was taken to court once, and the opening statement by police was, " I knew what he thought", which was fallowed by dead silence. The Judge asked if he read my mind. silence again. brief court case.....
I was in traffic court in Detroit for a ticket I didn't get (ID theft). For some reason they had a lawyer there helping people before you went before the judge. I don't know if this lawyer was stupid, over worked, deaf, or just got out of law school. Before it was my turn she took me in the hallway and I told her I didn't get the ticket, she said okay. When we went before the judge, and she asked how do I plea. The lawyer told her I plead guilty. I almost knocked her over when I jumped up shouting "No I Don't". After that the judge spoke to me directly. And I told her how a family member used my name, and it wasn't even in my vehicle. The judge asked if the cop who wrote the ticket was in the court room. The policeman stepped forward and said I wasn't the person he stopped. So the judge dismissed the case, that would have cost me several hundreds of dollars. 1) No proof of License 2) No proof of insurance 3) Speeding 4) No seat belt 5) Improper left turn. When I walked out, I told her I'm glad I didn't need her for something serious.
I have a lawyer story. I was a witness to an accident. I was stopped at a traffic light, a vehicle apparently didn't want to wait for the light to change so he went around me in the opposing traffic lane, entered the intersection and struck another car that was coming through the intersection causing a collision. He decided to fight the careless driving ticket he was issued and hired a lawyer to defend him. When I was called to the witness stand to testify by the prosecutor told my story as I witnessed it and when i was cross examined by the defense attorney he proceeded to ask me questions, like hows my eyesight? am I sure of the conditions I previously testified to. etc. He then asked me "How can I be so sure it was the defendant that went around me at the intersection" I replied I didn't Say your client went around me I said his car did. You'll have to prove he wasn't the driver of the car. And since he was the only occupant that would be tough to do.
Defendant's Attorney to Expert Witness: "You claim to have a PhD, but your transcript doesn't show any courses taken." Expert Witness: "At that level, there are no courses. The adviser assigns practicums and the candidate reports back when they are completed. It's not like law school . . . assuming you went to law school." Entire Courtroom: [a momentary hush followed by raucous laughter]
Re "sue the dashboard vendor": The manufacturer hopefully realized that it would be _really_ bad for business if they started to throw their suppliers under the truck. Because if you start doing that, nobody in their right mind will supply you with parts any more.
I was asked the judge if I could sack my lawyer and he said please do because he is pissing me off and I'll make sure he reimburse your money ...I actually won my case .
Dumbest thing I've heard from an attorney this year was one firm that was insisting we schedule a qualified medical exam with a Doctor that died a year prior. When we informed them the doctor was no longer with the living and that it would be somewhat difficult to reach them for an appointment, their response was only to repeatedly ask if we were objected to their letter about scheduling that appointment. Well, technically no, but we can't figure out how to contact the dead, and told them to contact the dead doctor's office and scheduling it themselves since it was their client that the appoint was for. Apparently they then actually tried to do that, they called back later saying they would let us know when they choose another doctor. Actual stupidest things resulted with both the attorney and their client going to jail. Yay fraud.
I live in Australia and I sold a car several years after a divorce and my ex wife tried to claim half the proceeds of the sale, her Solicitor who was a Queens Council (allegedly a top lawyer who charges top dollar) told her to make a claim under our state small claims legislation.... Now in Australia Family Court matters including property are the sole Jurisdiction of the Federal Family court, now I went to see a community advice lawyer (legal aid) to check whether I was correct as to the Family Court having sole original Jurisdiction of Family Court matters and was advised that that was the case and the matter could not be dealt with by the State Legislation and that furthermore because we had been divorced for over the statutory time limit for a claim had expired under that legislation also there was no case to answer from, and I was told that that was the case. Now at the time I was not aware who her Lawyer was, as My ex wife filed the case herself as that is what is required, under the Legislation, so I arrived in Court armed with the Federal statutes of the Family Law Act telling me that there was sole Jurisdiction under that Act. Our case is called and I jump in at the start to inform the Judge of the Jurisdictional problem, noting the QC was rather irritated and taken aback with this untrained non lawyer starting off with a Jurisdictional challenge, However the Judge listened to my argument and realised that the car was indeed purchased during the marriage and that I had after separation paid all the remaining payments on the loan as it was in my name and as such fell under the Jurisdiction of the Federal Family Law Act, Now the QC made his rebuttal argument and then at the End of his arguments to the Judge, made the stupid question to me. And WHO told you that the Family Law Act had sole Jurisdiction in this case, to which I answered well I read it myself in the Act, but I went to Legal Aid to confirm my argument and it was YOUR WIFE that confirmed my reading of the law was correct. The wife and the Husband practised at different firms! To which the Gallery full of other Lawyers all started laughing! Please note that this person was also a former State Attorney General.
Just saw this one, yeah a little late, but a nice 20 minutes of giggles. I've been in court as a witness for an accident and I stated that the defendant had run the red light and was hit by the other car. The attorney asked how I was so sure the light was red and I told him it was because I didn't get hit. He, and the judge, gave me funny look and he asked "What the hell does that have to do with him getting hit?" I told him I was stopped at the light his client ran and if it had been green I would have been in the intersection. He lost.
I had a judge in Philly find that a mortgage company improperly refused to accept mortgage payments...but then said their refusal accept payments was not a defense to being behind on their payments. Sometimes you can't make this stuff up!
Late to the party I know. I had to lemon law my duelly diesel pickup. I opted for arbitration, at that time it’s binding to the company not the consumer. One of the things the manufacture put into evidence is a picture of my truck towing a race car and trailer. The arbitrators asked me if I did in deed tow, I said yes, that’s exactly why I bought a 1 ton. Company said I was over tow capacity. I said I wasn’t, we pulled up the rules for my class of racing, car must be between 1100 LBS and 1350 LBS. Next they ran my trailer registration, came back as a tare weight of 1200 LBS. the arbitrator then asked the company “what’s the tow rating of the truck” it was just over 10K. They then asked why would 2500 LBS destroy 3 transfer cases if it was only loaded 1/4 of the stated tow capacity. The company actually gave up then, case was over.
I witnessed an attorney attempt to defend a guy who had been ordered to bring a vehicle back to the legal owner (ex wife I think). Anyways, he wouldn't give up the keys and his attorney tried to argue that the guy had in fact fulfilled the judgement against him and bringing the keys was not part of the judgement. Hilarious! The judge however did not think it was hilarious. Give her the keys or go to jail for contempt. Case closed.
LOL, reminds me of something similar that happened to friend of mine. He loaned his car, against my advice, to someone I knew was an untrustworthy and shady asshole. That guy then gave it to his girlfriend. GF refused to give my buddy his car back, claiming that since it was a gift from her boyfriend, she somehow magically owned it now. The sheriff's deputy we called out there disagreed, and ordered her to return the car, and then she claimed she lost the keys. The deputy told her to find them in 60 seconds or she was under arrest and miraculously they appeared. My buddy ended up filing charges anyway because the inside of the car was torn up, filled with trash and looked like a family of rabid raccoons had been living in it. It needed a a whole new interior. I was surprised his insurance covered it.
The dumbest thing that I ever heard an attorney say: "My client's board of directors were in fact illegally elected, but as they are illegally elected, they are only a de facto board rather than a de jure board. Corporate law does not apply to de facto boards of directors." (This was actually a famous case.)
