cincipatsfan
Mayor of Homerville
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2007
- Messages
- 710
- Reaction score
- 28
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Just popped some some popcorn. This is getting entertaining.
That sums it up pretty well and I think Ms. Washington's attorney is going to find out the hard way what happens when you mess with people who have lawyers bigger/smarter/sharper than you.......
I don't know if someone else within this thread pointed this out or not (I'm not reading through the entire thread to find out):
Tim Dipiero is also a lawyer, and a former Assistant US Attorney.
He's actually listed as one of the best lawyers in America, and in 2007 West Virginia made him one of their "super lawyers" under the "personal injury plaintiff" category.
So, if Dipiero claims McGill made those demands in direct conversation with him, I'm inclined to believe he's telling the truth.
I bore myself. ;0) Lawyers, though, do make good refs. (See, e.g., Ed Hochuli.)
To return to the only point of the whole techical legal mumbo jumbo: When you understand it, it SUPPORTS Moss's story.
And the fact that Dipiero's email to a reporter was silent on whether he has filed a bar complaint agains McGill is irrelevant.
AZ-
I have no issue with your legal statements now as I did not know that you were actually discussing Florida law until your third response (and if you are familiar with the bar there, you obviously can run a better time comparison between the administrative, civil and criminal systems - I know the systems in the northeast and Texas). Your extraneous advice rubbed me the wrong way, so I explained in my jurisdictions why the comments were not inaccurate.
And also as I stated initially, I was not questioning whether the e-mail message supported Moss's position. I raised those questions for purposes of forum discussion (and am now starting to understand how Bork may have felt during his hearings over law review article comments).
Given only the public information, I believe Moss and tend to think the attorney on the other side is a hack. Once commentary goes public however, it is hard to know what to believe based on unsworn statements and statements, even those in an e-mail messages to a third party, that do not give context to comments. As such, I tend to believe Moss but will wait until all these proceedings work out.
By the way, if you did research or are familiar with these procedures, do these proceedings allows for money awards to aggrieved parties and would you happen to know if Moss can accept a default judgment putting this order in permanent form or stipulate to the order while not admitting the underlying facts (I suspect Moss could care less if he ever sees this woman again, so such an order would mean little to him)? At that point, he can deal with the problem publicly in saying the order is an empty threat and he is happy to address the issue in any other forum if she wishes to try to face the music in court. That would seem to eliminate the short term issues for Moss (no hearings in the next few weeks) and push the problem into a more distant war, during which the aggrieved would face the music if she is found to be lying about facts.
DaBruinz-
The backgrounds of attorneys are available online for the most part, and as someone earlier stated his resume, there is no reason to doubt it.
There is no reason to question his professionalism or ethics in handling this case based on what has been disclosed. He can ethically make tactical decisions that would help his client without angering courts or bars.
MassPats38 - For someone who claims to be a lawyer, you can't read worth a damn. My response was to GreyHoodie, who was the one questioning DiPiero's credentials. I provided a rehash for GreyHoodie since he couldn't be bothered to read the thread.