Well That Was Odd.

I didn’t question the first $40 check .  While I told this particular party I would waive his (already reduced) fee due to his being on Social Security disability, I figured he was trying to make good.

The second $40 check gave me some pause, but I still figured this party was trying to pay what was owed.

The third check threw me because the three checks totaled more than what he would have owed me for my time.

So I dug out the agreement (which I had scanned to send to the Court – I don’t usually keep copies) and realized that the party was supposed to be paying the plaintiff that same amount.   After a few phone calls to both sides, the plaintiff said they hadn’t been paid on the Agreement and I now have to cut the plaintiff a $120 check.  I guess that vacation to the French Riviera is off…

The Pants Judge Files Suit Again! But only for one measly “mil”.

It was bound to happen sooner or later. After being canned last year by the (in part for filing the infamous $54 million lawsuit over his pants), Roy Pearson is suing the District of Columbia for wrongful termination, seeking damages of a mere $1 million. Pearson claims that he is a protected whistleblower who was fired for exposing corruption within the Office of Administrative Hearings.

Never at a shortage for words hyperbole, Pearson claims to have suffered “‘humiliation’ and ‘physical illness’ as a result of his former employer’s ‘wrongful actions.’”

Between this suit and the appeal of the $54 Million Pants case, he’s the busiest unemployed lawyer in America.

What Happened to the Year and a Day Rule?

Yahoo News reports that a man who shot and wounded a police officer more than 41 years ago and served 20 years for the assault will now stand trial for his murder after the police officer died last year. Yes, 40 years later. At age 64.

Judge Bradley Moss of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas allowed the trial to proceed despite the fact that he could not find any other case in the United States in which a suspect had been charged with murder so long after causing an injury, despite the fact that the medical examiners did not perform an autopsy and did not ruled out other causes of death, and despite the fact that the defense showed that the police officer had been involved in two car accidents after the shooting and also fell out of his wheelchair.

This is just weird. I’m no bleeding heart, but how is justice served by putting a 71 year old man who spent 20 full years in prison for his crime back in jail? Are the district attorneys elected in Pennsylvania? Is this an election year publicity stunt? Or maybe the judge is running for re-election? (They are elected here in Georgia).

While I haven’t practiced a day of  criminal law in my life, I got a B+ in it and stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.  What happened to the year and a day rule?