That sticky note transfer of assets was astounding in its desperation 🤣 I served on a jury where there was a dispute between a tenant and commercial property owner. The owner's lawyer emphasized every time he spoke how the property was owned by a trust, as if that had anything to do with the obvious breach of Contract under dispute. We found for the tenant. As foreman I ensured that we gave both sides due and dispassionate consideration, but everyone noted how the Owner's lawyer was insulting our intelligence with his ridiculous argument.
One of my professors was an expert witness and told me the most dumb question an attorney asked him was, "Now you don't really think my client did this, do you?" To which he responded "Yes, I do" to which the attorney responded with a regret filled "No further questions".
I was representing a child who had been bitten in the face by a dog. The dog was regularly trained, employed and owned by the City of San Jose, CA as a police dog. At the time of the incident, the dog was in the front yard of its police handlers home. The yard and the sidewalk were separated by a short picket fence. The child was a pedestrian walking down the sidewalk who had stopped to see the dog. The dog jumped up and bit the child as he was leaning over the fence to see the dog. The defense for the City made a motion for judgment on the pleadings asking for the case to be dismissed. The judge recited the above facts, then asked defense counsel "why on earth" the case should be dismissed. Defense counsel blurted out: "But your honor, the dog was off duty!" The motion was summarily denied, but not until after the courtroom laughter had died down.
On the subject of what constitutes manufacturing - I'm reminded that Carl Sagan once said, "To make a cake from scratch, you must first create the universe." 😁
Exactly! Car companies buy subassemblies, subassembly manufactures buy other sub assemblies and components, component manufacturers buy raw materials, raw material manufacturers buy lower level raw materials, those manufacturers buy components that were refined, those refined materials were once mined from the ground…
A colleague of mine was once on the stand on behalf of the insurer we worked for. Opposing counsel trying to discredit her as a claims adjuster witness and asked her "Do you have an intimate knowledge of warehouses?" She replied "Well I can tell you its not a great place for intimacy."
I was in court as an expert witness when an attorney asked a plaintiff if he had to drop the transmission to replace the brake pads. Plaintiff said, “I’m going to guess you haven’t worked on many cars.” Entire courtroom laughed for the next 5 minutes.
I would like to have been at the accident scene when the police arrived: "Oh, I'm not the owner. I was just testing it to see if the brakes would fail."
"The brakes failed in a different way"! The only way they would have known this is if they had established exactly how the previous brake failures had happened. This rather proves that the brakes had previously failed and that they knew how and why they had failed.
Could have been a case of the client saying, "The brakes failed when I pushed the pedal." and the tech observing during the test: "The brakes engaged when pressure on the pedal began, but disengaged once the pedal reached maximum travel." Or some such. [shrug] Hence they failed a different way than described in the brief.
Mrs Richards: "I paid for a room with a view!" Basil: (pointing to the lovely view) "That is Torquay, Madam." Mrs Richards: "It's not good enough!" Basil: "May I ask what you were expecting to see out of a Torquay hotel bedroom window? Sydney Opera House, perhaps? the Hanging Gardens of Babylon? Herds of wildebeest sweeping majestically past?..." Mrs Richards: "Don't be silly! I expect to be able to see the sea!" Basil: "You can see the sea, it's over there between the land and the sky." Mrs Richards: "I'm not satisfied. But I shall stay. But I expect a reduction." Basil: "Why?! Because Krakatoa's not erupting at the moment?
I'm particularly impressed with the attorneys, whose clients did the right thing 'against their legal advice.' They must be practicing some sort of Voodoo to keep their law license.
Very entertaining Steve. Especially the very last line of the story that the attorney who accused you of flying up didn't know how to identify a car in a parking lot and represented a car manufacturer. Hilarious. Please do a follow-up video when you get a chance. Thanks for these videos I appreciate them
I am not a lawyer, but even I know that brakes either stop safely under normal driving conditions, or they don't. Reminds me of the old joke: If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you!
I would have loved to go to the dealership and pick out a car to repo because of the judgement, walk up to it and take the sticky note off the car, crumple it and put it in my pocket right in front of the respondent, and tell the tow truck driver "start with this one" 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Sticky notes and trying to throw blame on the part manufacturer! That's when you know they have no real defense. Lawyers put together focus groups of comedians or circus clowns to come up with these ideas? I don't understand why the auto maker wouldn't just repair or replace... throwing good money after bad by going back to court with ridiculous arguments makes no sense financially and definitely not helping the ol' reputation.
if that lawyers car was nicer, should have walked up and claimed it was yours, since you know.. there is no way of proving who's it is with her logic haha
I have enjoyed watching your videos because you have explained the law as it pertains to Michigan as clear as possible. Although I have never had to retain the services of an attorney for car issues I wish I would have had knowledge of the topics you cover years ago. I bought a new car from the local dealer about three years ago. They had to get the car from another dealer several hundred miles away because the one I wanted was in another city. I know this to be common because I've bought new cars like this before since small lots don't have exactly what I want. Shortly after taking delivery I noticed something was not right with the suspension. I took the car back the next day to service and it was discovered that the car had spring immobilizers that were not removed and it caused the suspension to ride hard and noisy. I never knew this, but car manufacturers install these on springs so the cars won't move while in transit on a car carrier, train, etc. When I asked for compensation for my lost day the sales guy was irritated that I had the nerve to ask for anything and kept pointing at the fault of the dealer where they got the car. I now know that my sales contract had absolutely nothing to do with the other dealer and that I also paid a 'dealer prep fee' which I take to assume that they were supposed do whatever it is to prepare the car for delivery and to make sure it is roadworthy. Had I taken my sales contract and pointed out these facts plus the fact that I didn't get what I paid for in reference to the dealer prep fee then it would have substantially bolstered my argument. I wasn't going to be greedy and all I wanted was my first service to be covered for my inconvenience and time wasted by taking the bus home and back. They eventually agreed and tried to hustle me out the door and tell me that all I have to do is come in and look for them when it was time. I told them this was BS because it could be up to a year before I needed to come back and that dealers churn employees all the time, therefore I wanted something in writing. Again the sales guy was really irritated at this and eventually he came back stomping his feet with a 'due bill' which stated in handwriting that I was to get my next service free of charge, plus it had a signature. Due to the sales guy's attitude I took the document to service and verified that they will accept it when I return for my first service and they confirmed that it would cover it. At the time I didn't know what a due bill was and for all I know he could have pulled it out of his rear, so I asked a buddy who works at a dealer. He said that it is a common document used by car dealers that states in detail that the dealer owes the customer (me) something of value and most likely whatever was on it will come out of the sales guy's commission. Thank you for making these videos because you have provided a lot of valuable and free insight in consumer law.
What I don't get is why the other attorney even bothered saying anything to Lehto about this hare-brained scheme. If the judgment turned out to be uncollectable because the dealer managed to transfer all of its assets to someone else--and Lehto couldn't simply get the judgment amended to apply to the fraudulent transferee--wouldn't it be better to let Lehto and his client find out the hard way? I thought revenge was best served cold. Maybe that lawyer is just as dumb as it seems.
Best one I had as a prosecutor, was a civil attorney calling me up to want to know why they weren't noticed on a criminal search warrant before we presented it to a judge. Another one was an attorney for a bank, who tried to stop agents from serving a search warrant on the bank, because it was their policy to not comply with any legal documents before their attorneys had an opportunity to review them. At the point she got handcuffed, she began to realize that legal proceeding was not going the way she thought it would.
