WIN\LOSS 2002

 

Last Revision:  January 8, 2003

 

1.         PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE:  January 9th, 2002, Fulton Superior Court before Judge Davina Gude.  Client charged with Family Violence and harassment by the alleged victim.  The hearing was held in which the client admitted making numerous telephone calls to the alleged victim, but denied any family violence.  Defendant was not found guilty of family violence.  However, the Court held that he had harassed the other party on the telephone, and issued an injunction with no finding of guilt and no fine.  This is a win. 

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -1-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -0- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -0-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -0-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

 

2.         PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE:  February 1, 2002, before Judge Gail S. Tusan.  This was a contested paternity suit where Mr. *** sought to legitimize his biological daughter by a lawsuit against the mother, Ms. ***.  The DNA testing showed that Mr. *** was the father.  He was allowed to legitimate the child.  The name of the child was not changed.  Mr. *** was ordered to pay child support.  Mr. *** was ordered to pay medical expenses of the mother in having the child, in the sum of one half of the expenses or approximately One Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($1,500.00).  This is a win.

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -2-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -0- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -0-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -0-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

 

3.   PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE: February 4, 2002 and February 5, 2002,  Gwinnett County Civil Action File No. 01-A-04457-3, Juvenile Court Docket No: 01-2352-2 and 01-2353-2, case assigned to Judge Dawson Jackson, who assigned it to Judge Stephen Franzen of the Gwinnett County Juvenile Court for determination of all issues, sitting as a Superior Court Judge.

 

This was a divorce/custody action where we filed the divorce petition and filed for and obtained an Emergency Hearing Ex-Parte before the Judge, outside of the knowledge and the presence of the Defendant Wife, that custody of the two minor children, ***, age 3 and ***, age 7, would be on a temporary basis in our client the father, ***.  That was decided before the wife was served. 

 

The wife had Baron Munchausen’s Syndrome, which is basically is a souped up form of Hypochondria, where she has herself taken by ambulance to the emergency rooms of various hospitals, which makes her feel special.  This also concentrates the efforts of the medical doctors, nurses, and medical personnel on her, and where she becomes the center of attention.  She receives treatment for usually imaginary hypochondriacal symptoms, sometimes even having unnecessary operations, in order to keep herself as the center of attention.  The creating of medical emergencies, by someone having Baron Munchausen’s Syndrome, relieves that person from present stresses. It puts her in a hospital bed, where she does not have to cope with the ordinary stresses of life, where people can come to visit her and hope she gets better.  Everything is easier when viewed from the hospital bed. 

 

Additionally, the wife was addicted to Percocet and Lortab (Vicodin) and basically to various opium derivative pain killing medications.  Wife admitted that she had gone to different hospitals on the same day, and seen different physicians on the same day, in order to get the pain relieving opium based prescription drugs to which she was addicted.  This was done at a horrendous expense.  Over a period of three years wife accumulated approximately $132,274.47 in medical bills.  $31,121.83 was paid by insurance, and $100,387.95 was left for the wife and/or the husband to pay. 

 

The issue was custody.  The wife wanted joint legal and joint physical custody, with the husband being the primary physical custodian, and the wife the secondary physical custodian.  Judge Franzen said he had leaned toward joint custody generally.

 

During closing argument I was able to quote from McConaughey, Section 24-2, that, if the parties were equally fit and equally loving and caring for the minor child, then it was reversible error for the Judge to not consider joint custody.  This does not mean that the Judge had to grant joint custody in such a case, but he at least had to consider it.  This ruling by the Court of Appeals, was affirmed by the Supreme Court of Georgia, in two cases, which we cited.  The implication from that is, where the parties are equally fit and equally loving and equally caring for the minor children, that joint custody is really preferred.  Not mandatory, but preferred.  But in this case the wife was not fit, since she was addicted to pain medications, and had not attended N.A. from October of 2001 through January 30, 2002.  She had had three surgical procedures, two operations and one setting of a broken bone in her ankle, where she each time received opium based, pain relieving medications such as Percocet, Lortab (Vicodin), and Morphine.  She was still addicted to her pain medications.  She was not attending N.A.  The court- appointed expert stated Wife would have to attend N.A. meetings for the rest of her life.  Therefore, she was not equally fit with the husband. 

 

The husband was a fit parent with no negatives against him.  The wife was, we argued, unfit as a parent, because she had hurt the children by her neglect, and she had caused them both to act immature and younger than their age.  ***, who is 7, had the social maturity of a 3 or 4 year old, because the wife thought the world was a dangerous place to be in, and kept the children at home in the house, and away from other children. 

