My day in court
So I'm a legal assistant at Sound Transit. The legal department has eight attorneys, one paralegal, and two assistants. It was three assistants, but the legal secretary to the general counsel retired last month and I'm not sure if they're going to hire a replacement. That, and the other legal assistant is on vacation this week. So I guess I shouldn't be surprised that, in addition to handling the department's invoices and helping out with the public disclosures, that I'd be doing more work for the general counsel (that's the top attorney for the agency, and the head of the department).
He's been calling me in on minor research and proofreading for the last few days, but today things took a bizarre turn. First he wanted me to write up some notes for today's court hearing. Apparently, there are some people out there who don't believe in Sound Transit's mission of bringing light rail to the area. I shouldn't be talking about the particulars of it, so I'll let THE STRANGER do that part--
http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/09/sound_transit_sued_again
Anyway, so after I drew up exhibit lists and created folders for everything, he told me that he wanted me to come to the hearing, get a feel for what it is I'm supposed to be assisting with. Well, that's a vote of confidence (I'm only just beginning to not feel like I'm still a temp around the office). Had I known I was due in court today, I would've worn something better than a khaki sports shirt, black jeans, and sandals--the general counsel and the other two attorneys were in suits and ties (I don't own a suit, but I'm pretty sure I have a tie in my closet somewhere...). Also, I wouldn't have been out bar-hopping last night, finally getting to bed around 3:30am.
Fortunately, I've been a misfit all of my life, so the whole fish-out-of-water feeling is old hat to me. I'm underdressed and don't know what the hell is going on or what to expect? Story of my fuckin' life. So I just grabbed a legal pad and a pen, and the paperwork that I had drafted, and walked with the attorneys up the street to the courthouse. In addition to our two Sound Transit attorneys, there was also our outside counsel from K&L Gates, and attorneys from the prosecutor's offices of King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties (since it's the prosecutor's office that approves the final ballot proposal titles and explanatory statements).
The plaintiff was a nice enough guy, I'd met him a few months ago when he filed a public disclosure request for agency records on the drafting of the ballot title and statements--ammunition for this lawsuit, in other words. When requesters come by to review the documents, I have to sit with them and make sure they don't deface or destroy anything; but I can't do any department work while sitting in front of them, so essentially I'm being paid $21.54/hour to do the puzzles in the agency library's copy of the Seattle TIMES, frequently for hours at a time. Worse ways to round out a forty-hour week, I suppose.
As I had been warned by one of our attorneys on the walk over, these hearings can be less than thrilling. I'll admit that there were a few points where I was beginning to fade out, my sleep deficit catching up with me. I had to fight back laughter at one point, though: the plaintiff said that he wasn't bound by the time limit for filing his petition, since the statute had recently been amended (recodified), and no longer referenced the appropriate paragraph. Basically, I thought to myself, he's arguing that, since the library has misplaced its copy of MOBY DICK, that Melville never wrote it in the first place. [Note to self: that's not bad, tell that one to Desmond tomorrow.]
The judge set off something of a scramble, when he questioned the agency's estimate that the .5% sales tax increase would cost the average taxpayer about $69 more a year in taxes. He quickly did the math, and concluded that would mean that the average taxpayer then spends $13,800 a year on sales taxable goods and services ($69 divided by 0.005 = $13,800). Didn't that seem a little low? I didn't want to speak up, of course, but I actually thought the opposite: dividing that number by 12 on my calculator watch, I saw that would come to $1,150 a month would be spent on taxable items. Rent isn't subject to sales tax, neither is food in this state, or gasoline. I fall right into the actuarial middle of their average taxpayer salary ($44,000-$46,000), so I was flattered that they thought I spent over a grand a month on taxable items. They think I take my paycheck straight to Best Buy or something? If I had a grand to throw around every month, I'd start dating again.
This line of questioning kept our side fairly busy for the better part of ten minutes--and the hearing was scheduled for one hour: right in front of the judge's bench was a prominent red digital clock, hours-minutes-seconds, which only displayed when the court was in session (while in recess, it went -- -- --). I thought the judge was leaning pretty hard on the agency: he didn't challenge the plaintiff much at all, that I could tell. I heard on the walk over that the odds were very good that the petition wouldn't get very far. There was even a hope that the judge could rule right away, though he has a reputation for being deliberative. The three county attorneys each asked for the judge to rule on this no later than the next day, since they each had to get their ballots printed soon in order to be ready for the November election.
