Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When is it okay for a lawyer to lie? (2018)

americanbar.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 146 posts

Re: When is it okay for a lawyer to lie? (2018)

#111

Post by drewmol »

ikeboy wrote: post #74
dependenttypes wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not want to dismiss what you are saying (in fact I find it extremely interesting) but don't 80%+ of people in all professions (or even out in society) just suck? I am more surprised that you consider 50% to be the minimum of bad lawyers rather than a higher percentage.

80% of doctors don't suck. It's not that lawyers suck, per se. It's that you're dealing with an adversary, and if you get a 50th percentile lawyer to go against a 90th percentile lawyer, well, you could still win if you've got a good case, but it's certainly not as likely as the reverse. In many cases you get what you pay for.

Yes! Also, satisfaction scores are pretty low for people who've been indicated for aggrevated murder, same as if you're diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer. If your goal is to walk away free and unharmed then just about everyone is gonna suck, most of the time. Also, you can't bribe cancer.

Re: When is it okay for a lawyer to lie? (2018)

#112

Post by pc86 »

ta1234567890 wrote: post #66
parsimo2010 wrote: post #7

These are interesting scenarios, but let's not forget that the rules are only binding under the threat of being caught and punished. They aren't like the laws of physics. So if a lawyer isn't supposed to engage in trickery, they might do so anyway, especially if they think they can get away with it and their client happens to be a rich criminal who pays them extra to do shady stuff. Source: Lawyers wouldn't have the…

> Lawyers wouldn't have the reputation they do if all the members of the club had integrity. Some anecdotes: - A company I started, hired a big-brand SV legal firm, super expensive. We thought they would be great. But we were so little to them, it was sometimes even hard to get a timely response. In the end we stopped using them, but not before we signed a bunch of documents they reviewed and told us were fine to sig…

Per your second point, if you can prove that a lawyer knowingly put lies in a civil complaint that's a slam dunk for the Bar to sanction them. Another way to say "truths twisted to paint a mostly false story [with] plenty of...omissions" is "making a legal argument."

Per your third point, I was once wrongly accused in a criminal case. I was a nobody, random person making like $30k a year at the time but was able to retain someone from K&L Gates. I think he felt bad for me because he basically lobbied the partners for permission to take me on at a reduced rate (like $1.5k total). A couple letters and a court appearance later and the misunderstanding was rectified. But the important part is I was obviously a nobody, the partners at this firm bill tens of thousands of dollars a day. $1500 is probably less than a single office location spends on coffee in a week. But this guy sat with me for hours going over the case and where the problems were.

Re: When is it okay for a lawyer to lie? (2018)

#113

Post by ikeboy »

drewmol wrote: post #111
ikeboy wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

80% of doctors don't suck. It's not that lawyers suck, per se. It's that you're dealing with an adversary, and if you get a 50th percentile lawyer to go against a 90th percentile lawyer, well, you could still win if you've got a good case, but it's certainly not as likely as the reverse. In many cases you get what you pay for.

Yes! Also, satisfaction scores are pretty low for people who've been indicated for aggrevated murder, same as if you're diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer. If your goal is to walk away free and unharmed then just about everyone is gonna suck, most of the time. Also, you can't bribe cancer.

Difference is, your family doctor isn't going to try giving you chemo treatments.

Re: When is it okay for a lawyer to lie? (2018)

#114

Post by smichel17 »

michaelt wrote: post #94
ovi256 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But there is no truth in an adversary justice system (and I'm not sure about the other systems either). There are only the parties' differing perspectives (if they were not differing there wouldn't be a complaint) and a court ruling at the end, which we take for impartial.

Imagine I receive a letter from a lawyer saying "It appears your product A infringes our client's patents B and C" That's fairly clearly a statement of fact - that in their professional opinion they believe their client has a reasonable chance of prevailing in court. Do lawyers not have an obligation to display good faith and professional candour in making such statements of fact, even to their adversaries?

I do not agree that's clearly a statement of fact. An unrelated example that demonstrates why: laat week, I was having a (text) conversation with two other people, and I made a comment to the effect of, "I think it's a waste of time for you to argue about X, figuring out how to do Y would be more productive instead." To which one of the other participants responded, "...but we were talking about Z, not X!"

The literal words we had written were the facts. Their meaning was up for interpretation. If something as basic as the subject of a conversation cannot be necessarily be agreed upon, something more complicated like "does this infringe on a patent?" certainly has room for disagreement.

Re: When is it okay for a lawyer to lie? (2018)

#115

Post by flowerlad »

function_seven wrote: post #67
flowerlad wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the defendant does not want to plead guilty then the attorney cannot plead guilty on behalf of the defendant. "This morning the Supreme Court overturned a Louisiana inmate’s death sentence because the inmate’s lawyer – hoping to save his client’s life – had told the jury that the inmate was guilty, even though the inmate had expressly objected to that strategy." See: https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/05/opinion-anal…

Defend his client. It's the government's job to establish the guilt of the accused. It is not the defendant's advocate's job to help out. The actual guilt or innocence of their client is not a concern—legally speaking. Ensuring that they get a fair trial, and are afforded all the process due to them is. A defense attorney will poke whatever holes they find in the state's evidence, in their theory, and in their conduc…

How can you do that without lying? "My client is not guilty..." is already a lie.