 

As a result, the Court Ordered sole custody to the father with visitation to the mother, which visitation she could have one night every other week starting on Saturday morning at 10:00 a.m., until Sunday night at 6:00 p.m., and one night per week on Thursdays when the children got out of school until 7:30 p.m.  Any other visitation such as holiday visitation by the wife would have to be supervised by the wife’s relatives.

 

In 1973, when we won the first case we ever tried for custody for the father, fathers just simply did not get custody.  This time we got custody in an ex-parte hearing before the Judge, which is very, very, very, hard to do before the wife is served.  We had the wife served by a private investigator, and served her not only with the Complaint, but with the Court Order granting custody of the minor children to our client, the husband.

 

Approximately ten days later, we had a contested hearing where the wife had secured able counsel, Pat O’Kelley.  They argued that the husband was guilty of child molestation, but the Judge did not believe them.  The original ex-parte Order giving custody to the husband remained in force.

 

The Judge ruled sole custody to the husband, with supervised visitation to the wife if visitation lasts more than one day.  Ordered the wife to continue counseling until she was released by her counselor, and ordered her to attend N.A. meetings, and to provide proof to her husband each quarter of her attendance.

 

The clients were the most hard-working, diligent, cooperative clients, as well as among the brightest that I have ever had in my life, so it was really a joy to represent them.  The day was complete when the grandmother, *** gave me a big hug, and then when my client *** thanked me and I thanked him for being my client, and said it was a privilege to represent such fine people.  This is a big win.    

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -3-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -0- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -0-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -0-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

 

4.         PARTIES REDACTED; CRIMINAL CASE, Dekalb Superior Court before  Judge Clarence F. Seeleger.  Defendant was charged with unlawful taking while being in lawful possession of various items belonging to his employer of a value of approximately One Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty Dollars ($1,650.00). We pled Defendant guilty.  The prosecutor, in negotiations, with a negotiated plea, offered 5 years of probation, 80 hours community service or a $500.00 fine, Fifty Dollars ($50.00) restitution and alcohol and drug evaluation.  Defendant is an alcoholic who needs to control his drinking, and that is his main problem.  The Judge had him pay $50.00 restitution and $37.00 a month probation fees.  The Judge waived the $500.00 fine, and the 80 hours of community service, on the grounds that the Defendant did not have enough money for all that, and Ordered Defendant to undergo alcohol treatment and random drug and alcohol screens.  Judge Seeleger and I went to law school together.  He recognized me before the Court during the calender call and said he had not had the pleasure of my being in his Courtroom for quite some time.  And after the plea was over he asked me to approach the bench so we could talk over old times.  It was good to see him again.  This was a settlement with high leverage. 

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -3-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -1- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -0-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -0-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

 

5.  PARTIES REDACTED; CRIMINAL CASE, Recorder’s Court of Gwinnett County, February 25th, 2002. We pled client nolo contendere to driving on a suspended license, had his charge of following too close merged into the DUI.  Pled the client guilty to DUI.  Got 30 days work release, $1,000 fine, 25% add ons, and alka-sensor.  This was the second DUI in five years and the first driving on a suspended license.  Client got 12 months probation, thirty days work release, 30 days community service, $1,000 fine, $250.00 add ons, victim impact meeting, and the alka-sensor required when he gets his license back.  This is as good as it gets in Gwinnett for a second DUI, and first driving with suspended license.   This is a good settlement.

 

  Won                                                                                                                                                  -3-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -1- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -0-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -1-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

 

6.  PARTIES REDACTED; CRIMINAL CASE, Dekalb County Superior Court, March 14th, 2002.  Hazardous Waste Felony Violation before Judge Cynthia Becker. Sitting for Judge Becker in her illness was Judge Murray, of the Georgia Supreme Court.  We Pled client First Offender, nine years probation, with $61,300.00 restitution to be paid on probation, and 200 hours community service. The maximum allowable fine was $200,000.00.  He received no fine.  The maximum time in jail was nine years.  He received no time in jail.  This was a settlement with high leverage.

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -3-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -2- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -0-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -1-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

 

7.  PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE, Magistrate Court of White County, Cleveland Georgia, April 24th, 2002, before Judge Gerald Johnson.  Ms. Lancette charged Mr. Yawn with Interference with Custody.  The hearing was to determine whether probable cause exists for the issue of a warrant for his arrest.  After approximately a two (2) hour hearing and despite the work of Mr. Yawn’s excellent attorney, the Judge found probable cause.  This is a win.