Ha! I make cabinet doors from cypress boards. I plane them to thickness, rip them to width, trim them to length, cut the tenons and all the grooves the tenons fit in, cut the panels ,assemble then paint and install them, but I don't manufacture them.. I have little cabinet door fairies that do the manufacturing for me.
I was in court one day and heard a defense attorney said “my client denies all involvement in this burglary….. but if it helps he will give the stuff back.” We saw him in the hall and he immediately said “you know that wasn’t my idea.” Turned out his client had pled and served out on 5 other burglaries. Had they charged him on the sixth he would have pled at the time. I think he took time served and gave the stuff back
When I was a police officer I often stayed after my cases were finished because I knew looking at the attorneys present, certain ones were either going to say something stupid or have their clients say something stupid. Always entertaining.
My brother is an attorney. From that fact alone, I can attest that there is (apparently) no requirement for native intelligence or inherent moral rectitude to become an attorney in the USA.
Funny. My wife worked for a law firm and her atty. did aviation law and he came back from court one day with this story. "When the plaintiff's lawyer cross examined the pilot, she asked where he was located when he was piloting the aircraft. A few titters in the courtroom. In the Pilots seat ma'am. Is this pilots seat in close proximity to the controls? Guffaws burst out to the point where the judge had to call for order. Yes ma'am, very much so." The red faced and flustered atty. ended her cross. How do these people pass a Bar Exam?
The story goes that a person was owed $1,500, so they went to see a lawyer and asked them to collect the debt. The lawyer said, "Deposit $3,000 to my account and I'll get you your money". When the deposit landed in the lawyer's account, they waited 10 days and sent the client $1,500. The client was amazed, but the lawyer didn't do anything to chase the debt, instead, they paid their client from the $3,000 deposit. The client was happy to get their money and felt justice was served, even though it cost them $1,500 !
Worked for a DA's office for nearly 10 years in Colorado. Once, in a DUI case, the public defender filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that her client was too inebriated to understand his rights when they were read to him.
Car manufacturer: We didn't made that part, we bought it from A A: We didn't made it, we had a third party B design it. B: Yeah, we designed it, and it is not a design flaw. C is the one that assembled it C: Yes, but we don't make the parts, D made it D: Yes we did made the parts, but we did not installed it, C did, and it was misinstalled C: We installed it as per the installation instruction from D D: Well, engineer E made the doc, and it is obiviously wrong E: Manufacturer D supplied us with the information, we just made a nice document D: It come from from another part that F made F: We have nothing to do with this. D: Well hmmm It is guidelines anyway, the issue is your machine G that didn't installed it proprelly! G say it's the software guy, who say it's the hardware guy, who say it's the designer/engineer guy, which say that the machine wasn't designed for this and blame the marketting/sale guy, who say that he got misinformed by the car manufacturer and so on and on and on, and eventually nobody knows what it is about...
I was a witness in a civil case where the lawyer disputed my "interpretation" of someone's statement and not being a lawyer dog realized he just argued against his premise for winning the case , the other lawyer looked over at me in amazement ! I was there because I knew the client had paid off a private mortgage and the of the seller's heir was trying to steal the buyers house .
*Judge Judy:* What was stolen? *Plaintiff:* My wallet... *Judge Judy:* What was in your wallet? *Plaintiff:* It was 50 bucks. *Judge Judy:* Okay. *Plaintiff:* I had to replace all my IDs, I had gift cards in there, my earpiece, and a calculator. *Defendant:* There was no earpiece in there ma'am. *Judge Judy:* I love it. I love it. Judgement for the plaintiff in the amount of $500.
I used to love watching The People's Court when judge Milian was presiding. She would often come up with these hilarious sayings from her grandmother that sometimes made little or no sense in English but she would explain them. I preferred the People's Court and Judge Mathis, who could be hilarious also, over Judge Judy and Judge Joe Brown (though I would often watch all 4 late at night recorded with my DVR) because the latter 2 always seemed to start out angry just for being there, maybe not so much Judge Joe Brown but he would too often stand up and give long lectures. But as to what you said, I love it when defendants, or plaintiffs for that matter, incriminate themselves. It just proves both how stupid crooked people usually are, and that crime doesn't pay. (much, lol)
I had trouble with the warranty on my tire insurance as I all of a sudden got a flat on the highway driving 100 KM/hr, The tire company said I’m sorry we cannot warrantee your tires as you continue to drive on them. I asked him how it was supposed to come to a dead stop from 100 km an hour on the highway. Needless to say they did concede that I had to continue to drive on it to the shoulder and park there. 🤦♀️
Just now seeing this video for some reason, but as I listened, when you described the attorney who advised his clients to transfer all assets to a separate company, using sticky notes on car windows no less, it seemed to me, that even if he was able to transfer them legally, wouldn’t that have been a fraudulent conveyance? I’m not sure what the law is in Michigan, but I believe most states have laws relating to transferring assets to avoid paying judgments. Some states even have a proviso in the law that states the transfer must be made for the explicit purpose to avoid paying a judgment. The fact that the attorney explicitly stated that he advised his client to do this very thing, makes me think you could have very well brought the conduct before the judge and filed a complaint with the state bar.
A lawyer told me about his first court case. He had a friend of the accused on the witness stand. It went something like this: "Do you know the accused?" "Yes" "Are you a friend of the accused?" "Yes" "Would you lie to help out your friend, the accused?" "Sure would" "Uh, I'd like to ignore that last answer." Judge - "Too late" He learned that he should talk to his witnesses before putting them on the stand.
I wish I knew about Steve when I had an issue with a kenworth. The DPF system failed and caused carbon packing in the engine. they "fixed" that and then the DPF unit almost caught the truck on fire. $14,000 later and it still wasn't fixed. the truck was leased and I wound up having to turn it in and go work for another company. 2 months later it was in flames on the side of I70 in PA. A good lawyer could have helped get the situation corrected without having to quit a job. I feel bad for the driver that lost all their belongings in a fire that never should have happened.
The Marquette lawyer was counting on you not showing up. Rural lawyers do that constantly, trying to make attorneys from Chicago drive to southern Illinois hoping they won’t show.
I like his idea spouted in padding that somebody could be medically declared stupid. After the past year, that is an astounding statement on many levels. How prophetic...
I love it! You’re client’s car is not a lemon, because the brakes failed and we crashed it but not in the way about which your client was concerned. Summary judgement would be a slam dunk.
I said "He has never been negligent. He is incompetent" He's an excellent driver. He just sometimes runs into things. A friend who totaled 3 cars in 2 years.
The most hilarious thing I ever heard of was:- Attorney: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?
I LOVE THIS VIDEO! Well done. Usually, listening to an attorney ranks on my list of favorite activities next to shoving knitting needles through my eardrums, but this was entertaining.
Wow, Steve. You've come a long way in the past 6 years. Your new mic is so much better. (I just finished your latest video) The background was a bit sparse here but it's pretty busy now. Good stories though. How about a new version of the dumbest things said by an attorney?
I like the "You can't prove that it is your car" argument when any police officer can to see the registration when pulling you over. Maybe you should do that... have a police officer tell that lawyer she can't prove the car she's driving is her own... registration isn't proof... LOL
If someone asked me to test drive a car that the owner claims has faulty brakes, the last thing I would be doing is testing it in traffic. For that, I would use the same term I use for people who overdrive their sight distance in foggy conditions: "faith-based driving".
