Trump's Lawyers Fined $1,000,000+
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 фев 2023
- ⚖️ Do you need a great lawyer? I can help! legaleagle.link/eagleteam ⚖️
The hammer came down on the lawyers. 🍋 Get 65% off of HelloFresh plus FREE shipping at legaleagle.link/hellofresh (code: LEGALEAGLE65)
Welcome back to LegalEagle. The most avian legal analysis on the internets.
🚀 Watch my next video early & ad-free on Nebula! legaleagle.link/watchnebula
👔 Suits by Indochino! legaleagle.link/indochino
GOT A VIDEO IDEA? TELL ME!
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Send me an email: devin@legaleagle.show
MY COURSES
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Interested in LAW SCHOOL? Get my guide to law school! legaleagle.link/lawguide
Need help with COPYRIGHT? I built a course just for you! legaleagle.link/copyrightcourse
SOCIAL MEDIA & DISCUSSIONS
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Twitter: legaleagle.link/twitter
Facebook: legaleagle.link/facebook
Tik Tok: legaleagle.link/tiktok
Instagram: legaleagle.link/instagram
Reddit: legaleagle.link/reddit
Podcast: legaleagle.link/podcast
OnlyFans legaleagle.link/onlyfans
Patreon legaleagle.link/patreon
BUSINESS INQUIRIES
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Please email my agent & manager at legaleagle@standard.tv
LEGAL-ISH DISCLAIMER
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Sorry, occupational hazard: This is not legal advice, nor can I give you legal advice. I AM NOT YOUR LAWYER. Sorry! Everything here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney-client relationship. Also, some of the links in this post may be affiliate links, meaning, at no cost to you, I will earn a small commission if you click through and make a purchase. But if you click, it really helps me make more of these videos! All non-licensed clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).
Special thanks:
Stock video and imagery provided by Getty Images and AP Archives
Music provided by Epidemic Sound
Short links by pixelme.me (pxle.me/eagle)
Maps provided by MapTiler/Geolayers
The fact these lawyers aren't disbarred is unbelievable
No kidding. These poor excuse for lawyers definitely shouldn't be allowed to practice law in any US state anymore.
Lawyers are a loyal bunch of sociopaths. They fight each other for a living and argue for cases they don't have to believe in. They know once the door is opened for disbarring stupid and questionable behavior and actions, they have targets on their backs.
Take away the big legal fees and celebrity status and see how fast the unethical lawyers run for the door.
Good news is that Rudy Guliani and the Kraken lady (I forgot her name) are both facing potential disbarment right now.
Just checked Sidney Powell isn't being disbarred (though she may still face consequences) but Rudy had his license suspended (so he could still be disbarred) and a bunch of his lawyers are facing a myriad of consequences including at least one criminal investigation.
Yet.
There is no expectation of professionalism, or even rationality, in the post trump world.
Telling a billionaire that the penalty for repeated blatant abuses of the justice system is *a fine* is basically saying there is no penalty at all.
EDIT: Wow, a lot of you are *really* getting hung up on the wrong part of this post.
tRump won't have to pay one cent. His donners will gladly pay the fines.
@@jimbeamm36 Even if it wasn't being paid for by donors, which is a completely seperate thing that should not be allowed, it still wouldn't matter. If you are rich enough to pay the penalty for for what should be an illegal act and not even notice it, then it's not really illegal for you.
I'm remembering a comment by BOTFC where he mentioned a rich guy he knew in college referring to a speeding ticket as a "go fast fee". Not a _fine._ A _fee._
Yes, I agree. A penalty to or punishment should be significant enough to cause the perpetrator REAL PAIN and hopefully an opportunity to reconsider their thoughts and actions as being unreasonable, unfair, or thoughtless of others. Sadly, penalty maximums are the often written directly into the law, limiting the justice system's ability to consider severe enough punishments to cause said pain.
it's not, just, a fine. The attorneys are eating those fines (you can argue they may get rescued but some damage is done anyway)
Having your political hero's incompetence and indiscretion pointing at one another, as a smokescreen for accountability,
digging a hole for all of time
is not where to pitch one's tent.
If the punishment for a crime is only a fine, then it's only illegal for the poor. This fine means literally nothing to these people.
Yeah, it's like taking a blade of grass from someone who has an entire lawn. Bad analogy, but still, I agree.
Yep, I know that they all are relieved by only having to pay a fine
They know that already, they just want it to seem like they're at least trying something, but honestly being lazy about it isn't really doing anything. We all know.
Agreed ... But I have yet to hear anyone propose an alternative system that doesn't sound like a gulag.
There actually are ways to make fines into a punishment for everybody. Maybe the easiest way is to change fines from fixed amounts to an amount tied to income. The easiest way to implement this is to calculate what is commonly refered to as "day income" and then fine a certain amount of day incomes. So let's say the fine for some crime is 5 day incomes. That means for someone with a day income of 10 dollars the fine is 50 dollars while the fine for someone with a day income of a million dollars is five million dollars.
Wait, in the U.S A LAWYER CAN GO LIVE ON TELEVISION TO PROMOTE HIS CASE? If you do this here in Brazil you will lose your license.
The USA is crazy.
Yeah, I know.
Crazy these Yankees, eh?
There is a bunch of things I wish US Layers couldn't do or else they'd lose their license
Joke country obsessed by the law but not with ethics.
@@kwanman5146
Well said. 👍That’s it, in a nutshell.
"It was not that the Complaint and Amended Complaint were inadequate in any respect, they were inadequate in nearly every respect" Had me absolutely dying, imagine having to write that as a seasoned judge
😊🥰😊🥰😊🥰
Outside of the law such concepts are called "fractal wrongness". That is, from a distance, a fractally wrong person's worldview is incorrect; and furthermore, if you focus on any small part of that person's worldview, that part is just as wrong as the whole worldview.
@@Z4r4sz so, Qan?
