3 ms·

I'm a former litigator. Third party discovery is generally a pain in the ass. The parties to a lawsuit have some rights to compel witnesses to share documents

I'm a former litigator. Third party discovery is generally a pain in the ass. The parties to a lawsuit have some rights to compel witnesses to share documents etc. Often it's hard to push back but eventually you just stop responding and the party to the litigation needs to decide how worth it is (without pissing off the judge) to make your life hell. Sounds like Amazon is going hard on this guy.

weinzierl 3y ago
What is the worst thing that can happen if you stop responding?
- balls187 3y ago
  Being found in contempt of court. Penalty range from a slap on the wrist to jail time.
- johndhi 3y ago
  This article is pretty good: https://www.cades.com/2022/07/11/third-party-subpoenas-whos-going-to-pay-for-that/ https://www.cades.com/2022/07/11/third-party-subpoenas-whos-... Basically it goes like this: -they send you a subpoena, you kinda try to respond -they tell you they want more documents and your response is insufficient, and they threaten that the subpoena is issued with the authority of the court and contempt is a potential remedy etc -if you get really annoyed, you threaten to (or actually move to) quash the subpoena -Ultimately the judge is supposed to determine whether, based on the resources available to you, the subpoena is causing you "significant expense." If it is, the judge needs to ensure the expense isn't too significant by working with you. If you're being careful and paying a lawyer for all of this, this can be pretty damn expensive to go through. I guess in theory if you just fire from the hip yourself and try to learn the rules (probably not advised) you could be OK, but then you risk making little errors that Amazon will blast you and your testmiony with.
balls187 3y ago
> without pissing off the judge I find it interesting that many lawyers in the US have this POV.
- johndhi 3y ago
  Why do you find that interesting? The judge ultimately decides a ton of MASSIVELY important issues for you, and your job as a lawyer is to maintain credibility with them.
  - balls187 3y ago
    > Why do you find that interesting? I understand the need to maintain proper court room decorum, but "don't piss the judge off" runs counter to everything we are supposed to believe about the US judicial system being based on fair and impartial judiciary.
    - ShroudedNight 3y ago
      "Fair and impartial" is aspirational: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungry_judge_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungry_judge_effect
      - randallsquared 3y ago
        The hungry judge effect hasn't replicated well. For example, https://www.tse-fr.eu/sites/default/files/TSE/documents/doc/wp/2022/wp_tse_1393.pdf https://www.tse-fr.eu/sites/default/files/TSE/documents/doc/... , and a few years ago it was pointed out that the actual effect in the original paper seems too large and precise to be true: https://daniellakens.blogspot.com/2017/07/impossibly-hungry-judges.html https://daniellakens.blogspot.com/2017/07/impossibly-hungry-...
    - johndhi 3y ago
      Ah. "Don't piss off the judge" can mean a lot of things to me, and the way I was using it here is (I think) actually pretty fair. It could (but shouldn't) mean: avoid the judge's biases and pet peeves. When I said it I meant: while Amazon may legally have the right to ask for 100x what it really needs, the judge will (rightly) ask them to bring that down to 1 to 5x, and if they fight the judge on it, they may lose the judge's patience for other more important issues.
moneywoes 3y ago
Any resources you’d suggest short of a google to understand the nuances of litigation as an engineer building products / writing things online

weinzierl 3y ago

What is the worst thing that can happen if you stop responding?

balls187 3y ago
Being found in contempt of court. Penalty range from a slap on the wrist to jail time.
johndhi 3y ago
This article is pretty good: https://www.cades.com/2022/07/11/third-party-subpoenas-whos-going-to-pay-for-that/ https://www.cades.com/2022/07/11/third-party-subpoenas-whos-... Basically it goes like this: -they send you a subpoena, you kinda try to respond -they tell you they want more documents and your response is insufficient, and they threaten that the subpoena is issued with the authority of the court and contempt is a potential remedy etc -if you get really annoyed, you threaten to (or actually move to) quash the subpoena -Ultimately the judge is supposed to determine whether, based on the resources available to you, the subpoena is causing you "significant expense." If it is, the judge needs to ensure the expense isn't too significant by working with you. If you're being careful and paying a lawyer for all of this, this can be pretty damn expensive to go through. I guess in theory if you just fire from the hip yourself and try to learn the rules (probably not advised) you could be OK, but then you risk making little errors that Amazon will blast you and your testmiony with.

balls187 3y ago

> without pissing off the judge I find it interesting that many lawyers in the US have this POV.

johndhi 3y ago
Why do you find that interesting? The judge ultimately decides a ton of MASSIVELY important issues for you, and your job as a lawyer is to maintain credibility with them.
- balls187 3y ago
  > Why do you find that interesting? I understand the need to maintain proper court room decorum, but "don't piss the judge off" runs counter to everything we are supposed to believe about the US judicial system being based on fair and impartial judiciary.
  - ShroudedNight 3y ago
    "Fair and impartial" is aspirational: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungry_judge_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungry_judge_effect
    - randallsquared 3y ago
      The hungry judge effect hasn't replicated well. For example, https://www.tse-fr.eu/sites/default/files/TSE/documents/doc/wp/2022/wp_tse_1393.pdf https://www.tse-fr.eu/sites/default/files/TSE/documents/doc/... , and a few years ago it was pointed out that the actual effect in the original paper seems too large and precise to be true: https://daniellakens.blogspot.com/2017/07/impossibly-hungry-judges.html https://daniellakens.blogspot.com/2017/07/impossibly-hungry-...
  - johndhi 3y ago
    Ah. "Don't piss off the judge" can mean a lot of things to me, and the way I was using it here is (I think) actually pretty fair. It could (but shouldn't) mean: avoid the judge's biases and pet peeves. When I said it I meant: while Amazon may legally have the right to ask for 100x what it really needs, the judge will (rightly) ask them to bring that down to 1 to 5x, and if they fight the judge on it, they may lose the judge's patience for other more important issues.

moneywoes 3y ago

Any resources you’d suggest short of a google to understand the nuances of litigation as an engineer building products / writing things online