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -4-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -2- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -0-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -1-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

 

8.  PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE, Fulton County Superior Court, Friday April 26th, 2002, 8:30 o’clock a.m., before  Judge Gail S. Tusan.  Defendant moved for new trial, and new trial was denied.  That is a win.  Defendant brought a Motion for Contempt, and a First Amended, Second Amended, Third Amended, and Fourth Amended Motions for Contempt.  Court found that the Plaintiff, my client, did not return the items from the boat as she had been ordered to in the Final Judgement and Decree, which was ordered previous to my representation.  It was not my fault. We defended successfully against their 4th and 5th amended Complaint. This is a loss.

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -5-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -2- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -1-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                                                                                            -0-

 

9.  PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE, Superior Court of Cobb County, before Judge George Kreeger, April 30th, 2002.  Plaintiff’s Motion for Contempt was denied, and a lot of fun it was! A win.

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -6-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -2- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -1-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

 

 

10.  PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE May 17th, 2002, Cobb Superior Court before Judge Watson L. White.  I actually had a difficult time persuading the Judge to allow us to hear this contested divorce on an uncontested calender.  But since the client’s mother and sister came from England for it, the Judge decided to hear it.  We won sole custody.  It was fair.  The Defendant had his lawyer withdraw for non-payment of fees and had left for parts unknown.  We thought it would be best to get it on the calender as soon as possible.  This is a win.

 

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -7-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -2- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -1-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

 

11.  PARTIES REDACTED; CRIMINAL CASE, June 10th, 2002, Clayton County State Court before Judge Carbo.  Client charged with criminal trespass to property.  The State nol prosqued the case against the client.  The client paid $127.00 in administrative fee for failure to attend Court for the previous session he had.  There was a bench warrant set for his arrest when we brought him into Court in the morning, when I had to turn him over to the bailiff, and they put him in the jail.   This was a settlement with high leverage.

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -7-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -3- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -1-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

 

12.  PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE, June 18th, 2002, Gwinnett Superior Court before Judge Ray.  Motion to Compel Response to Discovery and the Taking of the Deposition.  The opposing party agreed to fully amend her responses to Interrogatories and to the Notice to Produce and Request for Production of Documents. Opposing party agreed to have her deposition taken at our office on June 24th, 2002.  The Judge awarded attorneys’ fees in the sum of One Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars ($1,800.00). This is a win. Later that day, we settled the case.  This is a win.

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -9-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -3- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -2-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

 

13.  PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE, August 1st, 2002, Cobb County Superior Court before Judge George H. Kreeger, divorce/custody.  This case was settled on terms that made pages to both parties after a lot of work on Settlement by the clients and the two attorneys.  This is a good settlement. 

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -8-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -3- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   


   Settled                                                                                                                                 -3-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

 

14.  PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE, September 4th, 2002, before Judge William M. Ray, II, Superior Court of Gwinnett County, Divorce case. This was a settlement. 

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -8-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -3- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -4-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

 

15.  PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE, October 10th, 2002, Forsyth County Superior Court before Judge Jeffrey M. Bagley.  This was an action by the Plaintiff to have the Defendant pay rents into Court.  Plaintiff had a clear right to pay rent into Court.  However Plaintiff wanted   August, September and October be paid in, and the Judge said that Defendant would pay November 1, 2002, or move out.  Defendant would have to pay $900.00 for November 1st, 2002, and every month thereafter, or move out.  We saved her August, September and October, at $900.00 per month or $2,700.00.  This is a win, for we did all we could, with the law in the Plaintiff’s favor.

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -9-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -3- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -4-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

 

16.  PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE, October 15th, 2002, Gwinnett Superior Court.  This was a domestic violence action, filed by the wife.  We negotiated all morning.  Wrote and prepared the Order.  Wife insisted she wanted Husband to attend a domestic batterer’s seminar.  Husband said he had done nothing wrong.  Right before lunch I said well let’s go to Court.  Wife then called Husband and said she would agree to take out the domestic battery requirement.  I advised Husband not to settle.  Before the hearing, I told Wife that I was known by some people as the Barracuda, and that was for no reason.  She responded that she was known as the witch, and that is spelled with a “B,” and that was for no reason.  Wife testified.  I cross-examined the Wife, with devastating effect.  Wife’s case was dismissed.  Earlier we had offered $600.00 per month plus medical insurance, and to split the marital debt, with the Husband paying $175.00 on it per month, and the Wife $225.00 per month because she was making $47,000.00 to his $35,000.00.  Wife received nothing. This is a big win.