Reminds me of reading the documents for the omegaverse lawsuit. You can just *see* the judge's will to live withering alongside their patience in reading it.
@@Z4r4sz 😊🥰
suggesting bad lawyers to learn cooking so they do something useful is the most professional insult I`ve heard in a long time 😂
Again! Your segways to the commercial is legendary!
Also a very smooth transition to the ad!
I mean they may wanna consider having a backup plan at this point 😂
I wouldn't trust these people to handle anything I plan to eat.
That was perhaps the best, and yet most savage segue to a sponsor segment in the history of sponsored videos.
Honestly what's most crazy to me about all this is that there was no penalty for trying to incite stochastic terrorism by mentioning their home addresses many times. The only reason they would do it is in the hopes someone gets attacked.
The fact that they continually put the defendants home addresses on public documents just shows how reckless they are and they are deliberately trying to get these people hurt. That should be illegal.
It mostly is but the consequences are usually fines unless they found to be with malicious intent
What does it actually take to get disbarred? I feel like there should be a strike system for filing frivolous suits. Make grifters and the SLAPP happy radioactive to lawyers. Might do a lot to curb these behaviors.
Well seeing as how the lawyers had multiple opportunities to stop, they would have used far more than 3 strikes.
It's a popularity contest. That's why some lawyers are disbarred on the first DUI while some still practice while dealing with their 17th.
This would be enough for disbarment it just takes a while and I don’t know if they will actually be disbarred
As I understand it pretty much the only thing that gets you disbarred is mishandling clients' funds. But maybe that will change with all the outrageous behaviours we are seeing.
Most likely a three strike policy
Seriously, isn't there a federal ethics board regarding lawers and judges? Someone who has the authority to step in and stop this nonsense?
Um No there isn't. And you can pretty much sue anyone for any reason. Rather you win or not is up to the judge.
It isn’t that just the American Bar Association
@@acat6145 Technically yes. But filing a lawsuit on behalf of a client isn't ground for being disbarred by the Bar.
@@John2r1 Filing a lawsuit, no. But being called out by the court multiple times for lying and misrepresenting facts and practicing law in bad faith, absolutely.
An oversight board would likely make the courts worse then they are given how republicans have prioritized ideological purity above all else.
I understand that the UK has a law that can result in disbarment for attorneys who file superfluous suits… we should do that, too.
Sorry, what's a 'superfluous'?
Is that a glow in the dark thing?
@@johnsonhunglo1993 It basically means pointless and unnecessary here. Something extra which serves no purpose.
@@ryleighs9575:
Thanks, I seriously did not know.
Every time Trump passes gas,
he files a lawsuit!!!
@@johnsonhunglo1993 Trump himself is the definition of "superfluous" lol. I assume he also glows in the dark.
@@ryleighs9575:
Well, he does have a certain 'inner glow'!!!
How all these lawyers have been immediately disbarred for the blatantly false lawsuits is beyond me. There are apparently no standards in the legal profession.
I dated a lawyer. She was always terrified of making any sort of mistake in filing because it could mean losing her law license. But then, we're in Canada, where lawyers are expected to follow the law.
“The former president looked at me and said drop it we can’t win” These people are the worst liars. All that statement is missing is him calling her “ma’am”.
I really liked the part where a single tear rolled down his cheek.
Yeah I really really doubt he said not to try the case. Mr "I will sue you" and his 3 year old mindset does not lend to that idea.
They are just more of his loyal asshole minions falling on a sword for him
And then everyone clapped
Right? That sounds like a piece of self-insert fanfiction.
Honestly, even if I believed it, it would just make her look worse. DONALD TRUMP, of all people, told you to drop the case because you couldn't win! I thought you were just greedy, doing whatever your client told you so long as you got paid. Now I think you're a moron.
So basically if you have money in the US, you are free to harass anyone endlessly with lawsuits, independently if you win or lose?! That's beyond nuts.
Not if they have a gun and nothing left to lose.
Look up John Oliver SLAPP lawsuits
@@cwovictor3281 I dunno. Seems to have worked before.
@@cwovictor3281 nah, it can work sometimes ❤
@@cwovictor3281 Who said anything about wanting to fix their system? Why would anyone help their own enemies screw them with their own weapon of choice? Just because they use different weapons doesn't mean they're not malevolent.
Another fact I find unbelievable is how Trump continues to find lawyers willing to risk their reputation in these frivolous lawsuits....and not pay them.
But finding it increasingly difficult to find anyone with genuine relevant expertise. Rather, he is scraping the barrel for lawyers who have no reputation of value.
@@alexanderSydneyOz being a trump hating woke lawyer will in the future not be a good reputation
@@divineantiwokegangsterbecoming a trump hating woke lawyer is the only way for these lawyers to keep their jobs lmao
@@divineantiwokegangster
You should try going outside
It's a pyramid scheme, he does not have to pay them. Make a case, hype it up, and idiots will donate to support their god. These lawyers do it because they just found a way to make money without having to work beyond lying at a news interview
"it's never Rico" That didn't age well.😂
It aged like milk. Into a delicious cheese.
Time for a joke that I think we all need some comedy this whole event aged like milk we get from a pampered cow.
Imagine being the lawyer in the New York case when they saw how the conspiracy case went, imagine the sheer terror on realizing you were facing the same judge
imagine being the investigators at ground zero realizing how fixed the game is and they become a liability when exposing the charade
Imagine I knew what you were talking about.
@@2MinuteHockey Are you mentally handicapped?
Imagine being a lawyer and realizing you work for Trump.
Priceless! 🇺🇲
How is it possible these lawyers aren't disbarred? And only a million dollars? That's pocket change for the corrupt fundraisers.
They aren't disbarred....yet.
And only a million dollars....so far.
Oh - it's coming.
I think the deal with paying sanctions is that judges tend to look unkindly when someone might fundraise to pay it off. They want to make sure that those punished feel the pain by making sure it comes out of their own pockets.
