« Solving Obesity |
Main
| Who Does She Think She Is? »
24 May 2008 10:31 am
Litigant Or Sociopath?
Ann Althouse, seconded by the Passive-Aggressive one, poo-pooed the notion that the Clintons are sociopaths in their Florida and Michigan grandstanding. They're just being lawyers - preparing to litigate. There is one obvious problem with that argument, as a reader explains:
Althouse is right to an extent. Often in ligitation, if the rules
help you, they are iron clad, and if they don't, you look for reasons
why they shouldn't apply. But that's not what's going on here.
To use
the ligitation analogy, if you walk in to court espousing the exact
opposite position of an earlier stated position, you lose, plain and
simple. Your opponent calls it an admission, throws it in your face,
and probably moves for sanctions. The judge accepts the earlier
position as the truth and the later position an obvious attempt to
impose a different standard of liability than what everyone agreed to
before the litigation (or at an earlier point in the litigation).
Worst of all, you lose all credibility with the judge, which any
litigator will tell you is the most important weapon in your arsenal.
By Ann's analogy, Clinton loses (and gets sanctioned).
Lord knows I'd like to litigate that case.
Share This
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c45669e200e55279df0f8833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'Litigant Or Sociopath?'