taking walks through pdf's. testing how far the playback speed slider can go. if i'm wrong lmk.
NY
Joined September 2018
- Tweets2.5K
- Following1.2K
- Followers376
- Likes71.1K
Pinned Tweet
Thread of other similar "orders": xitter.cf/dotdotslashstar/status…
Judge Perry-Bond has ruled that Jane Doe will be allowed to proceed under a pseudonym in the Cornell 7 case.
She takes the opportunity to write that:
> [C]yberstalking and engaging in or encouraging threats across state lines, whether it be of Jane Doe, any of the named defendants, or their attorneys, can be considered a federal crime and perpetrators of those acts may be subjecting themselves to prosecution.
Since I expect this to be misinterpreted, it's probably worth noting that this order does not bind anyone other than “parties, their counsel, the parties' agents, and the [clerk's] office”.
Brian Steel fans might like this week's Court of Appeals oral argument. This case is one where Steel himself was trial counsel.
Billy Greg Pruitt was convicted of aggravated assault for displaying a BB gun at an off-duty police officer. Most of the oral argument is about a strong 404(b) issue: the trial court allowed evidence of a prior incident where Pruitt fired an actual gun.
The justices seem to agree that it had little or no relevance: "Are you arguing harmless error? I'm trying to figure out why I care."
A26A2155. BILLY GREG PRUITT v. THE STATE
Full video: vimeo.com/1238468769
Appellant Brief: gaappeals.gov/wp-content/upl…
DA Brief: gaappeals.gov/wp-content/upl…
JustAnswer provided what appears to be a transcript of Chirayu Rana's conversation with their "expert" about the claims he was contemplating against Morgan Stanley, prior to suing JPMC.
Chirayu Rana asked for help with his problem from a chatbot. In the process, we can see a major inconsistency in his story.
He originally said the abuser was a male! I guess he eventually thought it was better to pick the hottest woman he worked with to go after.
This is from ten months ago on the website Ask a Lawyer.
He claimed to have "AMPLE" evidence for his claim and left his name, phone number, and email.
Rana calls the boss who gave him drugs and assaulted him "he."
It looks like he was developing his story over time, and eventually decided to make his abusive boss into a woman, and also make himself a laughing stock in the process.
It's funny to see him talk about his mental health struggles as a result and the chatbot lend him a sympathetic ear.
Morgan Stanley HR investigation into Chirayu Rana's harassment complaints in 2022. (Attached as exhibit to tonight's motion)
> He told me he was going to say he was bisexual to make his sexual harassment claim stronger.
Chase and Hajdini both just filed SPICY oppositions to Chirayu Rana's attorney's withdrawal motion.
They claim that Rana's sister, and his friend Allan Flott have recanted their previous sworn statements, which formed the bulk of the evidence for Rana's claim.
And, his withdrawing attorneys were notified of this *prior* to filing Rana's latest amended complaint, which continues to use their statements.
----
Summarizing the call with the sister's attorney, JPMC attorney writes:
> [H]er brother, Chirayu Rana, came to her to ask her to present the statements in the affirmation as if they were facts within her own personal knowledge, but they were not. You stated that [she] was told by her brother the affirmation would not be used in court or disclosed publicly.
Chase and Hajdini both just filed SPICY oppositions to Chirayu Rana's attorney's withdrawal motion.
They claim that Rana's sister, and his friend Allan Flott have recanted their previous sworn statements, which formed the bulk of the evidence for Rana's claim.
And, his withdrawing attorneys were notified of this *prior* to filing Rana's latest amended complaint, which continues to use their statements.
----
Summarizing the call with the sister's attorney, JPMC attorney writes:
> [H]er brother, Chirayu Rana, came to her to ask her to present the statements in the affirmation as if they were facts within her own personal knowledge, but they were not. You stated that [she] was told by her brother the affirmation would not be used in court or disclosed publicly.
Chirayu Rana's latest attorneys seek to withdraw from his case against JPMC and Lorna Hajdini.
Obviously, they don't provide specifics of their reasons but, from among the many possible rules permitting withdrawal, the ones they chose to cite are:
> the client insists upon taking action with which the lawyer has a fundamental disagreement
> the client fails to cooperate in the representation or otherwise renders the representation unreasonably difficult for the lawyer to carry out employment effectively
Rana's answer to counterclaims is due Monday. JPMC and Hajdini (calling it “a carousel of counsel”) both oppose the motion.
courtlistener.com/docket/736…
Many of the docs are filed under seal, with entirely redacted public versions. Docket is here: courtlistener.com/docket/736…
Chirayu Rana found a new firm (surprisingly quickly) to represent him against JPMC and Hajdini.
Chirayu Rana's latest attorneys seek to withdraw from his case against JPMC and Lorna Hajdini.
Obviously, they don't provide specifics of their reasons but, from among the many possible rules permitting withdrawal, the ones they chose to cite are:
> the client insists upon taking action with which the lawyer has a fundamental disagreement
> the client fails to cooperate in the representation or otherwise renders the representation unreasonably difficult for the lawyer to carry out employment effectively
Rana's answer to counterclaims is due Monday. JPMC and Hajdini (calling it “a carousel of counsel”) both oppose the motion.
courtlistener.com/docket/736…
Idk if I'm not reading this right, but she seems to be arguing that County Law § 701(6) makes it so only the AG can disqualify the AG? That doesn't sound right.