I now understand the motivation for the strict libel laws in the UK. If an attorney in the UK accused another attorney of lying to the judge, and couldn't prove it, the false accuser would face very dire financial consequences and disbarment for such libel. Falsely accusing people is not something that should be taken lightly and tolerated the way that we do here in the US.
There are a lot of legislators who are not lawyers. And they write the worst laws. Primarily because they don't understand how the courts will interpret what they have done (while a lawyer WOULD know).
@@stevelehto I am not as worried about politicians who write bad law that can't be understood as I am about those that write bad law that *can* be understood, and violates my constitutional rights ways to Sunday. The USC seems to be treated as a list of suggestions these days that politicians and judges can pick and choose from like a Sunday pot luck dinner.
I was an officer called to testify in a DUI once and the written Miranda warnings, signed by the defendant, were being introduced. The defense asked me, "Did it ever occur to you that the defendant might have been too intoxicated to understand the meaning of the warnings you read to him?" Of course the prosecutor rose and asked if the defendant was changing his plea to "guilty".
I'm going to start putting sticky notes on things I want. "This is mine, this is mine, that is mine, all these are mine..." "Sir, you need to pay for those." "No... sticky notes... see?"
Some of these 'defences' are things which any first term law student could defeat! It's amazing they are seriously presented in court. Fortunately we in the UK are spared most of this nonsense, as the loser is usually ordered to pay the winner's costs, and so the losing party cannot frustrate the judgment by wriggling on the line and running up the winner's legal bill.
Thank you for all of your videos. I find them very informative. I always remind my friends who denigrate lawyers in general, that there are good lawyers and lousy lawyers, just as in all professions. I then ask them what they will do if they need legal representation.
Have you ever thought to seek sanctions against an attorney who repeatedly asserts frivolous defenses ? Where I practice, the Court controls the proceedings. If it wants to do a telephonic pre-trial, its done telephonically. Had an attorney ever made a remark like the woman did after the pre-trial, particularly insisting on that you both appear personally, at a minimium, I would have asked to Court to admonish the lawyer. I've never had opposing counsel make such a ludicrous remark.
I would have just shook my head at her and left. Then I would notice that apparently, while we were arguing about silly crap inside, some miscreant had vandalized her vehicle in the parking lot.
Years ago sitting in a bar with a friend and there was a soccer game on that we weren't paying attention to and all of a sudden everybody started screaming and celebrating and two shots of Irish whiskey showed up in front of us and we said what's this for and the bartender said that guy over there bought everybody a round because Manchester United scored. I've been a Manchester United fan ever since.
During my divorce, I was speaking to a law firm. I told them everything my ex would try to claim. Ex would without any proof, state that I was physically, mentally, and emotionally to both ex and my daughter. Also, ex was actually guilty of everything ex was accusing me of. Further, I would be accused of infidelity. In this conference was a young, black, female junior. I could sense that she was getting angry as I told my situation. Not angry with me, though. By the end of the interview, the Young Lady stood up and said "I want this case"!! I said that I wanted her in my corner as well. Turns out, my Attorney had lived the same situation, but from the child's perspective as a youth. I'm not going to get into all the details, but my wonderful Attorney ripped my ex apart. Even pointing out in negotiations that just the fact that she took my case was proof that ex was a liar. We were able to negotiate a 50/50 split, as opposed to the 90/10 that ex wanted.
Here’s a dumb thing said by a car salesman. I wanted a black car and the one they had of the model I was looking for was dark blue and parked outside under the overhang of the dealership roof. The salesman said to me “Under cover, this one looks black.” Oh great, I’ll just keep the car under a roof all the time! WTF?
You popped up on my feed and I recognized you from VINwiki ... cool stories . I am in Ohio and travel Michigan a lot... I will call the next time I receive a visit from a Michigan State Trooper... Many Blessings , SMR
was taken to court once, and the opening statement by police was, " I knew what he thought", which was fallowed by dead silence. The Judge asked if he read my mind. silence again. brief court case.....
I was in traffic court in Detroit for a ticket I didn't get (ID theft). For some reason they had a lawyer there helping people before you went before the judge. I don't know if this lawyer was stupid, over worked, deaf, or just got out of law school.
Before it was my turn she took me in the hallway and I told her I didn't get the ticket, she said okay.
When we went before the judge, and she asked how do I plea. The lawyer told her I plead guilty. I almost knocked her over when I jumped up shouting "No I Don't".
After that the judge spoke to me directly. And I told her how a family member used my name, and it wasn't even in my vehicle.
The judge asked if the cop who wrote the ticket was in the court room. The policeman stepped forward and said I wasn't the person he stopped.
So the judge dismissed the case, that would have cost me several hundreds of dollars.
1) No proof of License
2) No proof of insurance
3) Speeding
4) No seat belt
5) Improper left turn.
When I walked out, I told her I'm glad I didn't need her for something serious.
Makes you wonder how hard the bar exam is.
"For some reason" I think I can guess exactly the reason they had her "helping" people
I have a lawyer story. I was a witness to an accident. I was stopped at a traffic light, a vehicle apparently didn't want to wait for the light to change so he went around me in the opposing traffic lane, entered the intersection and struck another car that was coming through the intersection causing a collision. He decided to fight the careless driving ticket he was issued and hired a lawyer to defend him. When I was called to the witness stand to testify by the prosecutor told my story as I witnessed it and when i was cross examined by the defense attorney he proceeded to ask me questions, like hows my eyesight? am I sure of the conditions I previously testified to. etc. He then asked me "How can I be so sure it was the defendant that went around me at the intersection" I replied I didn't Say your client went around me I said his car did. You'll have to prove he wasn't the driver of the car. And since he was the only occupant that would be tough to do.
Defendant's Attorney to Expert Witness: "You claim to have a PhD, but your transcript doesn't show any courses taken."
Expert Witness: "At that level, there are no courses. The adviser assigns practicums and the candidate reports back when they are completed. It's not like law school . . . assuming you went to law school."
Entire Courtroom: [a momentary hush followed by raucous laughter]
There are actually four states, Washington, Virginia, California and Vermont, where you are not required to go to law school to take the bar exam.
Re "sue the dashboard vendor": The manufacturer hopefully realized that it would be _really_ bad for business if they started to throw their suppliers under the truck. Because if you start doing that, nobody in their right mind will supply you with parts any more.
I was asked the judge if I could sack my lawyer and he said please do because he is pissing me off and I'll make sure he reimburse your money ...I actually won my case .
Dumbest thing I've heard from an attorney this year was one firm that was insisting we schedule a qualified medical exam with a Doctor that died a year prior. When we informed them the doctor was no longer with the living and that it would be somewhat difficult to reach them for an appointment, their response was only to repeatedly ask if we were objected to their letter about scheduling that appointment. Well, technically no, but we can't figure out how to contact the dead, and told them to contact the dead doctor's office and scheduling it themselves since it was their client that the appoint was for. Apparently they then actually tried to do that, they called back later saying they would let us know when they choose another doctor.
Actual stupidest things resulted with both the attorney and their client going to jail. Yay fraud.