There's something *seriously* wrong with a system where laywers like these, and Giuliani, are allowed to practice AT ALL, EVER after filing ONE case like this. Like, somebody explain to me how the Bar Association doesn't see this happening and THE NEXT DAY issue a whatever-you-call-it to disbar these lawyers. How are we multiple years on with zero discernable consequences?! (and no, a million dollar fine to lawyers getting paid millions doesn't strike me as a serious consequence.) w. t. f.
@@rgemail I don't even get how you can get sued completely crazily like this, and still have to pay a lot of attorney fees. Pretty sure in my country there's a law saying the judge can put that on the plaintiff.
A million for them is a write off. They didn't pay a dime of that money.
"Perhaps they should stop false lawyering and instead use this food delivery service."
Smooth.
Devon, you do realize that in '1950s-speak', "(driver) fell asleep at the wheel, and lost control of the (vehicle)" was code for "(driver) was drunk and lost control of the (vehicle)"; and "was cleaning his gun when it accidently discharged" was code for "shot himself", and, also "ladies man" was code for "date rapist", or just "rapist", or just "sex-offender", depending on when New York instituted the current wording of its criminal statute!
...just so we're all clear on what kind of predator we are dealing with!
anyone that remotely abuses the legal system should be permanently disbarred, and all their previous actions should be scrutinized. and don't forget jail time.
@King DJ these are (really, really, REALLY bad) civil attorneys. It is extremely unlikely they have ever been in a criminal court, let alone sent anyone to prison.
No, that would be terrible. That would mean one bad judge could screw you really bad and you cannot defend yourself in any way. Also there are ways to handle this properly. I think to remember that if you file too many lawsuits in bad faith, the court can dismiss future lawsuits immediately, if they find them frivolous.
It really feels like Trump is a vexatious litigant at this point. I mean, I'm no lawyer, but when someone goes through double digits of lawyers, that feels like a bad sign.
At *this* point? How many bogus lawsuits does it generally take to earn that title in your universe?
@@BdotYewToob Your comment is the reason lawyers regulate themselves. When you ask people your very question about "How many bogus lawsuits does it generally take to earn that title in your universe?" they will pull a number from the clear blue sky!
Trump has benefitted from an absolutely ludicrous amount of tolerance for his antics... on every subject imaginable, and several that weren't.
However many I end up filing at the end of my career... plus one.
@@BdotYewToob 3billion.
To me it is unbelievable how long it takes for the bar-associations to act on these cases!!!
Lawyers all follow the same game plan of "delay, delay, delay" for a variety of reasons
im no expert, but using the courts for political reasons isnt a reason for disbarment. its america.
@@qweasdzxcname but repeatedly submitting frivolous suits and mucking up the judicial system maliciously is DEFINITELY a reason for disbarment
@@qweasdzxcname wha
My bar association seems to be loath to go after the big fish. They go after the small fry. They appear to particularly dislike it when a regular old lawyer sleeps with a client. Oh, boo, hoo.
Australian observer: How do you get declared a vexatious litigant? For those of you unfamiliar with the term, it's kind of a court term for "serial pest." If someone is declared a vexatious litigant, it stops them from filing persistent lawsuits. If this happens, then they need the permission of a judge to continue to file civil action in the court. Or at least, this is how it works in the Australian civil system
That seems to be how it can work here in the US. I've heard of that happening. But it's very rare, and probably even more rare when it comes to licensed lawyers. The problem is that the US legal system is a massive complicated mess, because the individual "states" of the US do actually operate like individual countries (I.E. states) to an extent, including their own court systems, and own requirements to practice law. And they can't interfere with one another's functioning.
What this means is that federal courts can't take away a lawyer's admission to the bar, though they could probably ban them from federal court (I think). Or, at, least that federal district, each of which operates separately, and allows lawyers in on an individual basis. You need to apply to each one to operate there. Also, there's only one type of license to practice law in the US.
Basically, the US court system is a mess, simply because the US is more of a federation of individual smaller governments, more akin to the EU in some aspects than to a centralized country. Which makes sense, because there are states in the US with larger populations that the entirety of Australia. We've got 330 million living here, in pretty much every environment you can think of. It makes life very interesting.
@@Nixeu42 I figured it would be that messy. It's notoriously rare to do the same in Australia. The last time I heard of anyone being declared a vexatious litigant was Julian Knight. He was a policeman wannabe, rejected from both the army for psych reasons. This clown gunned down two police officers in cold blood and tried to kill others. Was sentenced to life, and has made a pest of himself in the court system complaining about everything from the food to the bedding in his cell. The Victorian courts had enough of this and got him declared a vexatious litigant. Tried to appeal to the Human Rights Commission, and they rejected it because there was nothing "inhumane" or "abnormal" about his conditions behind bars.
@@Mechknight73 Similar things have happened here too. A lot of vexatious litigants are convicted criminals with too much time on their hands, from what I understand. They feel they have little to lose from it, and they're probably right, honestly.
Just because you put all the words you know on paper doesn't mean that you just authored the next 'Anna Karenina'. His lawyers are an affront to the legal profession.
Yeah for that you need ChatGTP!
How dare you? tRump has the best words! He just never tells us what they are.
@@byteresistor I read this as Greta Thunberg
I'd rather read Every Word Ron Swanson Knows.
"Rectangle. America. Megaphone. Monday... Butthole."
His lawyers are an affront not just to the profession, but to the species in general.
It's insane ppl can abuse the courts like this. The fact Rich ppl can do this, to just about anyone they choose, is a big mark on our claim of being the 'most free country on earth'.
The most free country on earth "for rich people". That appendix has always been implied by the setup. Poor people are free to sleep under bridges.
They just need to be “rich” relative to their targets. It’s kind of great at being a tool to punch down with.
@@andrewahern3730 It's why we need to make inheritance illegal. Period. You get NOTHING.