   Won                                                                                                                                                 -10-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -3- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -4-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

 

17.  PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE., Thursday October 17th, 2002, Tift County Superior Court before Judge McCorvey.   This was a divorce for adultery with issues of equitable distribution, alimony and child support, and child visitation.  We went down there ready to root, hog or die.  I told my client that even if we fell on our face, if we could show them that we will fight until we could no longer stand, and we would fight on our hands and knees, that those people will respect us, and give us what we need and deserve.  We went down there, used the Sun Tzu philosophy of victory without military victory, using the sheathed sword without battle.  We got down there, made a showing of strength and settled the case well very much to her liking and to her benefit.  This was a settlement with high leverage.  It might have been better than what we had learned had we tried the case.  We were about two minutes away from trying the case.  It was great. 

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -10-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -4- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -4-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

 

18.  PARTIES REDACTED; CRIMINAL CASE; Douglas County Superior Court October 26th, 2002, Motion to Set Reasonable Bond.  The motion was denied.  The client made several untrue statements, and contradicted himself. 

 

   Won                                                                                                                                                 -10-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -4- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -4-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

   Lost Motion or Trial where the Client did not tell                                -1-

   the truth.

 

19.  PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE; Gwinnett County Superior Court November 7th, 2002, before Judge Melody Snell Conner.  It was a divorce case where the client came to be in 1999, and we negotiated off and on for three years, and the client and her husband negotiated it themselves, with input from both attorneys.  We decided to handle this if quietly and negotiate the matter, rather than have it filling the headlines.  Mrs. *** was patient and understanding.  Mr. *** was also patient and understanding.  This was a settlement with high leverage.

 

   Won                                                                                    -10-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -5- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -4-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

   Lost Motion or Trial where the Client did not tell                                -1-

   the truth.

 

20.  PARTIES REDACTED; CRIMINAL CASE; United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Gainesville Division, on November 25th, 2002, before Judge William C. O’Kelley in Gainesville at 1:30 o’clock p.m.  We pled the client guilty to theft of approximately $36,000.00 in money or stamps from the United States Government.  Client had already paid the money back as restitution from his retirement.  Client was sentenced to five years probation, six months of that was to be under home confinement with an electronic metering device.  Client was allowed during the six month period to go to work, go to the doctor, go to Church, and do various things he needed to do.  Client received no fine.  Client paid $100.00 Court fee.  This is a settlement with high leverage. 

 

   Won                                                                                    -10-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -6- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -4-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

   Lost Motion or Trial where the Client did not tell                                -1-

   the truth.

 

21.  PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE; Superior Court of Fulton County before Judge Constance C. Russell on December 10th, 2002.  Plaintiff *** sued rapper *** “*** the Dream” for slander, libel, intention infliction of emotional distress, tortuous interference with business relations, for injunctive relief and for attorneys fees and expenses of litigation.  Plaintiff demanded a verdict in excess of $250,000.00.  We filed a counterclaim.  Asserting relief for approximately two million five hundred thousand dollars.  At trial we struck a jury and they thought it was a jury favorable to the Defendant.  The Plaintiff had our jury dismissed on alleging batson violations.  Both parties agreed to enter into a Mutual Dismissal of the Complaint and the Answer and Counterclaim. This was a good settlement.


   Won                                                                                    -10-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -7- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -4-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

   Lost Motion or Trial where the Client did not tell                                -1-

   the truth.

 

 

22.  PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE; The Magistrates Court of Gwinnett County December 13th, 2002, at 1:30 p.m.  Mr. Pauley brought a Motion for Contempt at a Compliance Hearing. The Court ruled that Mrs. Pauley had substantially complied.  This is a win.

 

  Won                                                                                     -11-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -7- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -4-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

   Lost Motion or Trial where the Client did not tell                                -1-

   the truth.

 

23.  PARTIES REDACTED; CIVIL CASE; Gwinnett County Superior Court on December 23, 2002 before Judge Dawson Jackson.  Opposing Counsel and I negotiated, and came to a good settlement for Mrs. Pauley.  This is a settlement of high leverage.

 

   Won                                                                                    -11-

   Settled with high leverage                                                                                                 -8- 

   Lost                                                                                                                                                  -1-   

   Settled                                                                                                                                 -4-

   Non dispositive motion or hearing                                               -0-

   Unavoidable loss, but protected Client's interests                     -0-

   Draw                                                                                     -0-

   Lost Motion or Trial where the Client did not tell                                -1-

   the truth