I live in Australia and I sold a car several years after a divorce and my ex wife tried to claim half the proceeds of the sale, her Solicitor who was a Queens Council (allegedly a top lawyer who charges top dollar) told her to make a claim under our state small claims legislation.... Now in Australia Family Court matters including property are the sole Jurisdiction of the Federal Family court, now I went to see a community advice lawyer (legal aid) to check whether I was correct as to the Family Court having sole original Jurisdiction of Family Court matters and was advised that that was the case and the matter could not be dealt with by the State Legislation and that furthermore because we had been divorced for over the statutory time limit for a claim had expired under that legislation also there was no case to answer from, and I was told that that was the case. Now at the time I was not aware who her Lawyer was, as My ex wife filed the case herself as that is what is required, under the Legislation, so I arrived in Court armed with the Federal statutes of the Family Law Act telling me that there was sole Jurisdiction under that Act. Our case is called and I jump in at the start to inform the Judge of the Jurisdictional problem, noting the QC was rather irritated and taken aback with this untrained non lawyer starting off with a Jurisdictional challenge, However the Judge listened to my argument and realised that the car was indeed purchased during the marriage and that I had after separation paid all the remaining payments on the loan as it was in my name and as such fell under the Jurisdiction of the Federal Family Law Act, Now the QC made his rebuttal argument and then at the End of his arguments to the Judge, made the stupid question to me. And WHO told you that the Family Law Act had sole Jurisdiction in this case, to which I answered well I read it myself in the Act, but I went to Legal Aid to confirm my argument and it was YOUR WIFE that confirmed my reading of the law was correct. The wife and the Husband practised at different firms! To which the Gallery full of other Lawyers all started laughing! Please note that this person was also a former State Attorney General.
Just saw this one, yeah a little late, but a nice 20 minutes of giggles. I've been in court as a witness for an accident and I stated that the defendant had run the red light and was hit by the other car. The attorney asked how I was so sure the light was red and I told him it was because I didn't get hit. He, and the judge, gave me funny look and he asked "What the hell does that have to do with him getting hit?" I told him I was stopped at the light his client ran and if it had been green I would have been in the intersection. He lost.
Transferring ownership of assets to evade creditors can also be defeated as a “fraudulent transfer”
I had a judge in Philly find that a mortgage company improperly refused to accept mortgage payments...but then said their refusal accept payments was not a defense to being behind on their payments. Sometimes you can't make this stuff up!
Late to the party I know. I had to lemon law my duelly diesel pickup. I opted for arbitration, at that time it’s binding to the company not the consumer. One of the things the manufacture put into evidence is a picture of my truck towing a race car and trailer. The arbitrators asked me if I did in deed tow, I said yes, that’s exactly why I bought a 1 ton. Company said I was over tow capacity. I said I wasn’t, we pulled up the rules for my class of racing, car must be between 1100 LBS and 1350 LBS. Next they ran my trailer registration, came back as a tare weight of 1200 LBS. the arbitrator then asked the company “what’s the tow rating of the truck” it was just over 10K. They then asked why would 2500 LBS destroy 3 transfer cases if it was only loaded 1/4 of the stated tow capacity. The company actually gave up then, case was over.
I witnessed an attorney attempt to defend a guy who had been ordered to bring a vehicle back to the legal owner (ex wife I think). Anyways, he wouldn't give up the keys and his attorney tried to argue that the guy had in fact fulfilled the judgement against him and bringing the keys was not part of the judgement. Hilarious! The judge however did not think it was hilarious. Give her the keys or go to jail for contempt. Case closed.
LOL, reminds me of something similar that happened to friend of mine. He loaned his car, against my advice, to someone I knew was an untrustworthy and shady asshole. That guy then gave it to his girlfriend. GF refused to give my buddy his car back, claiming that since it was a gift from her boyfriend, she somehow magically owned it now.
The sheriff's deputy we called out there disagreed, and ordered her to return the car, and then she claimed she lost the keys. The deputy told her to find them in 60 seconds or she was under arrest and miraculously they appeared.
My buddy ended up filing charges anyway because the inside of the car was torn up, filled with trash and looked like a family of rabid raccoons had been living in it. It needed a a whole new interior. I was surprised his insurance covered it.
The dumbest thing that I ever heard an attorney say: "My client's board of directors were in fact illegally elected, but as they are illegally elected, they are only a de facto board rather than a de jure board. Corporate law does not apply to de facto boards of directors." (This was actually a famous case.)
"Ignorance can be educated, and crazy can be medicated, but stupid is forever."
That sticky note transfer of assets was astounding in its desperation 🤣
I served on a jury where there was a dispute between a tenant and commercial property owner. The owner's lawyer emphasized every time he spoke how the property was owned by a trust, as if that had anything to do with the obvious breach of Contract under dispute. We found for the tenant. As foreman I ensured that we gave both sides due and dispassionate consideration, but everyone noted how the Owner's lawyer was insulting our intelligence with his ridiculous argument.
Please tell me you left a sticky note on that attorney's car...
'This vehicle now belongs to Steve Lehto'
More like, the driver of this car owned by Steve Lehto.
One of my professors was an expert witness and told me the most dumb question an attorney asked him was, "Now you don't really think my client did this, do you?" To which he responded "Yes, I do" to which the attorney responded with a regret filled "No further questions".
I was representing a child who had been bitten in the face by a dog. The dog was regularly trained, employed and owned by the City of San Jose, CA as a police dog. At the time of the incident, the dog was in the front yard of its police handlers home. The yard and the sidewalk were separated by a short picket fence. The child was a pedestrian walking down the sidewalk who had stopped to see the dog. The dog jumped up and bit the child as he was leaning over the fence to see the dog. The defense for the City made a motion for judgment on the pleadings asking for the case to be dismissed. The judge recited the above facts, then asked defense counsel "why on earth" the case should be dismissed. Defense counsel blurted out: "But your honor, the dog was off duty!" The motion was summarily denied, but not until after the courtroom laughter had died down.
The child's face was trespassing. The defense used the wrong defense. De fence was too low Does this mean a retrial?
@@jonka1 Ok that's good. 🤣🤣🤣
Love it George!
was it a german shepherd? those things should be exterminated..
@@guggiuggi3687 It's not the dog's fault if people but them thought shitty training.
On the subject of what constitutes manufacturing - I'm reminded that Carl Sagan once said, "To make a cake from scratch, you must first create the universe." 😁
I already have my sicker on that!
Exactly! Car companies buy subassemblies, subassembly manufactures buy other sub assemblies and components, component manufacturers buy raw materials, raw material manufacturers buy lower level raw materials, those manufacturers buy components that were refined, those refined materials were once mined from the ground…
"Gather around children. It is story time with Uncle Lehto and his epic journeys dealing with idiots."
A colleague of mine was once on the stand on behalf of the insurer we worked for. Opposing counsel trying to discredit her as a claims adjuster witness and asked her "Do you have an intimate knowledge of warehouses?" She replied "Well I can tell you its not a great place for intimacy."
I was in court as an expert witness when an attorney asked a plaintiff if he had to drop the transmission to replace the brake pads. Plaintiff said, “I’m going to guess you haven’t worked on many cars.” Entire courtroom laughed for the next 5 minutes.
Nathan Brame even with inboard brakes you don’t have to drop a transmission to change pad.
Only vehicle I know of that requires you to pull the transmission to replace brakes is an early WWII tank prototype...
Attorney: What gear were you in when you were involved in the car accident. Witness: Nike shoes, blue jeans and a t shirt.
