Daily Archives: Dec. 3, 2008

Judge again admonishes Schneiders’ lawyers

Judge Monti Belot continues to admonish lawyers for motions they’re filing on behalf of Stephen and Linda Schneider, as the couple await trial charged with more than 30 federal crimes related to their prescription practices for painkillers at their Haysville clinic.

As in earlier orders, Belot’s latest ruling was terse and critical of the Schneider defense team’s efforts to argue their case

The Schneiders’ lawyers had asked Belot to reconsider a ruling last month, in which he rejected their attempts to keep prosecutors’ medical experts from testifying at the Schneider’s trial.

Belot noted in his order today the defense included a list of medical articles to support their arguments but which, in fact, supported the other side:

“The court is left to wonder whether defendants’ counsel even read the articles they claim will require exclusion of the government’s experts’ testimony.”
Belot concluded that the government’s experts’ opinions “are reliable, credible and will be helpful to the jury” and the Schneiders’ lawyers “have failed to provide any basis to challenge that conclusion.”

Trial is set for February.

The kinds of emails that get you in trouble

My wife says you should never put anything in a company e-mail that you don’t want to be shown to 12 strangers on a big movie screen. She practices employment law, including sexual harassment lawsuits, and she said you wouldn’t believe what people put in e-mails that end up being shown to juries in public courtrooms.

Searching electronic archives of company e-mails and files is becoming an increasingly useful tool for lawyers involved in lawsuits against you or your boss. It’s called “e-discovery.”

Following are phrases that lawyers and investigators like to search for, from Roger Matus’ “Death by E-mail” blog:

  • “I could get into trouble for telling you this, but…”
  • “Delete this email immediately.”
  • “I really shouldn’t put this in writing.”
  • “Don’t ask. You don’t want to know.”
  • “Is this actually legal?”
(Thanks to Walter Olson for pointing this out via Twitter):