Sometimes....

there's just nothing worth saying.

Such has been the case for the last few weeks. My life right now is unbelievably depressing (I was going to say "unbearably", but clearly, I'm bearing it just fine; no suicidal tendencies here - although, I must say, if I did have any, they'd certainly be at the fore by now).

For the unaware, I'm an attorney. I've been licensed to practice law in at least one jurisdiction since December 1994 (and was admitted in others later). However, I can't afford to open my own firm, and I cannot buy a job.

In my last job, I was a "legal assistant." Basically, my job was to make my (former) boss look good. I did the work, he took the credit. Then he fired me for daring to protest gender discrimination (actually, the stated reason was that the firm could not meet its payroll, and I was an "expensive employee", but, since I was immediately replaced with a temporary employee (for whom the firm had to pay the agency more than they had been paying me), that's fairly clearly nothing but pretextual).

He claims there was no discrimination to protest.

Really? None? Well, let's see. When I was hired, I had already been licensed in another state for 9 1/2 years, but didn't have the bar here yet. He told me at the time that every time the firm had tried to have more than 3 attorneys, there had been "problems" (of an unspecified nature), so that once I had the bar here, he would expect that I would look for a new position, elsewhere. Okay, so, at the time, that seemed gender-neutral. However, the following year, the firm hired 2 male attorneys, right out of law school - and the *minute* each of them were sworn in, they were promoted. When I got admitted after them? Well, I got cake - from the other legal assistants (all female) - but no promotion.

And it's not like my work wasn't good enough. For over three years, it was good enough for him to sign his name to the briefs that I researched and wrote for him, while he worked on his farm and went on vacation. It was good enough for him to rely on my investigations and my organization when he went off to trials, often with little or no preparation time of his own. If it's good enough for him to use my work, then my work ought to be good enough for me to be allowed to practice. But, apparently, not in his firm. His firm only promotes men. How, exactly, is that not discriminatory?

If you can see it, drop me a line and explain it to me, because I'm still trying to wrap my head around the concept, and, frankly, I'm failing miserably.

So, since the end of July 2007, I have been unemployed. I had hired an attorney in August to represent me in my claim against my former employer - she turned out to be a worthless piece of work, but she ran up a bill that I'm now obligated to try to pay off - and now I owe her over $5700. I hadn't thought I could be objective enough to handle the claim myself; as it is, I'm handling it myself anyway, so I should have just saved the retainer.

My unemployment benefits ran out at the end of January 2008. I have applied for over 1000 jobs, and had fewer than 20 interviews - no call backs, no offers, no fucking job.

I already had no savings (I'm also still paying off student loans and medical bills).

My husband is also unemployed.

So, we're broke. And when I say "broke", I mean literally destitute. I have fewer than 10 pennies in my changepurse, and -$600 in my checking account (yeah, that's a negative number, as in severely overdrawn). I don't mean "broke" as in "we'll have to cut out going out to dinner" - we did that months ago.

My family can't help. Mom's on a fixed income. My brother's in school and living off an Army pension. They're it. I don't have anyone else.

His family won't help. In fact, his stepfather told him that he shouldn't bother to call them anymore, "since you only call when you need something" - nice, considering that the last 3 times his mother or stepfather called us was when they needed hubby to fix their computers for them, for free - oh, and despite the fact that we're broke, we had to front the costs for the parts and for shipping, but apparently, that doesn't matter. His father gave us $20 in gasoline so we could continue to get to job interviews, and said he might be able to bring our checking account balance "back up to $0", but he'd have to "check his finances" - this from a man who paid over $20k to have cabinets with "air brakes" in his new kitchen in his new $275k house. Ok, dad. Thanks. I won't hold my breath waiting for your call (which, by the way, has not been forthcoming for the past week - just sayin').

So, I applied for food stamps. My stomach aches at just the thought that somehow my life has gotten so bad that I need - and qualify for - public assistance. Seven years of post-high-school education (which, again, I'm still paying off), and I qualify for public assistance. How sad is that?

We were supposed to have the required "face to face" meeting with the case worker last Wednesday. Our appointment was set for 1:30 p.m. I know this, because while on the phone with the case worker to schedule this appointment, I wrote the date and time down on my scratch pad that I keep between my keyboard and the telephone. Here it is: "Food - [case worker's name] - Wed 3/19 1:30 p.m. - Job Center". When we arrived at the Job Center at 1:25, the receptionist informed me that our appointment was at 1:00, and when we hadn't arrived by 1:05, our case worker had left for the week.

Not the day.

The week.

Friday was Good Friday, so the Job Center was closed, and the case worker had arranged to take a personal day on Thursday. Apparently, she decided that she didn't feel like working on Wednesday afternoon, either, so she changed our appointment time in the schedule book (you could still see where the original appointment had been written in and erased, although the receptionist tried to hide it), didn't bother to tell us that it had been changed, and then, when we (unsurprisingly) "didn't show", she left.