Re: When is it okay for a lawyer to lie? (2018)

#116

Post by blaser-waffle »

codesections wrote: post #92
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same could be said for software developers. While I am aware of the audience here, I'm not trolling. There is a remarkable similarity between the "helplessness/vulnerability", for lack of a better term, of clients using a lawyer and the helplessness/vulnerability of users in using software authored by someone else (not to mention clients who hire software developers to write software for them). In each case, the clie…

> Same could be said for software developers. I am licensed attorney and a full-time software developer and I agree 100% - there are remarkable similarities. (And there are strong parallels between big tech and biglaw, especially for junior devs/associates, but that's a bit of a tangent)

> (And there are strong parallels between big tech and biglaw, especially for junior devs/associates, but that's a bit of a tangent)

Are there parallels? I mean to some degree all large, well paying orgs are going to have similarities, but a plucky undergrad coming out of CalTech will get $130k+ at a FAANGM or orgs that pay roughly in that continuum, and be able to jump to all sorts of other options, while most newly minted lawyers are looking at average salaries of $70-$80k USD while having huge law school debt on top of undergrad debt. This means ruthless wageslavery at BigLaw until you make partner or you pay off enough of that debt to walk.

As a dude with a PoliSci degree and a minor in IT, I did a good hard look at the cost benefits when I graduated... and went IT. As the bad tattoo says: "no regurts".

Re: When is it okay for a lawyer to lie? (2018)

#117

Post by blaser-waffle »

nmfisher wrote: post #39
umvi wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I didn't realize how downright nefarious lawyers can be until I read "Bad Blood" and thought to myself "How is what David Boies does to help Theranos legal? This seems extremely unethical at the very least, and highly illegal at most"

As someone who (in an earlier life) started off in the profession, here's a dirty little secret - I'd say around 2/3 of lawyers get by on pure bluff, bluster and intimidation. I'm talking shouting on phone calls, slamming fists on tables, threatening letters, and so on. Once you have the slightest clue about the law, it's easy to just laugh it off. The problem is, most people don't know any better, so these tactics a…

> As someone who (in an earlier life) started off in the profession, here's a dirty little secret - I'd say around 2/3 of lawyers get by on pure bluff, bluster and intimidation. I'm talking shouting on phone calls, slamming fists on tables, threatening letters, and so on.

"If you have the facts on your side, you pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, you pound the law.

If you don't have facts or law on your side, you pound the table"

Re: When is it okay for a lawyer to lie? (2018)

#118

Post by justinclift »

srtjstjsj wrote: post #106
justinclift wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the perspective of a lay person, it doesn't to be effective in doing so. eg. Places like Prenda Law being able to operate openly for years before being shut down, etc.

Prenda Law operated for 1 year before they were caught, and then. Disbarred and imprisoned. The reason they continued their crimes for 3 years was that it's impossible to prevent someone from doing paperwork crimes if they aren't in prison.

> Prenda Law operated for 1 year ...

While technically yes. They just opened another company and kept on going. Guess I should have said "Prenda Law and it's various incarnations". ;)

> ... it's impossible to prevent someone from doing paperwork crimes if they aren't in prison.

That's the whole point. ;)

On that note, it looks like Paul Hansmeier is now attempting to start that racket back up again, even from behind bars.

Re: When is it okay for a lawyer to lie? (2018)

#119

Post by ta1234567890 »

ikeboy wrote: post #71
ta1234567890 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lawyers wouldn't have the reputation they do if all the members of the club had integrity. Some anecdotes: - A company I started, hired a big-brand SV legal firm, super expensive. We thought they would be great. But we were so little to them, it was sometimes even hard to get a timely response. In the end we stopped using them, but not before we signed a bunch of documents they reviewed and told us were fine to sig…

There's a big difference between a lawyer who will take a case and a lawyer who can handle a case. I agree 100%. One thing I do is look for similar cases and contact the lawyer on the winning side. The "formulas" do save you money, though. Would you rather pay 5k for them to use an existing template slightly edited, or 25k to write a complaint from scratch? It depends on the case, there is no right answer. You can al…

You have excellent points, and I hope I had known them many years ago.

One of the main issues for non-lawyers is that the first time you need to hire a lawyer, you have no idea what you are doing, so there's a huge learning curve and a lot of information asymmetry to overcome.

Re: When is it okay for a lawyer to lie? (2018)

#120

Post by ta1234567890 »

dependenttypes wrote: post #69
ta1234567890 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lawyers wouldn't have the reputation they do if all the members of the club had integrity. Some anecdotes: - A company I started, hired a big-brand SV legal firm, super expensive. We thought they would be great. But we were so little to them, it was sometimes even hard to get a timely response. In the end we stopped using them, but not before we signed a bunch of documents they reviewed and told us were fine to sig…

I do not want to dismiss what you are saying (in fact I find it extremely interesting) but don't 80%+ of people in all professions (or even out in society) just suck? I am more surprised that you consider 50% to be the minimum of bad lawyers rather than a higher percentage.

Not sure about percentages, but it is definitely true that for any professional service, most people are just trying to make some money and go about their they without being bothered or caring too much. So you almost always have to deal with people that don't care about you or your situation and will just give you some template solution that fits their situation and their past experiences (not yours).

In particular it is very evident with doctors when they see you for barely a few minutes and diagnose you. Sure, if it's something super common you'll be fine, but if it's not, good luck trying to convince them to keep digging. They seem to think they are always right and you have no idea what you are talking about because you are not a doctor.

Post reply on HN