Anyone who has paid even a bit of attention to legal outcomes in this country knows the entire system is corrupt as hell. For-profit prisons make campaign contributions to judges and DAs. Attorneys cost so much that they are cost prohibitive for more than half the population and the legal system is so convoluted that having one is mandatory. Cops and other officials receive almost zero penalties for misconduct. And on and on.
capitalism is a plague
Every single accusation is an admission of guilt. Holy cow.
I love that scene where the judge runs over with the gavel and hammers the person 😂 feels like something you would see in ace attorney 😂
"Silence! You're no longer worthy of your title!" * down goes the hammer *
For real 😂
it feels like something that should definitely be practiced... on a regular basis ! it would solve a lot of issues...
This is why in every state, and federally, we need anti SLAPP laws.
Plenty of those laws ! Only there used only against the little guy .
@@breakingbadheisenberg9703 I was thinking the same thing. Any system anyone can come up with someone else will find a way to exploit it and it will most likely be someone with plenty of resources to do so.
@@BigMobe 2 choices. address the loop holes as they are exploited by people exploiting them, or just do nothing
@@BigMobe That's not really the case in other countries though. Laws might still protect the powerful, but when you can easily be sentenced to pay the opponent's attorney's fees there's fewer frivolous lawsuits...
Pretty sure the Anti-SLAPP law would just be used for SLAPP...
Trump hiring Alina might be bad for america, but I bet the parking garage world breathed a sigh of relief
Hilarious!
One of the best comments I've ever read!
It’s right up there with hiring a two man company to fix the electrical problems in Port a Rico.
@@maryelizabeth6797 Puerto Rico?
@@maryelizabeth6797 Do NOT remind me of the state of the AEE in Puerto Rico.
I was curious enough to go and read Middlebrooks' decision. I feel sorry for him, having to put together a decision like this on such an utter mishmash of ridiculous claims. Of course he chose to become a judge and this is part of his job, and he probably had his assistants do some of the work, but still. I suppose making a flowchart of all the details of all the allegations that he had to decide on would have helped.
I like the term "judicial napalm," and I totally see why you used it. Overall I think the judge's language was fairly restrained. He did indulge himself in saying, "With this predicate act, Plaintiff tries to fit a square peg into a round hole," and a few other descriptions, but I wouldn't be surprised if some much stronger language was heard in private.
Do you have a link were I can find it?
I would love to read his uncensored and not-in-professional-speak opinion. It would probably be a fantastic read of judicial vitriol
@@partlycloudy7707 "you guys are garbage, please quit practicing law"
Misuse of the courts? An understatement…👏🏾
There's something so... Karen-ish... about those filings. They just put me in the mind of the woman you see in the parking lot of Target screaming at the poor cashier that they have no right to make her leave because there's no law against being barefoot in public.
Well... yeah, why do you think all karens are "social conservatives"
No shoes, no shirt, no service. Karen doesn't comprehend.
Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the lawyers had some form of Narcissism that would usually call for these outbursts. In fact, its almost a given knowing who they work for.
Lmaooo this is to true and I can’t unsee it now
They should really get rid of "No Shoes No Shirt No Service" policies in general though.
Honestly, our legal system has always been massively broken in favor of the rich. The fact that he and his lawyers likely made significantly more money than this fine loses them, means they still won in their goals with effectively no punishments. Meanwhile the people they've done this sort of thing to have often "lost" even after winning, due to the lawyer fees just to defend themselves from such nonsense.
Not to discount the impact of a law suit being filed against you but in this instance the Court is awarding costs against Trump. In terms of stress and anxiety for the respondents to the law suits that’s hard to monetise and definitely an aspect of Trump weaponising the legal system against opponents.
You would hope that these series of cases render Trump a vexatious litigant in most jurisdictions that have these legal protections.
McDonald Vs. City of Chicago (2010) Supreme Court rules for 70 year old McDonald’s right to buy a pistol after the ‘87 Handgun act.
Its like how big companies get away with polluting water ways, car companies with lethal defects etc.. its cheaper for the company to just pay the fines than to properly dispose of the waste/fix the problem etc.
Trump made more charging the US government for hosting secret service details and transporting them than the fine amounts to by itself I think.
It is easy to forget that the people who support Trump the most are some of his biggest victims, misled and duped out of their money.
The fact that in the US the looser doesn't carry the cost of the litigation for the winner is insane to me.
Just having the looser pay for winner's court costs would nib most of these suits in the bud by default (not only this: SLAP suits are another example).
That would bad in certain cases like if I sued my neighbor for a valid reason and my case was lost on a technicality then I shouldn’t be forced to pay the other size legal fees
It would be nice if the U.S required the wealthier party to pay the other's lawyer fees if they lose. In theory, the "American rule" of loser doesn't pay opponent's lawyer fees allows a wealthy litigant to sue an average person and make them bankrupt. Note that the wealthy usually don't sue poor people as they won't get any money if they win, but it can be catastrophic for others. Apparently the rationale is that the American rule allows a poor person to sue a wealthy entity without fear of major costs if they lose, and where their opponent may hire some very expensive lawyers.
@@latenightmoon767 If you sue for a valid reason and then lose... Then by the "law" your reason was invalid and you should pay. Like ya know. In most normal Western countries? The USA is really the third world of the Western world lol.
@@WillowGreenheart let me put it this way if I sue my boss, because my boss is stealing my wages we get to the point where did jury just came back from and it comes out to ten jurors are voting in my boss favor but two are for my should I still have to pay the opponents legal fees? Or whatever it didn’t come down to evidence, but the argument of the lawyers presented.
@latenightmoon767 The judge is for the law. You can always appeal your case and... most western countries don't use the common law system BECAUSE juries are just people and you're not fighting your case but trying to convince people. It's more marketing and less law. It's the reason why most Western countries outside of old-brit empire countries use Civil. It's just fairer.
In my legal opinion, you've just surpassed John Grisham as the most dramatic and accurate publisher (fact it fiction), of judicial cases and news in America.