Lmbo....luv it
what accident
Hahaha and clean underwear
I would like to have been at the accident scene when the police arrived: "Oh, I'm not the owner. I was just testing it to see if the brakes would fail."
I’m really surprised they didn’t test it on a track
@@t900HAWK At least an empty parking lot.
"The brakes failed in a different way"! The only way they would have known this is if they had established exactly how the previous brake failures had happened. This rather proves that the brakes had previously failed and that they knew how and why they had failed.
True but I figure their next argument would be the way they initially discovered [brakes faiked] has to do with owner's neglect of servicing.
Could have been a case of the client saying, "The brakes failed when I pushed the pedal." and the tech observing during the test: "The brakes engaged when pressure on the pedal began, but disengaged once the pedal reached maximum travel." Or some such. [shrug]
Hence they failed a different way than described in the brief.
Mrs Richards: "I paid for a room with a view!"
Basil: (pointing to the lovely view) "That is Torquay, Madam."
Mrs Richards: "It's not good enough!"
Basil: "May I ask what you were expecting to see out of a Torquay hotel bedroom window? Sydney Opera House, perhaps? the Hanging Gardens of Babylon? Herds of wildebeest sweeping majestically past?..."
Mrs Richards: "Don't be silly! I expect to be able to see the sea!"
Basil: "You can see the sea, it's over there between the land and the sky."
Mrs Richards: "I'm not satisfied. But I shall stay. But I expect a reduction."
Basil: "Why?! Because Krakatoa's not erupting at the moment?
I'm particularly impressed with the attorneys, whose clients did the right thing 'against their legal advice.' They must be practicing some sort of Voodoo to keep their law license.
Right?
Dumb lawyers just trying to save face for themselves. Anyone who can think sees through it.
Definitely NEED a second episode. Hilarious!!
Oh, hear hear!
Michael, I concur... Definitely need a second and 3rd episode.
Honestly I think we need a syndicated program entitled The Lehto Law Hour.
Very entertaining Steve. Especially the very last line of the story that the attorney who accused you of flying up didn't know how to identify a car in a parking lot and represented a car manufacturer. Hilarious. Please do a follow-up video when you get a chance. Thanks for these videos I appreciate them
I am not a lawyer, but even I know that brakes either stop safely under normal driving conditions, or they don't. Reminds me of the old joke: If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you!
Thanks for not selling out and having good morals :) We need more lawyers like you.
I love the sticky note story. Wow, I can't believe some of these people went to law school and passed the bar.
Or didn't pass the bar, but walked right on in and had a few, and are now, dipso facto, incompetent to practice law.
I would have loved to go to the dealership and pick out a car to repo because of the judgement, walk up to it and take the sticky note off the car, crumple it and put it in my pocket right in front of the respondent, and tell the tow truck driver "start with this one" 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Could have been worse when some people went to a bar and passed law school.
Sticky notes and trying to throw blame on the part manufacturer! That's when you know they have no real defense. Lawyers put together focus groups of comedians or circus clowns to come up with these ideas?
I don't understand why the auto maker wouldn't just repair or replace... throwing good money after bad by going back to court with ridiculous arguments makes no sense financially and definitely not helping the ol' reputation.
Affirmative Action
if that lawyers car was nicer, should have walked up and claimed it was yours, since you know.. there is no way of proving who's it is with her logic haha
as long as you brought a package of sticky notes with you
steve, when the expert who crashed your client's car while testing the brakes. whose insurance paid the claim the experts or your clients?
I have enjoyed watching your videos because you have explained the law as it pertains to Michigan as clear as possible. Although I have never had to retain the services of an attorney for car issues I wish I would have had knowledge of the topics you cover years ago. I bought a new car from the local dealer about three years ago. They had to get the car from another dealer several hundred miles away because the one I wanted was in another city. I know this to be common because I've bought new cars like this before since small lots don't have exactly what I want. Shortly after taking delivery I noticed something was not right with the suspension. I took the car back the next day to service and it was discovered that the car had spring immobilizers that were not removed and it caused the suspension to ride hard and noisy. I never knew this, but car manufacturers install these on springs so the cars won't move while in transit on a car carrier, train, etc. When I asked for compensation for my lost day the sales guy was irritated that I had the nerve to ask for anything and kept pointing at the fault of the dealer where they got the car. I now know that my sales contract had absolutely nothing to do with the other dealer and that I also paid a 'dealer prep fee' which I take to assume that they were supposed do whatever it is to prepare the car for delivery and to make sure it is roadworthy. Had I taken my sales contract and pointed out these facts plus the fact that I didn't get what I paid for in reference to the dealer prep fee then it would have substantially bolstered my argument. I wasn't going to be greedy and all I wanted was my first service to be covered for my inconvenience and time wasted by taking the bus home and back. They eventually agreed and tried to hustle me out the door and tell me that all I have to do is come in and look for them when it was time. I told them this was BS because it could be up to a year before I needed to come back and that dealers churn employees all the time, therefore I wanted something in writing. Again the sales guy was really irritated at this and eventually he came back stomping his feet with a 'due bill' which stated in handwriting that I was to get my next service free of charge, plus it had a signature. Due to the sales guy's attitude I took the document to service and verified that they will accept it when I return for my first service and they confirmed that it would cover it. At the time I didn't know what a due bill was and for all I know he could have pulled it out of his rear, so I asked a buddy who works at a dealer. He said that it is a common document used by car dealers that states in detail that the dealer owes the customer (me) something of value and most likely whatever was on it will come out of the sales guy's commission. Thank you for making these videos because you have provided a lot of valuable and free insight in consumer law.
12:40 So the attorney advised his client to do a fraudulent conveyance. Pretty sure Michigan has passed the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act.
Yeah that sounded like it was illegal, of course I'm not a lawyer, so I wasn't certain.
@hognoxious They cannot arrest a husband and wife for the same crime!
What I don't get is why the other attorney even bothered saying anything to Lehto about this hare-brained scheme. If the judgment turned out to be uncollectable because the dealer managed to transfer all of its assets to someone else--and Lehto couldn't simply get the judgment amended to apply to the fraudulent transferee--wouldn't it be better to let Lehto and his client find out the hard way? I thought revenge was best served cold. Maybe that lawyer is just as dumb as it seems.
Best one I had as a prosecutor, was a civil attorney calling me up to want to know why they weren't noticed on a criminal search warrant before we presented it to a judge. Another one was an attorney for a bank, who tried to stop agents from serving a search warrant on the bank, because it was their policy to not comply with any legal documents before their attorneys had an opportunity to review them. At the point she got handcuffed, she began to realize that legal proceeding was not going the way she thought it would.
Ha! I make cabinet doors from cypress boards. I plane them to thickness, rip them to width, trim them to length, cut the tenons and all the grooves the tenons fit in, cut the panels ,assemble then paint and install them, but I don't manufacture them.. I have little cabinet door fairies that do the manufacturing for me.
Wood Gnomes
But you didn't grow the tree, cut it down, or saw it into boards, therefore you are not a manufacturer .....😆
I was in court one day and heard a defense attorney said “my client denies all involvement in this burglary….. but if it helps he will give the stuff back.” We saw him in the hall and he immediately said “you know that wasn’t my idea.” Turned out his client had pled and served out on 5 other burglaries. Had they charged him on the sixth he would have pled at the time. I think he took time served and gave the stuff back
"Three times the head of the broom has come off, and now the handle has come out"!!!
