a surveyor to come in and the surveyor said that not only were we using all of our property but we had been paying rent to them on about 20 feet that was also our property obviously they weren't happy so they got their own surveyor who gave us 50 feet we won the lawsuit now their little patch of property has a rusty fence all around it with keep out signs everywhere it's about 20 x 10 feet i am a lawyer who defends a state from injury claims there was a claim where there was a dispute as to the value of a state employee's injury we went to trial to argue the extent of the injury when the employee takes the stand and is under direct examination by her attorney she is unable to answer basic questions about her name and address everyone just thought it was nerves but eventually the employee confesses that she is a convicted felon and she stole her sister's identity to obtain the state job judges jaw hits the floor and the employee's attorney just keeps going through his examination like nothing happened the judge stopped him and had the court reporter read back the testimony the employee's attorney was still oblivious to what happened the judge recommended the employee drop a case and quit her job immediately the employee's attorney wanted to keep going the judge then told him that his client will drop a case and quit case was dropped and she quit that afternoon the vast majority of the time it's not an opponent who directly proves up my case but the expert s he she hires instead it's only happened twice in my relatively short career but these types of cases usually settle real quick after the shortest depositions of my life l do you have an opinion on what may have caused plaintiff's spinal condition d yes l in your opinion within a reasonable degree of medical and surgical certainty could it have been what happened to him at work d no a lot of doctors charge for a pre-interview before a deposition and a lot of attorneys hate paying so i understand how this can happen but i've got to feel for the guy at the end of one of those debts former prosecutor in the uk here defendant had not attended community service and went to trial stating he had a valid reason not to attend usually we would accept doctor's notes proof of hospital admission evidence of travel disruption but he had none of this he told his solicitor he was unwell and his note was lost in the post i began cross-examination by asking if he attended on the date no i didn't did he have a transport issue no was he unwell no i'm fit as a fiddle i looked at his solicitor a friend of mine outside court and he buried his head in his hands so why didn't you attend oh bugger i was meant to say i was sick wasn't like quickest trial i ever won not a lawyer but i had a legal dispute settled this way had a car crash in which both myself and the other party were driving towards each other both too quickly around the corner and crashed a few minutes after the crash another driver who knew the other driver in the crash arrived on the scene and offered to act as a witness despite not having seen the crash in this witness description of the event they started off by describing the roads as totally blocked by hedges with no visibility of the traffic ahead they then went on to describe how they could see my driving is way too fast for the conditions having seen me from miles ahead obviously called them on the contradiction and got the blame split 50 stroke 50. now but i got my younger brother out of a traffic ticket related to a minor fender bender i went to traffic court with him and asked the judge for permission to assist him since he was under 18 at the time the judge was cool with it anyways the first thing i said was my brother asked for it was never shown a copy of the police report from the responding officer can we see it before we go any further the counter's attorney said there isn't one the officer failed to complete his report because he was called to another incident immediately after this one the case dismissed court fees returned if you are new to the channel you can subscribe i publish new videos every day until then check another video [Music] bye for now

Channel: Updoot

Views: 117,093

Rating: 4.8889894 out of 5

Keywords: lawyers, lawyer stories, professionals, funny lawyer, funny lawyer moments, funny lawyer stories, funny lawyer fails, #updootst, updoot, updoot reddit, updoot everything, reddit on tap, toadfilms, pewdiepie, reddit, askreddit, funny reddit, reddit stories, top posts, reddit top posts, reddit cringe, comedy, reddit compilation, /r, r/, r/askreddit, top posts of r/, askreddit reading, best reddit posts, top posts of all time, people of reddit, askreddit question, ask reddit, subreddit, sub

Id: jRRbU3EMsk4

Length: 26min 13sec (1573 seconds)

Published: Fri Sep 11 2020