Also, what is this request in the answer? Seems like boilerplate from a different Article 78 response, why would there be a "rehearing" of the special prosecutor appointment?
iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nys…
Kathy Hochul and Letitia James filed their answer today in the Article 78 proceeding to remove James from the Cornell 7 case.
It raises a whole bunch of issues but probably the strongest argument is that the matter is not ripe as no charges have been filed yet.
iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nys…
>be New York attorney
>inherit over $1 million
>gamble it all away instead of paying taxes
>owe IRS and other creditors $217k
>creditors keep garnishing your bank accounts
>have genius idea
>creditors can't touch IOLA, right?
>deposit $752k in personal funds
>make 288 gambling transactions
>165 payments to online psychics
>223 meals and entertainment transactions
>680 PayPal withdrawals
>even link Amazon account to escrow account
>"stepson" rents a $5.99 movie
>meanwhile client gives you $8k for litigation expenses
>escrow balance somehow drops to $112.51
>fantasy sports transactions on IOLA start bouncing
>bar notified and starts investigating
>insist you only gambled your own money
>claim no clients were ever harmed
>court points out you literally misappropriated client funds
>also not impressed by hiding money from IRS
>disbarred
Matter of Wolf, 2026 NY Slip Op 06125 (2d Dept, Oct. 21, 2026). nycourts.gov/reporter/curren…
Florida 4DCA decision today, referring to the bar lawyer previously ordered to defend her "AI slop" writing.
The OSC got a lot of pushback at the time, as she was not being accused of making the (previously) commonplace AI citation errors but of, more generally, filing what the court called "legal gibberish".
If the "gibberish" characterization is correct, it's not even necessary to discuss AI to consider her filings sanctionable.
4D2026-2262 LISANDRILLO
v. PALOZZI: acis.flcourts.gov/portal/cou…
Sep 16 - Opinion and OSC: law.justia.com/cases/florida…
Sep 28 - Lawyer's 84pg OSC response: fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gf…
Remember the Florida lawyer who was ordered to explain... WITHOUT USING AI... why she shouldn’t be sanctioned after a Florida appellate court said her filings looked like “AI slop”?
She just responded... and she's pushing back HARD...
And her argument is basically:
> “AI slop” is not a legal standard.
She says the legal strategy, arguments and professional judgment were hers, that every authority was reviewed and verified, and that the court is effectively treating writing that looks AI-generated as evidence of sanctionable conduct.
She also did a full audit of the filings: roughly 237 citation instances.
Her concession?
Two errors... an outdated rule subsection and one quotation that wasn’t actually verbatim.
Her position: those are human mistakes, not fabricated law.
So this case just got MUCH more interesting.
The question is no longer merely whether lawyers can use AI.
It’s whether a court can infer that a lawyer failed to exercise independent professional judgment because the work product looks like AI... even where the cases are real, the citations exist, and the lawyer stands behind the arguments.
That is a much bigger fight for the profession.
My take: if she wrote all 84 pages of her response without using AI in 2026, free this women... she earned it! 😂
Another GPDC attorney's brief deemed "substantially deficient" today.
The brief argued lack of evidence to sustain convictions for two charges, one of which defendant was acquitted of, the other never indicted on.
This is one of the cases that the GPDC asked to remand after SCOG flagged attorney Marilyn Tyler's deficient performance (see quoted tweet). But it turns out that Tyler did not author the brief in this case. Instead of denying remand, the court of appeals took a look at the brief and decided it warranted remand anyway.
A26A1329. JERIOD MATHIS v. THE STATE efast.gaappeals.gov/download… gaappeals.gov/wp-content/the…
A huge problem in Georgia since Kemp took office is that the head of the GPDC fired the appellate division and started paying random contractors very little money to do serious appeals without oversight.
One person did such a bad job that SCOG is remanding all their cases.
@HappilyAngryEsq
Was surprised to see a case affirmed on appeal where it was undisputed that (a) the jury was never sworn in (b) a juror Googled and shared relevant info with the panel.
Turns out that, while failure to swear in a jury is a non-waivable jurisdictional defect in criminal cases, the same reasoning does not apply to civil trials 🤷.
The Googling turned out to not be an issue, at least in part, because the info revealed was harmful to the side that won at trial, so it's unclear how it may have prejudiced appellant.
A26A1286. HEARD v. LOGAN efast.gaappeals.gov/download…
It was great to ride the South GWB bike path again, which reopened this week ahead of schedule (!) after years of renovations.
But, as always, @StreetsblogNYC is complaining that it's just. not. good. enough.
Their main issue is that, at the points where the cables attach to the deck, the path is less than 7' wide -- narrower than guidelines suggest.
And, like, a wider path would be nice, but is it really the best use of ~$100M? It must depend, on how many people use it, right? 1/
ALT Headline from Feb 14 2023 Pics from "George Washington Bridge ‘Restoring the George’ Construction Program Supplemental Information"
ALT Oct 16 2026 article
Pedestrians now have their own walkway over the Hudson (except for during the overnight periods). buff.ly/gr8Ml6P
Well, when they started campaigning for constructing a new lane in 2015, they justified the need with an estimate was that ridership would *double by 2024*.
However, the Port Authority's numbers over that period show *no increase in ridership*.
The "Complete George" campaign site is still up and active, but this particular projection has been taken offline.
This did not seem to have any impact on their assessment of the wisdom of the $100M upgrade.