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Do you think “getting Trumped” will become legal world slang for “I decided to lie blatantly in court for my client and now I can’t practice law.”?
I hope so lol
"getting double Trumped" should be when, on top of that, your client claims that they never met you
I play a lot of card games, and I really need a new term to replace "trump card". Because right now, that card is looking like a 3 of clubs at best.
You may not want to use your “Trump card” anymore.
Don’t insult the three of clubs. It actually has friends that can do something if you get enough of them together. (The other threes lol)
The fact that these lawyers continue to be allowed to practice law robs the system of any legitimacy.
Look at our politicians who practice law.
Letting China joe sit in the white house after that sham of a so called "legitimate" election is a travesty also!
But I guess living the good life with Affordable fuel, food an land is more than elites like gates and others could handle...
If their foot isn't on the necks of the middle / underclass, they can't be happy.
@@ArchmageMarlock Their number relative to the overall number of attorneys who don't suck (nearly this badly) doesn't matter for what James said. That they're allowed to continue practicing law at all is what matters.
@@ArchmageMarlock bruh, like…..I think Math is a little more complex when actually applied to real life…..
Nvm. It 100% is more complex and you’re a moron ❤
@@RvEijndhoven Yes, public trust is part of our ethics rules. Thus, making the profession look bad can be grounds for disbarment. Absolutely! On the other hand, go be a defense attorney and see public opinion in action in court. lol.
The public does need to have some intellect. Right? A hand full of attorneys, doctors, government officials, private sector CEOs, whatever is NOT a good measure of anything when thousands of people are in the pool of individuals! It is not even enough for a sample size! This RUclipsr should never say this to you. Why would he? That is odd. That would be odd. You remember that RUclips is for money. Right? Stop look for youtuber to give you eveything. Think! Is what I am saying wrong or just, you know, common sense?
Thank goodness the Judge opened the door for the defendants to win reimbursement.
So, it sounds like Habba was assigned a 1,000 word essay analysing Romeo and Juliet and turned in a review of a community theatre production of West Side Story riddled with inaccuracies and bragged to anyone who'd listen about how elegantly she'd sidestepped the instructions thus demonstrating how smart she was *before* receiving the graded paper back covered in red ink and with an F at the end.
This shit is basically a denial of service attack on the court.
This kind of garbage is simply not possible in the British legal system (which includes Australia, where I'm from). In this system, costs (that is, the costs a party pays to their lawyers) follows the event. If you lose your case then generally you're on the hook for the winning party's legal fees. It's like anti-SLAPP laws but it's the default for every case and there's no burden of proof, which means that frivolous cases are so high-risk that they're very rare. It beggars belief that the US operates on an 'own cost' system as it just invites harassing lawsuits.
Hm, but in this instance that system maybe wouldn't have prevented this.
For the lawyers it makes sense to bring up frivolous cases because they get paid even if they lose.
And for Trump it makes sense to use these frivolous cases because it's a political statement and he makes money through donations because of these lawsuits.
So maybe even if Trump had to pay all the legal fees he might still have profited.
@@Jehty21 in most of the Nordic countries, looser pays for both is also the norm, but, on top of that, all court ordered fines scale with the loosers income...
Your system failed in the Depp trail.
@@SonsOfLorgar since Trump is pretty broke, he probably would actually benefit from the nordic system lol
@@SonsOfLorgar Not in The Netherlands. The problem with the "loser pays" system may also be that if you can't pay if you lose, you're also discouraged from sueing even if you have a valid case. There isn't really a foolproof way that solves all problems here. The system can be abused both ways. Loser pays makes it harder to actively abuse it, while own cost makes it easier to bring suit against people with very expensive lawyers since they are still on the hook for their own fees.
"It's never ever RICO."
Fani Willis is gonna need you to hold her beer.
My dog doesn't like watching TV, but he seems interested in Legal Eagle. Thanks for entertaining and informing both me and my dog!
At times it’s hilarious to imagine what they are thinking as they watch anything this informative.
I bet a lot of lawyers started salivating upon reading the judge write "please, anyone, come bring the smackdown on these fools". Basically an invitation to just waltz in and be a superstar. The judge might even allow you to bring a steel chair into court.
Yeah but then all it takes is some corrupt right-wing appellate court to throw out all these sanctions and Trump wins again. Corruption is the downfall of democracy and almost impossible to root out.
hehe was that a pro wrestling reference?
You just know that there are hundreds of lawyers waiting in a line to get their sanctions through. This just so happens to have been the first set who were ready for it.
And they probably didn't even get paid. Seriously, why do lawyers keep representing a guy well known for not paying his lawyers?
his PAC paid millions to her firm, the video says... T**** didn't pay, his suckers did.
🤷🏻♀️ blackmail? *hypothetically (so I don’t get sued).
i think he explained it - they get paid by the PAC, i.e. funds given by his supporters, rather than Trump himself
Publicity for their law firm?
People will do a lot when they’re cult members
That order for sanctions was absolutely scathing. I work in a law office and I've seen some testy judicial orders, but this is on another level.
I have watched this video for the first time today, and @6:18 "Yes, they claimed it was RICO and of course it's never, ever RICO" is super funny right now.
Seriously, agreed; the Tangerine Nightmare *really* needs to be declared a vexatious litigant and required to ask a grown-up before filing any further suits.
Did you just pull that out of the air, or is that a sly reference to Tangerine Dream?
@@GrumpyOldFart2 Yes. (It's a shot at the litigious bronzer addict as well as a reference to the band; one that's probably unfair to the band, come to think of it.)
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHA
@@AntonPNym
It's also very unfair to tangerines!
Anyone of his children, the ones that agreed to have their mother buried on a golf course [in a golden coffin of course] would qualify as grown ups.
These lawyers should be forced to take the bar exam again to ensure they actually know the law. Or just disbar them because they either bought their law license to begin with or don't care about not filing frivolous lawsuits. It shouldnt take something this insane to get repercussions.