I've got the same knife my dad gave me. It has a new handle, & 2 new blades.
Like George Washington's original hatchet which is on display. The head has been replaced twice and the handle has been replaced 4 times.
Very nice.
When I was a police officer I often stayed after my cases were finished because I knew looking at the attorneys present, certain ones were either going to say something stupid or have their clients say something stupid. Always entertaining.
My brother is an attorney. From that fact alone, I can attest that there is (apparently) no requirement for native intelligence or inherent moral rectitude to become an attorney in the USA.
My sister is an attorney and I can attest to that statement as well!
All you need is a decent memory and a clean shirt to be a lawyer
@@Merescat my brother. Failed the bar 5 times
In fact, they seem to be prerequisites at some programs.
It’s the opposite of being a doctor.
"...I'm going to start snagging vehicles, I don't care if they got sticky notes on them or not...". That's just downright funny, good stuff!!
"Your honor, I did NOT steal that car! I put my sticker on it! It's mine!"
Funny. My wife worked for a law firm and her atty. did aviation law and he came back from court one day with this story. "When the plaintiff's lawyer cross examined the pilot, she asked where he was located when he was piloting the aircraft. A few titters in the courtroom. In the Pilots seat ma'am. Is this pilots seat in close proximity to the controls? Guffaws burst out to the point where the judge had to call for order. Yes ma'am, very much so." The red faced and flustered atty. ended her cross.
How do these people pass a Bar Exam?
The story goes that a person was owed $1,500, so they went to see a lawyer and asked them to collect the debt.
The lawyer said, "Deposit $3,000 to my account and I'll get you your money".
When the deposit landed in the lawyer's account, they waited 10 days and sent the client $1,500.
The client was amazed, but the lawyer didn't do anything to chase the debt, instead, they paid their client from the $3,000 deposit.
The client was happy to get their money and felt justice was served, even though it cost them $1,500 !
I'm not a software developer. I just arrange lines of code into computer programs.
Steve to the failed brake attorney: "Your expert got in a crash due to failed brakes... what's his name and contact info? I need another client."
Thank you for this wonderful example of what sane people must endure.
I'd like to hear a part 2 on this. I'm not a MOPAR man but wish you the best of luck with the book.
Worked for a DA's office for nearly 10 years in Colorado. Once, in a DUI case, the public defender filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that her client was too inebriated to understand his rights when they were read to him.
Car manufacturer: We didn't made that part, we bought it from A
A: We didn't made it, we had a third party B design it.
B: Yeah, we designed it, and it is not a design flaw. C is the one that assembled it
C: Yes, but we don't make the parts, D made it
D: Yes we did made the parts, but we did not installed it, C did, and it was misinstalled
C: We installed it as per the installation instruction from D
D: Well, engineer E made the doc, and it is obiviously wrong
E: Manufacturer D supplied us with the information, we just made a nice document
D: It come from from another part that F made
F: We have nothing to do with this.
D: Well hmmm It is guidelines anyway, the issue is your machine G that didn't installed it proprelly!
G say it's the software guy, who say it's the hardware guy, who say it's the designer/engineer guy, which say that the machine wasn't designed for this and blame the marketting/sale guy, who say that he got misinformed by the car manufacturer and so on and on and on, and eventually nobody knows what it is about...
Finger pointing often takes place in a circular manner.
And so the Titanic set sail on her maiden voyage!
I was a witness in a civil case where the lawyer disputed my "interpretation" of someone's statement and not being a lawyer dog realized he just argued against his premise for winning the case , the other lawyer looked over at me in amazement ! I was there because I knew the client had paid off a private mortgage and the of the seller's heir was trying to steal the buyers house .
That story should be taken out and shot too.
"not being a lawyer dog realized he just argued against his premise for winning the case ". And, once again, in English.
@@phildane7411 clearly you’re not fluent in auto-correct 😁
When this lawyer claims that her client assembles cars and isn't a manufacturer is like a car driver claiming he's a traveler and not a driver.
*Judge Judy:* What was stolen?
*Plaintiff:* My wallet...
*Judge Judy:* What was in your wallet?
*Plaintiff:* It was 50 bucks.
*Judge Judy:* Okay.
*Plaintiff:* I had to replace all my IDs, I had gift cards in there, my earpiece, and a calculator.
*Defendant:* There was no earpiece in there ma'am.
*Judge Judy:* I love it. I love it. Judgement for the plaintiff in the amount of $500.
Classic
That was a hilarious episode.
That's a Judge Judy classic, much funnier when you watch it.🤣🤣🤣😂😆
I'm in the UK and just watched that episode not long. So funny
I used to love watching The People's Court when judge Milian was presiding. She would often come up with these hilarious sayings from her grandmother that sometimes made little or no sense in English but she would explain them. I preferred the People's Court and Judge Mathis, who could be hilarious also, over Judge Judy and Judge Joe Brown (though I would often watch all 4 late at night recorded with my DVR) because the latter 2 always seemed to start out angry just for being there, maybe not so much Judge Joe Brown but he would too often stand up and give long lectures. But as to what you said, I love it when defendants, or plaintiffs for that matter, incriminate themselves. It just proves both how stupid crooked people usually are, and that crime doesn't pay. (much, lol)
These are great stories, along with bad attorney/judge/client series. This would be a great book...(hint, hint)
I had trouble with the warranty on my tire insurance as I all of a sudden got a flat on the highway driving 100 KM/hr, The tire company said I’m sorry we cannot warrantee your tires as you continue to drive on them. I asked him how it was supposed to come to a dead stop from 100 km an hour on the highway. Needless to say they did concede that I had to continue to drive on it to the shoulder and park there. 🤦♀️
Just now seeing this video for some reason, but as I listened, when you described the attorney who advised his clients to transfer all assets to a separate company, using sticky notes on car windows no less, it seemed to me, that even if he was able to transfer them legally, wouldn’t that have been a fraudulent conveyance? I’m not sure what the law is in Michigan, but I believe most states have laws relating to transferring assets to avoid paying judgments. Some states even have a proviso in the law that states the transfer must be made for the explicit purpose to avoid paying a judgment. The fact that the attorney explicitly stated that he advised his client to do this very thing, makes me think you could have very well brought the conduct before the judge and filed a complaint with the state bar.
A lawyer told me about his first court case. He had a friend of the accused on the witness stand. It went something like this:
"Do you know the accused?"
"Yes"
"Are you a friend of the accused?"
"Yes"
"Would you lie to help out your friend, the accused?"
"Sure would"
"Uh, I'd like to ignore that last answer."
Judge - "Too late"
He learned that he should talk to his witnesses before putting them on the stand.
"I like my cars and I like my wine; that's why I drink AND drive: THUNDERBIRD!"
- Eddie Murphy ( ?)
This just explained a lot about so many of our politicians.
Thank you steve.😀
Best thing I said: other attorney "you didn't have a joint banking account?" ... Me: "I've been married before" ... shut him up anyway
I wish I knew about Steve when I had an issue with a kenworth. The DPF system failed and caused carbon packing in the engine. they "fixed" that and then the DPF unit almost caught the truck on fire. $14,000 later and it still wasn't fixed. the truck was leased and I wound up having to turn it in and go work for another company. 2 months later it was in flames on the side of I70 in PA. A good lawyer could have helped get the situation corrected without having to quit a job. I feel bad for the driver that lost all their belongings in a fire that never should have happened.