The receptionist didn't tell us that she had left immediately. No, she let us wait until 2:00 before she admitted that our case worker was actually gone, and that she had been trying to reach another case worker to see if they could fit us in instead, to no avail. She told us someone would call us at home to reschedule - at 2:15, after we'd been waiting for nearly an hour.

It is now a week later.

I have called and left several messages for the case worker. I have left messages for her supervisor. I have spoken with the receptionist (who assures me that there is nothing she can do, as the case workers set their own appointments). No one for whom I've left a message has returned my calls. No one has called to reschedule the appointment.

Did I mention that this is for food stamps? Did I mention that we're fucking destitute? Did I mention that we have very little food left, and no way to obtain more unless and until this bitch calls me back? Yeah. I'm displeased.

And, of course, tempers are tight around the apartment just now, because hubby, on top of being hungry, is also suffering from five infected teeth (which need to be surgically extracted, which we cannot afford - did I mention that we have no medical insurance, and I haven't been able to buy my insulin for over a month?), is also trying to quit smoking, and has very little in the way of caffeine available to him. He's jonesin', and he's grouchy.

See, for our entire marriage, I've been the responsible one, the breadwinner, the one who solves all problems. He's come to expect that, and I've let him. So, now that I can't fix it, he still expects me to; and when I don't, he bites my head off....and I, never shy to be a bitch myself - well, I bite back.

Of course, I'm pissed that he doesn't even try - to take responsibility, to fix things, to fucking help out a teensy little bit; to get his ass off the computer, and maybe wash a fucking dish now and then.

Eh. I don't like washing dishes. What can I say? He'll have to get off the computer soon; we can't afford cable, much less his World of Warcraft subscription.

Anyway.

I vent to my mother. I try to relate the cute stories, too, but there are fewer of them. She, still suffering from the after-effects of her disastrous marriage to my father (which ended 33 years ago, ffs), urges divorce. I'm not doing it. Even if I could afford the filing fee (and I can't), (a) I made a promise, a commitment, a vow, and that means something to me - I knew what he was like, all his flaws and faults, before I married him, they're just more irritating now that we're poor, that's all; and (b) I know the judges in this county, and I won't put any of them in that kind of position of power over me, thank you.

I don't know how to explain to Mom that the good outweighs the bad, that I remain committed to this marriage and this man, and love him with all my heart despite (perhaps because of) his flaws, in any way that she'll understand. I wish I could, but I can't.

I love my mom, but our priorities are often different. She loves me, but she doesn't understand me. She wants me to leave him, come home, live in her basement....like I could find a job there, in a state where I'm not admitted to the bar, any more easily than I can here? Um...no. I love her for the offer, but. No.

So, yeah, it's not that there's nothing going on. It's more that what is going on is such stupid shit that I can't bear to think about it, much less blog about it.

I'm sick of election news already. My own life is depressing, as noted previously. There's nothing much else going on. So, I'll blog again when things improve, or get notably worse, as the case may be.

In the meantime, here's an interesting site for fun and profit. Color me appalled.

a. ;)

Dietary Goodness

August 1, 2007 - weight: 325 lbs.
January 30, 2008 - weight: 285 lbs.

40 lbs. down, 130 lbs. to go. Yay me.

a. ;)

I do not now, nor have I ever, had any problem with either: (1) the United States having interests overseas or (2) going overseas to defend/protect those interests.

What I *do* have a problem with is the hypocritical half-truths that are used to mask the real reasons we go in, when we *do* go overseas to defend/protect those interests.

For example: the public was "sold" on going in to Somalia because we were supposedly going in for "humanitarian" purposes...those nasty warlords were being so mean to the people, and whatnot. What a bunch of hooey. We went in to Somalia because British Petroleum and Amoco own the vast majority of the mineral rights and/or oil production leases in Somalia, and couldn't extract their oil without interference by the nasty warlords' infighting.

I have no problem with going in to protect BP and Amoco, but let's say that's what we're doing. If we were really going to go in somewhere for humanitarian reasons, we should have gone in to the Sudan, where the human rights violations then (and now) were at least 10 times worse than anything going on then in Somalia. But we didn't. Why? Simple: no oil in the Sudan, and even if there were oil there, the topography of the land would make extraction of said oil extremely difficult.

As Gordon Sinclair pointed out in his "One Canadian's View of America", America has gone in to numerous countries to help in the aftermath of disaster. I have no problem with our doing that, either. I do have a problem, however, with our charging those countries (particularly those countries in the Third World) for our help. Aren't we the richest country? Can't we afford to help out countries that aren't as well off? Isn't that how charity is supposed to work? If a country has just sustained a disaster and needs help to rebuild infrastructure afterward, doesn't it stand to reason that they can't afford to pay us back for the help we give? Why don't we just write it off? Put down the expense as part of the cost of maintaining good will?

As for America being the world's watchdog, I think that our role would be much less necessary if the United Nations were in a position to take over that role. But in order for that to happen, we'd have to let the UN take on a lot more responsibility, and we've never, as a country, been willing to do that - perhaps because if we did, we might have to face our own shortcomings. For example, we've still not paid the fines imposed upon us by the International Court of Justice for the mining of Nicaragua's harbors. Let the UN have some teeth. If we're in the wrong, we ought to admit it, and take our knocks like everyone else.

