My Photo

About Evan Schaeffer

Blog powered by Typepad

ccl

ga

« Law Students: This Year's ABA Techshow Is a Bargain | Main | Using Video at Trial: Consider the Risks »

April 05, 2006

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2d4b53ef00d834280c2b53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Dealing with Dirty Tricks at Trial:

» "Dealing with Dirty Tricks at Trial" from Stark County Law Library Blog
Posted by Evan Schaeffer: “The eleventh chapter of Henry G. Miller's On Trial, which I review briefly here a few [Read More]

Comments

AngelFactor

Is tampering with court records by replacing an offending brief with a "new and improved" backdated brief considered a dirty trick? What if opposing counsel then files a new brief supported by the "new and improved" brief? Let me make that clear, over a month ago opposing counsel filed a memo in support of a motion. A month later opposing counsel had the clerk replace the month-old brief with a "new" brief that was backdated to appear as though it was filed the same day as the old brief. Repetitious? Yes. Many people say it can't be done. Say what they want, it was done in this case. Of course, no one would know except counsel inadvertently filed emails with his brief. The emails detail what was done. Want to look it up on PACER?

Angel Factor

Evan

Angel Factor: I've seen lots of lawyers file "new and improved" briefs, but these are usually in the form of "supplemental" briefs. The original brief stays in the file. Even if the new brief is almost identical--i.e., it's got the same title but is refiled in order to correct an error or something--the orginal brief stays in the file, in my experience.

angela moore

What proof is there that a factum was filed with the court? In terms of the court clerk's honesty?

SusanS

Question: in a case against a lawyer, the lawyer specifically requested that he be allowed to withdraw his documents from the file, presumably to protect the privacy of the people whose names were contained therein. the judge agreed. However, thereafter other documents by opposing counsel were presented, which happened to also contain the names of the parties whom the lawyer was trying to protect. The attorney did NOT request to have these documents omitted from the file -- yet coincidentally, ALL documents that contained the names/personal information of the attorney's friends have been removed. I assume it was the attorney himself who did this, or perhaps his counsel.

What are the rules that apply to tampering of court files, and whom should be contacted -- the disciplinary commission?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

IT'S HERE!

  • A NEW BOOK BY EVAN SCHAEFFER



    How to Feed a Lawyer (and Other Irreverent Observations from the Legal Underground)

    Click on the book cover for details!

Search Trial Practice Tips