The Marquette lawyer was counting on you not showing up. Rural lawyers do that constantly, trying to make attorneys from Chicago drive to southern Illinois hoping they won’t show.
I like his idea spouted in padding that somebody could be medically declared stupid. After the past year, that is an astounding statement on many levels. How prophetic...
you admitted that you were going up 75 at 100 miles an hour, so you were flying.
I love it! You’re client’s car is not a lemon, because the brakes failed and we crashed it but not in the way about which your client was concerned. Summary judgement would be a slam dunk.
And those very same "dumb" attorneys end up in politics, don't they?
It’s awesome to see how far your show has come in 5 years. Congrats on your success!
I said "He has never been negligent. He is incompetent"
He's an excellent driver. He just sometimes runs into things.
A friend who totaled 3 cars in 2 years.
Re: the truck instrument panel manufactured by another company... wasn't that decided a long time ago? MacPherson V Buick Motor, in 1916.
"medically stupid" - i love it
But can you prove that that’s HIS brain?
Transferring ownership to a new corporation by sticky note? Even if it worked, wouldn't it be fraud?
“…if you’re medically stupid…” 🤣🤣🤣 I 💕*love*💕it when he uses technical terms!
Fabulous video, fabulous content, fabulous channel! Thank you!!!
The most hilarious thing I ever heard of was:- Attorney: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?
"You didn't drive up here" LMAO you beamed up there (XD)
I LOVE THIS VIDEO! Well done. Usually, listening to an attorney ranks on my list of favorite activities next to shoving knitting needles through my eardrums, but this was entertaining.
It's a person wonder how these attorney's ever got through grade school, let alone law school and the Bar exam.
"Medically Stupid" Hilarious, thanks for the laughs Steve!
Wow, Steve. You've come a long way in the past 6 years. Your new mic is so much better. (I just finished your latest video) The background was a bit sparse here but it's pretty busy now. Good stories though. How about a new version of the dumbest things said by an attorney?
I like the "You can't prove that it is your car" argument when any police officer can to see the registration when pulling you over.
Maybe you should do that... have a police officer tell that lawyer she can't prove the car she's driving is her own... registration isn't proof... LOL
I take it the Michigan Attorney test is really easy. Amazing.
I heard Federal employees drug test is multiple choice.
If someone asked me to test drive a car that the owner claims has faulty brakes, the last thing I would be doing is testing it in traffic. For that, I would use the same term I use for people who overdrive their sight distance in foggy conditions: "faith-based driving".
I now understand the motivation for the strict libel laws in the UK. If an attorney in the UK accused another attorney of lying to the judge, and couldn't prove it, the false accuser would face very dire financial consequences and disbarment for such libel. Falsely accusing people is not something that should be taken lightly and tolerated the way that we do here in the US.
The scary thing is that these are the same kind of people we who become politicians and write our laws.
There are a lot of legislators who are not lawyers. And they write the worst laws. Primarily because they don't understand how the courts will interpret what they have done (while a lawyer WOULD know).
@@stevelehto
I am not as worried about politicians who write bad law that can't be understood as I am about those that write bad law that *can* be understood, and violates my constitutional rights ways to Sunday.
The USC seems to be treated as a list of suggestions these days that politicians and judges can pick and choose from like a Sunday pot luck dinner.
I was an officer called to testify in a DUI once and the written Miranda warnings, signed by the defendant, were being introduced. The defense asked me, "Did it ever occur to you that the defendant might have been too intoxicated to understand the meaning of the warnings you read to him?" Of course the prosecutor rose and asked if the defendant was changing his plea to "guilty".
Wouldn’t there be ways the defendant was too drunk and still not guilty such as the alcohol had kicked in later when he was signing
I'm going to start putting sticky notes on things I want.
"This is mine, this is mine, that is mine, all these are mine..."
"Sir, you need to pay for those."
"No... sticky notes... see?"
That's kind of how some countries were formed. The sticky note, looked like a flag on a pole, but the concept was the same.
Classic Britain tactics lmfao
Some of these 'defences' are things which any first term law student could defeat! It's amazing they are seriously presented in court. Fortunately we in the UK are spared most of this nonsense, as the loser is usually ordered to pay the winner's costs, and so the losing party cannot frustrate the judgment by wriggling on the line and running up the winner's legal bill.
Lawyer: "We don't know who's book that is."
Steve: "But it has my name on the cover, I signed it."
Lawyer: "Anyone could have done that."
"Medically stupid" ROFLMAO I'm using that line from now on.
Thank you for all of your videos. I find them very informative. I always remind my friends who denigrate lawyers in general, that there are good lawyers and lousy lawyers, just as in all professions. I then ask them what they will do if they need legal representation.
The sticky note thing is a great move. I now own every car and house in my suburb.
You can do better than that. Put a sticky note on a bedrock outcropping and claim the entire planet.
Steve, I had a Dodge Daytona back in 1985 and people were stopping me left and right about it. It made heads turn!
Have you ever thought to seek sanctions against an attorney who repeatedly asserts frivolous defenses ?
Where I practice, the Court controls the proceedings. If it wants to do a telephonic pre-trial, its done telephonically. Had an attorney ever made a remark like the woman did after the pre-trial, particularly insisting on that you both appear personally, at a minimium, I would have asked to Court to admonish the lawyer. I've never had opposing counsel make such a ludicrous remark.
+Stephen in Michigan State courts, attorneys rarely get sanctioned. I've asked and judges just let everything slide.
Can you sue them for making false accusations with no evidence?
I would have just shook my head at her and left.
Then I would notice that apparently, while we were arguing about silly crap inside, some miscreant had vandalized her vehicle in the parking lot.
@@stevelehto Do you not have cost-sanctions in the US? They get rid of a lot of that BS!
I wish I knew the "sticky note" trick for my divorce. LOL
Years ago sitting in a bar with a friend and there was a soccer game on that we weren't paying attention to and all of a sudden everybody started screaming and celebrating and two shots of Irish whiskey showed up in front of us and we said what's this for and the bartender said that guy over there bought everybody a round because Manchester United scored. I've been a Manchester United fan ever since.
During my divorce, I was speaking to a law firm. I told them everything my ex would try to claim. Ex would without any proof, state that I was physically, mentally, and emotionally to both ex and my daughter. Also, ex was actually guilty of everything ex was accusing me of. Further, I would be accused of infidelity. In this conference was a young, black, female junior. I could sense that she was getting angry as I told my situation. Not angry with me, though. By the end of the interview, the Young Lady stood up and said "I want this case"!! I said that I wanted her in my corner as well. Turns out, my Attorney had lived the same situation, but from the child's perspective as a youth. I'm not going to get into all the details, but my wonderful Attorney ripped my ex apart. Even pointing out in negotiations that just the fact that she took my case was proof that ex was a liar. We were able to negotiate a 50/50 split, as opposed to the 90/10 that ex wanted.
Here’s a dumb thing said by a car salesman. I wanted a black car and the one they had of the model I was looking for was dark blue and parked outside under the overhang of the dealership roof. The salesman said to me “Under cover, this one looks black.” Oh great, I’ll just keep the car under a roof all the time! WTF?
You popped up on my feed and I recognized you from VINwiki ... cool stories . I am in Ohio and travel Michigan a lot... I will call the next time I receive a visit from a Michigan State Trooper...
Many Blessings , SMR