If we stopped being hypocritical and admitted when we make mistakes, the other countries of the world might actually see us in a better light. People elsewhere might very well still hate us for things done in the past, but they might at least have some respect for us going forward.

a.

(Originally written in July 2004)

Civil Procedure 101 - Part 3

Continuing series in an effort to live up to the blog's name. Feel free to use any information contained herein at will.

Disclaimer: for informational purposes only; not to be construed as actual legal advice pertaining to any particular situation.

Subpoenas

A subpoena is a written order issued by an attorney to a witness to appear to give testimony, and/or bring documents to trial or produce documents to the attorney issuing the subpoena. If documents are obtained from a non-party witness, the attorney who obtained them typically will produce them to the other parties in the case.

Costs

In a civil matter, the parties bear the cost of their own witnesses and discovery. As a practical matter, this usually means that the attorney (or, on the defense side, the defendant's insurance company) fronts the cost.

For example, in a motor vehicle accident case, the plaintiff (the person who was injured and filed the complaint) is usually represented by an attorney (but not always - you can always represent yourself). The attorney typically fronts the costs of the litigation, and either bills the plaintiff on a monthly or quarterly basis, or takes the costs out of the settlement at the end.

The defendant, on the other hand, will almost always have car insurance. The insurance company will arrange for representation of the defendant as part of his insurance coverage (the defendant can also arrange to have outside counsel, at his own expense). The insurance company is usually billed by the attorney they retain (many insurance defense attorneys are in-house, or work in "captive" law firms, owned by the insurer) for the costs as they go, and usually an insurance defense attorney will get approval of any costs they need to incur, beyond every-day items like photocopies and postage.

Pre-trial and Scheduling Conferences

A pre-trial conference in a civil matter is a meeting of the parties, their attorneys, and the judge. It takes place in the courtroom, and usually the attorneys and the judge work out a trial schedule, and discuss any pre-trial motions (such as motions in limine) that have to be decided before trial can go forward. The parties are usually present in the event that settlement is discussed, so that if the case can be settled, they can agree to the settlement's terms; then the court can approve the settlement, and the case doesn't have to go forward to trial (or can go forward, but with fewer issues to be decided). An attorney always has to have his client's approval of a settlement offer, before the attorney can accept it, so having the client present saves time.

A pre-trial conference differs from a scheduling conference. A scheduling conference happens soon after all parties have filed their initial documents (complaint and answer, etc), and sets certain deadlines and dates for the progress of the case as it goes forward. After the conference, the court usually issues a scheduling order to document those dates. Once that has been done, a scheduling order can be amended, but usually that requires a motion. A pre-trial conference, on the other hand, usually happens about 2-4 weeks before the trial date.

a. ;)

Civil Procedure 101 - Part 2

In my continuing efforts to live up to the name of the blog. Feel free to use the information provided.

Disclaimer: should not be taken as actual legal advice in any particular situation.

Motions

Motions to Dismiss

In addition to the motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, there are other motions to dismiss: for lack of jurisdiction, for improper venue, for failure to implead all necessary parties, etc.

In any motion to dismiss, you assume the allegations in the Complaint are true, and you have to demonstrate that there is some other factor that the plaintiff failed to include that impacts the court's ability to hear the case.

Motion for Summary Judgment

Similar to, but completely different from, a motion to dismiss, the motion for summary judgment can also end the case. Where a motion to dismiss has no impact on the defendant, however, a motion for summary judgment is a "win" for the party that succeeds. A motion for summary judgment can be brought by any party. It is usually not filed until after the Defenadnt has filed an Answer, but can be brought at any time.

In a MfSJ, the party filing the motion (the "moving party") sets out the "undisputed facts" and tries to demonstrate that there are no facts still in dispute that need resolution, the only issues are issues of law. If that is the case, the judge can decide the case, or a specific portion of the case, without a trial by jury.

A MfSJ can be filed seeking resolution of just the defendant's liability, and there can then be a jury trial on the amount of damages (this happens a lot, especially in negligence cases where the fact that the defendant caused the plaintiff's injuries is clear, but where facts regarding the medical treatment and actual damages are not).

Motions in Limine

Motions in Limine are filed to ask the court to set a limit, usually as to what sort of evidence can and cannot be introduced at trial.

Motion to Intervene

A person who is not a party, but who has an interest in a case that they want resolved or protected by the court, can file a motion to intervene. If granted, they become an intervening plaintiff. An example would be: in an motor vehicle accident case, a medical insurer who pays benefits for the plaintiff's accident-related injuries is entitled to recover the amount paid out if the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is successful; this is called a "subrogation lien". If the subrogated insurer is not named as a party (they're supposed to be, but mistakes happen), they can file a motion to intervene in the case in order to protect their lien.

Those are the most common types of motions. More later!

a. ;)