At the end of the hour the judge called a ten minute recess--at the end of which he would render his decision. Seems it would happen pretty quickly after all. Talked with the lawyers, they seemed interested in my impressions of how things were going. I have to admit, I wasn't sure how the judge was going to rule, since he seemed to pick apart the agency's position while leaving the plaintiff alone. So I was pleasantly surprised when, upon returning, the judge ruled against the plaintiff on all counts. "Petition is dismissed, with prejudice." That meaning that he couldn't bring the suit again (as opposed to "without prejudice", which would mean that the judge didn't rule on the validity of the suit itself). All in all, an overwhelming victory for the agency.
I got separated from the group on the elevator rides down, ended up walking back to the office with the media relations guy, who is also very cool. He said everyone was headed over to The Elysian on First, where they were holding some kind of event to kick off the election push for Proposition 1. The mayor would be there, along with all the major local media, and a lot of the higher-ups from the agency. He cordially suggested that I come along, but I wasn't feeling up to it. I had planned on seeing THE DARK KNIGHT at the Cinerama, as it was in its last week there, and I wasn't sure if I was up to a work-night out. So I just went back up to my desk, caught up on email and messages, started writing this post. Then went up to Shorty's, ordered a Long Island Iced Tea, drank it in less than a minute, then went over to Cinerama and caught DARK KNIGHT. And it was fucking *excellent*. Best movie I've seen so far this year. And I honestly think Heath Ledger may win Best Supporting Actor. Came home to find that my crazy roommate had slipped on the bus, and had severely injured her foot. What a day.
The next day the general counsel called me into his office to talk about my experiences at the hearing, what I thought of it all. We talked for quite a while, me telling him that most of my familiarity with the legal process came from watching LAW AND ORDER, which he said he never watched. When I said my favorite movie about lawyers was REVERSAL OF FORTUNE, he said he hadn't seen it, but he studied at Harvard Law and had met Alan Dershowitz...and Klaus von Bulow. Cool.
He's been calling me in on minor research and proofreading for the last few days, but today things took a bizarre turn. First he wanted me to write up some notes for today's court hearing. Apparently, there are some people out there who don't believe in Sound Transit's mission of bringing light rail to the area. I shouldn't be talking about the particulars of it, so I'll let THE STRANGER do that part--
http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/09/sound_transit_sued_again
Anyway, so after I drew up exhibit lists and created folders for everything, he told me that he wanted me to come to the hearing, get a feel for what it is I'm supposed to be assisting with. Well, that's a vote of confidence (I'm only just beginning to not feel like I'm still a temp around the office). Had I known I was due in court today, I would've worn something better than a khaki sports shirt, black jeans, and sandals--the general counsel and the other two attorneys were in suits and ties (I don't own a suit, but I'm pretty sure I have a tie in my closet somewhere...). Also, I wouldn't have been out bar-hopping last night, finally getting to bed around 3:30am.
Fortunately, I've been a misfit all of my life, so the whole fish-out-of-water feeling is old hat to me. I'm underdressed and don't know what the hell is going on or what to expect? Story of my fuckin' life. So I just grabbed a legal pad and a pen, and the paperwork that I had drafted, and walked with the attorneys up the street to the courthouse. In addition to our two Sound Transit attorneys, there was also our outside counsel from K&L Gates, and attorneys from the prosecutor's offices of King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties (since it's the prosecutor's office that approves the final ballot proposal titles and explanatory statements).
The plaintiff was a nice enough guy, I'd met him a few months ago when he filed a public disclosure request for agency records on the drafting of the ballot title and statements--ammunition for this lawsuit, in other words. When requesters come by to review the documents, I have to sit with them and make sure they don't deface or destroy anything; but I can't do any department work while sitting in front of them, so essentially I'm being paid $21.54/hour to do the puzzles in the agency library's copy of the Seattle TIMES, frequently for hours at a time. Worse ways to round out a forty-hour week, I suppose.