This isn’t a matter of them knowing the law; it’s a matter of ethics and professional integrity.
I'm sure everyone knows they know the law. They just decided to abuse it.
They're subjected to sanctions for abusing the court system and defaming individuals and businesses. I believe Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani have already faced disciplinary action and sued for slandering the voting-machine manufacturers.
It is a matter of ethics. They're mostly competent lawyers, who should be advising their client against these frivolous lawsuits.
For some reason, the Texas Attorney General hasn't received any complaints for his 2020 attempt to use the Supreme Court to overturn the presidential election in states Biden won popular majorities.
Kinda makes you wonder how they passed to begin with.
THey know the rules; they just pretend that they don't, and then feign ignorance when accused of ignoring the rules. Remember why people HATE lawyers; lawyers treat each other as special, because they are all creeps who abuse the system to win their cases in any way they can. The criminal law system is filled with more loopholes than the tax system, and lawyers allow other lawyers to get away with murder, because they themselves likely all have skeletons in their closet.
His lawyers need to be disbarred. Lawyers can't just represent someone who uses their services for frivolous lawsuits
I needed this. Thank you. Your straightforward and dry humor is a cherry on top!
Those so-called lawyers need to be hauled in front of an ethics committee, disbarred PERMANENTLY, and possibly jailed.
Would that change anything other than who worked for Trump?
Being brought before the bar can only result in a suspension or revocation of your license to practice law. There is no possibility of a jail sentence.
@@neilkurzman4907 possible perjury if anything they brought to their rabid filing of litigation can be demonstrably proven as false - if ever. One can only wish they be made permanent examples of how *NOT* to practice law.
@@obsidiansands
Since the judge didn’t recommend them to the district attorney for prosecution, I guess he didn’t feel it was warranted.
Because he certainly wasn’t cutting them any slack.
@@neilkurzman4907 Blacksands technically never said the ethics committee would be the one jailing them. As far as I'm aware, there's plenty of stuff that they could be sentenced over in court, like perjury and/or making false statements, if prosecutors felt it was worth the time and cost to bring to trial.
I find it especially funny when he points out bad grammar, spelling, or flat out incorrect legal terms in their filings. These people know what they're putting in the filings and don't care, but making basic spelling and grammar mistakes is not intentional. Given how important and basic that is in the legal profession, pointing them out is the sickest burn.
The entire lawsuit and lawyers thus involved have made me sit and go.. sweet jesus I could practice law if this is the kind of shit they're allowed to get away with.
"It's never, ever RICO" this aged well
to me this begs the question "when will these lawyers lose their bar?" when they can clearly just ask their supporters for another million dollars
Trading cards come to mind!
I'm glad everyone is coming to the realisation that the rich don't get what they deserve. Would be nice if we could start having discussion about how to take what we are owed.
Its just like corporations that pay fines for breaking laws. The cost means almost nothing to them compared to what they make from breaking the law. The system is always rigged for the wealthy.
It definitely raises the question.
At what point do we start deciding to get rid of the hopelessly corrupt bar associations, since they clearly are incapable of providing any real oversight or protection...
This reminds me of when I was in high school doing mock trial. One of our lawyers was really temperamental and would frequently cry during the competition. On our last trial, the witness goofed and said he had done something when he was supposed to say no. If you were there, I wouldn't have to tell you that because our lawyer said "Request to speak to my counsel" walked back to the table, and LOUDLY whispered "HE WAS SUPPOSED TO SAY NO???!!" A courtroom is supposed to remain quiet so everyone could hear it, started laughing, etc. That was a tough bus trip home from the state capital lmao. All this to say, I think those guys are probably more equipped to handle this case than Trump's attorneys
Yes true. Except that winning the case was never the goal. The goal was to create a political martyrdom so as to fundraise off of the great injustice and victimhood suffered by Trump, and bilk the gullible fools out of millions. Trump is no fool. His lawyers were not fools. They made millions and the grift continues.
heheheheh i bet that kid got roasted for the rest of the year
“it’s never RICO” aged so incredibly well
"They claim it's RICO but it's never RICO" my, the irony
Can I just say that the blue highlighter effect not only worked well to highlight information (no pun intended), but was also both visually satisfying and appealing.
Whoever’s idea that was, great job 👍
Nothing is funnier than lawyers being dunked on in legal documents
Habba doesn't care because she's get rich and famous from this grift!
"It's never, ever RICO."
6 months later: Trump violates RICO. 😆
WELP, that aged well. lol
Why can't he be formally declared a vexatious litigant? So that he can't commence proceedings without the court's permission? Or place him (and his fool lawyer) in contempt for this garbage, and throw them in the jail for a month or so?
LegalEagle:"Trump's lawyers will hopefully stop being bad lawyers and instead stay home and develop the skill to cook delicious home cooked meals"
Alina Haba: "Now there is this youtube lawyer who has suggested I should "get back in the kitchen"!
relax, she's a conservative...she agrees.
@@ron-paulsartre 😊🥰
Nice try but he never said that
Run along, Magaist
@@ron-paulsartre Sexisim is still sexisim, haha so funny /s
@@ninab.4540 it is funny.. The fact that you don't see the humor in it is why you have no friends
I've seen people complain that "this is a drop in the bucket" but its still a solid amount
The thing about a fine is that in order for it to actually deter crime, the fine has to make it too expensive to keep doing business that way. This fine does not accomplish that.
@@wkadams88 it sets a precedent though
@@wkadams88 16:40 apparently it was enough to deter this firm.
@@wkadams88 given Trumps track record of non payment? 1 M might be a lot larger then anything Trump has paid
"...a small fee of a million dollars."
"Its never RICO"
That aged awesomely.
Your presentation is outstanding.
Visuals are also excellent.
And, excellent ending segway.
Great job!
I have to say, for a lawyer, as opposed to an acting professional, your rapid fire delivery, comedic timing, deadpan ironic tone and inflection are all spot on. Amazing job.
