New Orleans Eats Forums at NOLAEats.com

Interesting story BB. Thanks for sharing.

I think the previous two posters are prime candidates to be CDC judges.

ToddMa wrote:I think the previous two posters are prime candidates to be CDC judges.

Why Todd? Because I prefer to hear both sides of a story before passing judgement? Is that an exclusively "liberal" thing to do now?

Well, ChoWeb, if Bam Bam’s description is even remotely accurate about the cell phone recording, there is no "other side to the story." The judge obviously has no clue concerning the Rules of Evidence, and I must assume that Bam Bam was just giving a blatant example of this ignorance to cast doubt on the rationality of the Court in excluding Plaintiff’s evidence. Admitting the cell phone evidence (as described by Bam Bam -- I doubt the judge or the Defendant will be posting here to give another version and actually expecting or asking for such a thing along with complete ignorance of the subject matter may not be exclusively a "liberal" thing but it is certainly quite a ChoWeb thing) was totally wrong in that it was an obvious violation of at least 3 or 4 Rules, all certainly appeal-worthy (assuming Bam Bam properly preserved error). However, that does not excuse Bam Bam’s conduct. He knows that he had other legitimate avenues of redress for such wrongs available, but he chose a more expedient, but obviously sanctionable, course of action, even if it does make for a good story.

bam bam wrote:
Nonetheless, I realized I was going to get my clock cleaned, if this case went to a verdict. So on rebuttal, I put on all my evidence that had previously been excluded. Mistrial. Good luck getting this case off your docket, jackass.

I apologize to anyone who wasted a day of jury duty on my case.

It amazes me that there isn't a single contested seat @ CDC this fall.

I don't know much about law but I think that you made a ballsy call and I applaud you for doing so.

On a side note, I had a good day in court today. I was erroneously ticketed for running a red light when I was merely caught in traffic and all the lights changed just as I slipped through along with the rest of the traffic before, along, and after me. The police officer failed to appear. My two new favorite words in the English language are "Cased dismissed!"

bam, I've seen attorneys do that in juvenile and criminal courts. lol, I've seen one or two of them held in contempt, too.

We had a judge years ago in Juvenile who was probably in the beginnings of dementia, although he wasn't very old. Poor thing... really nice guy... but we would have to fanangle the system sometimes like that for the sake of justice.... and usually in the accused favor.

Did the judge make any attempt to stop you at all? It's interesting that he allowed you to do it in your rebuttal.

lol, LiveOak something like that has to be very carefully planned and executed... you start talking and don't stop when the objection is made and sustained... and get out just enough that you force the other side to request a mistrial - and hopefully NOT enough to land your fanny in a jail cell.

I was essentially at the end of my rope. I had been in court since 9:00 am and was getting railroaded all day. There wasn't even a pretense of impartiality from the judge. I can deal with that but the minute the judge plays an unauthenticated recording of the incident to the jury, I can't win the case. I noticed my intent to take a writ (appeal) and asked for a stay. I was denied.

At that point I was going to lose. I had some things my witnesses were precluded from talking about on direct. On rebuttal, I put them on and had them start discussing these things. The reasons were 1) I was getting the shafted, so I didn't care about a mistrial and 2) I needed to rebut the recording and some of the excluded stuff explained away some of the things in the recording. The defense certainly didn't want a mistrial and I was called into chambers and screamed at by the judge. But I took it and have moved on.

Recusal is my next option.

Well perhaps I was a bit harsh in my initial condemnation of your tactics, if you were being treated that unfairly. Still not sure you shouldn't have dealt with the unfair rulings on appeal, but I can see the decision in the heat of battle. Good luck on that recusal.