As I had been warned by one of our attorneys on the walk over, these hearings can be less than thrilling. I'll admit that there were a few points where I was beginning to fade out, my sleep deficit catching up with me. I had to fight back laughter at one point, though: the plaintiff said that he wasn't bound by the time limit for filing his petition, since the statute had recently been amended (recodified), and no longer referenced the appropriate paragraph. Basically, I thought to myself, he's arguing that, since the library has misplaced its copy of MOBY DICK, that Melville never wrote it in the first place. [Note to self: that's not bad, tell that one to Desmond tomorrow.]
The judge set off something of a scramble, when he questioned the agency's estimate that the .5% sales tax increase would cost the average taxpayer about $69 more a year in taxes. He quickly did the math, and concluded that would mean that the average taxpayer then spends $13,800 a year on sales taxable goods and services ($69 divided by 0.005 = $13,800). Didn't that seem a little low? I didn't want to speak up, of course, but I actually thought the opposite: dividing that number by 12 on my calculator watch, I saw that would come to $1,150 a month would be spent on taxable items. Rent isn't subject to sales tax, neither is food in this state, or gasoline. I fall right into the actuarial middle of their average taxpayer salary ($44,000-$46,000), so I was flattered that they thought I spent over a grand a month on taxable items. They think I take my paycheck straight to Best Buy or something? If I had a grand to throw around every month, I'd start dating again.
This line of questioning kept our side fairly busy for the better part of ten minutes--and the hearing was scheduled for one hour: right in front of the judge's bench was a prominent red digital clock, hours-minutes-seconds, which only displayed when the court was in session (while in recess, it went -- -- --). I thought the judge was leaning pretty hard on the agency: he didn't challenge the plaintiff much at all, that I could tell. I heard on the walk over that the odds were very good that the petition wouldn't get very far. There was even a hope that the judge could rule right away, though he has a reputation for being deliberative. The three county attorneys each asked for the judge to rule on this no later than the next day, since they each had to get their ballots printed soon in order to be ready for the November election.
At the end of the hour the judge called a ten minute recess--at the end of which he would render his decision. Seems it would happen pretty quickly after all. Talked with the lawyers, they seemed interested in my impressions of how things were going. I have to admit, I wasn't sure how the judge was going to rule, since he seemed to pick apart the agency's position while leaving the plaintiff alone. So I was pleasantly surprised when, upon returning, the judge ruled against the plaintiff on all counts. "Petition is dismissed, with prejudice." That meaning that he couldn't bring the suit again (as opposed to "without prejudice", which would mean that the judge didn't rule on the validity of the suit itself). All in all, an overwhelming victory for the agency.
I got separated from the group on the elevator rides down, ended up walking back to the office with the media relations guy, who is also very cool. He said everyone was headed over to The Elysian on First, where they were holding some kind of event to kick off the election push for Proposition 1. The mayor would be there, along with all the major local media, and a lot of the higher-ups from the agency. He cordially suggested that I come along, but I wasn't feeling up to it. I had planned on seeing THE DARK KNIGHT at the Cinerama, as it was in its last week there, and I wasn't sure if I was up to a work-night out. So I just went back up to my desk, caught up on email and messages, started writing this post. Then went up to Shorty's, ordered a Long Island Iced Tea, drank it in less than a minute, then went over to Cinerama and caught DARK KNIGHT. And it was fucking *excellent*. Best movie I've seen so far this year. And I honestly think Heath Ledger may win Best Supporting Actor. Came home to find that my crazy roommate had slipped on the bus, and had severely injured her foot. What a day.
The next day the general counsel called me into his office to talk about my experiences at the hearing, what I thought of it all. We talked for quite a while, me telling him that most of my familiarity with the legal process came from watching LAW AND ORDER, which he said he never watched. When I said my favorite movie about lawyers was REVERSAL OF FORTUNE, he said he hadn't seen it, but he studied at Harvard Law and had met Alan Dershowitz...and Klaus von Bulow. Cool.
posted by Russ the Librarian at 6:18 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home