Absolutely.
He could definitely do stand up comedy if he ever steps down from law.
Devin's delivery is a bit fast sometimes, but he never fails to make me laugh.
He is not to be confused with a rooster , who clucks defiant.
The lawyer teaching my Business Law classes in college was one of the funniest people I'd ever met. And friends taking other lawyers' Business Law classes said the same thing about their teachers. I think there is some inherent connection between comedic presentation and the practice of law. Perhaps the law really is a joke.
I'm convinced that there are places in the US where you can pass the bar exam by simply presenting a half-eaten box of crackerjacks.
It's the "crackerjacks defense" thesis! /jk
Why in God's name would a person go thru law school and articling just to throw it all away supporting Trump in a vexatious lawsuit?
@Asus McTablet Because they hate what they think America's become.
🤔 no no he's got a point
@@asusmctablet9180 Money. "Sure, you won't be able to practice law, but you get 10% of the fundraising."
Absolutely beautiful result, great video covering it too ❤️
Always interesting, thank you.
This is exquisite. Thank you so much for walking us through it. Trump is not a rube, he's good at gaming systems and getting away with plausible deniability and being wrong where plaintiffs cannot afford to pursue him. A lot of people are very good at taking advantages of loopholes and weaknesses in the private sector but seeing weakness blatantly capitalized at the national level, within the federal court is probably a shock too many at the top weren't prepared for.
That was me in 2016 I knew Trump was awful, I just had no inkling that our structures were so rotten he could simply plow through them.
@@christophergreen6595 it's unfortunate that a lot of the leaders people expect to oppose it or safeguard our common resources and rights are too wealthy to feel threatened, until it becomes absolutely flagrant, and by then, it's late stage. It's even worse when the leaders we expect to safeguard us are profiting by similar means (looking at you DNC for simply fundraising and not much else.)
Complacency costs us all, dearly.
@@christophergreen6595 Ever stop to think that this was Trump's plan from the beginning? There is no better way to expose the corruption than to use the system against itself. Trump did promise to drain the swamp, well, closing out all the loopholes by having your political enemies go after you is a genius way to set precedent in order to turn the tables on your enemies and take them out of power! I have no love for Trump, and think he is an oxygen thief, but to give credit where credit is due, the DemonKKKrats and RINOs are playing right into his hands! If they prosecute Trump for the Classified documents at Mar-A-Lago, then they will have no choice but to prosecute Hitlery Clinton for Servergate and Creepy Uncle Joe for his widespread storage of Classified in multiple unauthorized locations! They don't realize just what Trump is doing, and they will have their attacks on him end up biting them in the @$$! I love watching the fights between two opposing turd piles (Republicans and DemonKKKrats)!
@@jasonpenn5476 rotten brain soup
How in the hell did they become lawyers without knowing "tortuous" vs. "torturous"? An embarrassment to their bar association.
Not to mention "tortious."
next lawsuit will be against spell-check.
@@johnopalko5223 Indeed. 7:07 for anyone looking for the relevant part of the video.
SO WELL PRESENTINTED, INFORMATIVE AND ENTERTAINING!! (Geez, even the segue into the sponsor was smooooth!)
I LOVE the commerical thrown in... super informative video!
now I understand why, in the U.S. rich people can do anything and poor people just need to endure.
sue the other part until they can't pay an attorney. congratulations, you won.
That's essentially what Trump is famous for. Not much else, though.
I don't know, I know a lower income acquaintance that used to own a very successful motocross race track but was sued endlessly out of business even though he won the cases he could not afford to keep defending against all of the mediocre middle class Karens of the HOA for a nearby neighborhood. Those houses were an empty field of a square mile when he established his business and they all moved in and complained and sued him into poverty. Poor people should be prohibited for nonsense lawsuits just the same. Actually, the most rational means to reduce BS suits is to make the loser plaintiff pay the entirety of the defendants expenses including legal, travel, and lost compensation or profits and damaged reputation and public market image resulting from the case.
@@jj4791 that's what happens in spain. you lose, you pay. I can't say "always" but that's how it has been every time they made me waste my time.
Only in America can you be the CEO of a company, commit Federal Felonies and never do so much as a second in prison ...... How can a corporation commit felonies and no one ever goes to jail?
@@longjohn526 generally they're what's called "limited liability"; corporations exist so business can be done without legal proceedings being too much of a brake; it's all about plausible deniability
I like the fact that Devin cooks his food while wearing a suit and tie.
I KNOW! What a hero!
'I like the fact that Devin cooks his food while wearing a suit and tie.' It's a thing. A television personality who was a contestant on the Great British bake-off, also cooked in his customary suit and tie. It gave the impression that the man had no downtime. 😂
...and uses the court hammer for...garlic or meat?
Good stuff thanks for sharing it!
First of all, great video explaining everything.
Second, you cooking for the sponsor ad in your suit with an apron was *chef kiss*.
...as a Network Engineer, the idea that someone put "Proprietary DNS information was leaked" is... Hilarious to me.
That's... DNS's entire purpose. To leak an IP address out and associate it to a Fully Qualified Domain Name in order to more easily navigate the internet...
What I can’t understand is why there isn’t a point in our judicial system that stops BS lawsuits from moving forward. Why would a guy misidentified in the filing have to show up in court? Is there nothing that anyone has to look into when it’s filed? There is no one who’s job it is to make sure that the right person is being subpoenaed? 😃
I would say this video shows that there are systems in place for all of these things you mentioned. The issue is that you can't just say "nope, you are done with lawsuits now, never come into court ever again." There's a procedure, they have to account for people making small mistakes since humans aren't perfect, and it's all wrapped up in red tape. Most people just don't have the bottomless funds to file hundreds of pointless lawsuits. It's like when a restaurant gets an entire bus full of people unexpectedly. You can't just say "nope, get out, we aren't built for this," you have to try to deal with what you've got.
