Thursday, April 02, 2020

Judge Milton Hirsch on "emergencies"

This order has it all: a Judge Edward Davis story, Shakespeare, and a dose of reality during the virus.


Anonymous said...

I like judge Hirsch, but the thought of somebody selling away the property of an estate and taking the proceeds could certainly be an emergency. 15k is a ton to some people...and if the person receiving it is judgment proof (ie they will spend it asap and leave the beneficiaries with squat), the beneficiaries have a right to expect haste to stop it, or protect the estate before the scumbag who is trying to circumvent probate court buys an ounce of meth and heads to South Beach to party it up.

Imagine a cop saying, no, the guys stealing from your house right this instant do not present an emergency, call the station....and then....berating you.

There really is no need to attack the reputation of a lawyer for vigorously trying to protect her client (and take 3 pages to do so), when the supposed complaint from the bench is that she is trying to skip to the front of the line to get her issue heard.

Come on...just deny it and move on.

Anonymous said...

David, was that law clerk you??? Brett Barfield? Or maybe Judge Altonaga?

Anonymous said...

Hirsch needn't have dragged "The Bard" into it, he could have just written:

LOL 15k is no emergency u r poor LOL, enjoy unemployment, maybe u can sue some1 l8ter

Anonymous said...


Its not so much that you're wrong. $15k can be a fortune to some. And a judgement proof defendant in this situation might be able to leave you without a remedy. But orders like this are necessary.

Civil practitioners have become almost hysterical in their unfounded belief in the "emergency" of their causes. Money is not an emergency; at least not in the context of the practice of law where lives and freedom are at stake. When we deal in money, especially in business, there is inherent risk. This case wasn't business, I know, but the loss of a dead man's car still isn't an emergency - he doesn't need it and it wasn't yours to begin with. Money comes and money goes. If your debts exceed your income, declare bankruptcy, wipe the slate clean, and start over. Tomorrow is always another day to try and make more money.

The practice of law, especially in civil law, is cheap and more and more orders like this should be issued. Lawyers should think long and hard about using the word "emergency," and frankly about speaking at all. There should be consequences - real consequences like fines and suspensions - when civil lawyers exaggerate, stretch the truth, misrepresent facts and law, make mountains out of molehills, and/or fail to be courteous and professional (all of which are daily occurrences in civil court). And this sort of thing should be policed aggressively by the courts and the Bar.

Its nice to see that some good is coming of coronavirus. I've seen more and more orders like this smacking foolish civil lawyers around. Did you see the trademarks and copyrights order on unicorns? Excellent work. Get a grip people.

Anonymous said...

According to Webster's, "emergency" was first used circa 1631, more than a decade after Shakespeare's death. Just sayin'

Anonymous said...

In other news, David Lat is all better.

Anonymous said...

Very tried of these grandstanding judges. Get over yourselves. You're not that smart or funny.