@@skeetsmcgrew3282 I understand that. I’m complaining about the way it is because of what you outlined. These are basically SLAPP suits and we need to address it and CHANGE the system. It’s ridiculous that a person can have their time wasted just because oh well that’s the way it is.
@@darryldouglas6004 Ok, but how do you change the system in a way that's fair? Limit the number of lawsuits a person can file? Create a blacklist of people you don't like who can't file lawsuits anymore? Neither of those feel particularly fair or unbiased. Maybe somebody could come up with a nuanced solution, idk. But I guess I sorta do feel like, welp it sucks but what are you gonna do?
@@skeetsmcgrew3282 Fine people who file frivolous lawsuits. The more money you make, the bigger the penalty. And the money HAS to be paid before one can file an appeal, which if successful they would get their money back.
@Skeets McGrew A judge can rule that you're a vexatious litigant and create a restriction that requires you to get judicial permission before filing further lawsuits.
The fine should be 10 times that much and should include disbarment.
Thanks for explaining this!!
In Germany and Austria if you win a civil lawsuit on all merits, as defendend or plaintif, the loosing party has to pay all court fees and ALL your legal fees, making it almost useless to file a revenge/slap- lawsuit in bad faith, in Germany or Austria, as frequently seen in the US.
It’s not too different than in Canada. Here though, it’s just a possibility and it’s up to the courts to decide.
In Sweden, defendant pays both sides court fees is the norm unless the court says otherwise.
in nazi jermanny ostriches also get straight anschlussed, so at least these united shitholes of america has that going for it
Could Trump be designated a Vexatious litigant and need to go through a judge before being allowed to sue people in the future?
Man, if that IS possible, it really should have happened decades ago.
yes, as anyone who abuses the courts can be declared a vexatious litigant.
Can the blondo putlerist moron still be able to sue anybody from the prison cell? I'd like to see how he'd try to sue his future pal Bubba.
17:30 that segue tho, smoother than a ride on a self-balancing parallel-wheeled scooter
yes i know the product is spelled Segway
I'm glad that adding 17% more gravitas (or whatever the new desk upgrade was) didn't cut into your content's levity!!!
If they made more than a million from scamming their followers in relation to the case, then they won't learn their lesson because they still made a profit.
I love the idea that Devon just does everything in his suits. I know we've seen him in loungewear, but just... cooking in a full suit was not what I was expecting to see
He probably wears it so often he forgets it is uncomfortable.
@@tomorrow4eva he gets enough money from his practice and RUclips that he can afford custom-tailored suits. And a suit that fits well is so much more comfortable than a suit that fits “well enough.”
I didn’t know the difference until I needed a new suit for a funeral this past fall and happened to find one that fit perfectly off-the-shelf. The difference in comfort was unbelievable.
There's some really awesome stock(?) video clips in this one. Bravo to the video editor!
"It's never Rico"...except if Trump is involved as defendant...😂
These lawyers need to be disbarred to maintain a level of accountability. Fining them isn't enough when they're raising more through fundraisers just to abuse the courts.
It's not like the courts can do that. I think the best a federal court could do would be take away their ability to bring cases in that district. The licensing is done at the state level. Federal courts can't do more than advocate for disbarment.
"Let's sue!"
"We have nothing to base a lawsuit on."
"Let's sue anyway!"
"We are getting a reputation for outrageous lawsuits."
"Yeah, ok. But what if we file a lawsuit so outrageous, it will make the next outrageous lawsuit look sane by comparison?"
"I don't think that will work."
"It worked for our political policies."
"...good point."
"Let's IMPEACH him again ""and again,,, and all his friends..and get Mueller back and plant some evidence this time..and let's lie about the perfect call again ,,and make up a new transcript in congress like Schiff did and just say it's a joke
Pretty much XD
Loved that segue from content to sponsor. Well done.
I loved the HelloFresh ad at the end where you cook in a full suite. Good stuff!
I still find myself amazed that *THIS GUY* ever was president of the United States and that people *actually think he's a sure fit for a second term*
Same, friend. Same.
You really, really have to wonder what's going on in their heads sometimes... like, how can you be THIS out-of-touch with reality?
@@ThEjOkErIsWiLd00 when you hear about how 16% of American teenagers don't know who the first president was, or that 79% of Americans believe that the Earth revolves around the sun, or that millions of Americans idolize the Confederacy as a victim of Union aggression, it's not much of a surprise.
Nice opinion. One small issue: The blue collar workers are going to revolt.
@tarsontalon608 I wish they would. Hell, I'd be right next to them because the current system is painfully flawed. Dunno, how that's a small issue with my original point as it was a demagogue like him who stripped power away from workers under the guise of "helping the little man." That train wreck in Palestine, Ohio? Near where I used to live? Yeah, his regulation cutting caused that.
People tend to remember that.
Devin: If the lawyers were fined but not disbarred or otherwise temporarily banned from practicing law, how much bad faith would their respective state bars have to find to implement disbarment and other harsher penalties?
It's not like lawyers don't have the ability to fight back. And the more powerful attorneys would have self interest in not letting the system get political.
We can have nice things, we don't have to reduce everything to the worst case scenario.
@@johnmclawson3982 No, the opposite. I'm saying if a lawyer got railroaded you'd hear the end of it. If a big corporation or a political body screwed over a mother of two in Ohio, odds are she wouldn't fight back. But a lawyer, an A+ alpha, slinking away. I don't buy it.
I also think it's in their financial best interest to maintain the integrity of the court. It's like the nfl, if it was fixed, no one would watch it. You're not going to file a lawsuit if it can't win. So who needs lawyers?
This is an awesome video. Well written and presented in an entertaining manner not to mention very informative. This is my second time watching it. I put it in my learning through laughter folder.🤓
Thank you hello fresh! and the superb post production team. That lawyer guy was fun as well. ;-) Good work folks... Great content. As always. D.