Shows about lawyers were popular for a while. Ages ago,Perry Mason, then in the 90s LA Law, The Practice, Boston Legal. I didn’t watch any of those regularly, but that was back in the day when popular prime time TV drama or comedy really provided some cultural oatmeal for the nation sticking to everybody’s ribs. You always knew more bout such shows than you would admit, more, even, than you thought you did.
(And of course, so did everybody else; the great Irving Younger said attorneys MUST watch those shows, so we could act like “real”lawyers. If we attorneys didn’t act like the actors, juries and clients would assume we didn’t know what we were doing!)
A couple of things about that genre of drama always seemed ridiculous to me, like when, somehow, two lawyers from the same firm were arguing against each other. But THE most glaringly inaccurate feature was that someone committed a crime, or decided to get divorced, or was in an accident or whatever, in the first 3 minutes of the 40 minute hour—and was at trial by the last ten minutes, apparently within days.
HA! Litigation is not a speedy process, usually, to put it mildly. (Yes of course there’s a “speedy trial” for crimes mandated in the Constitution, but have you ever tried asking a prosecutor about that deadline?) A complaint is filed, an answer denying everything and demanding proof is filed, and they you enter the sempiternity of the “discovery period”. Written interrogatories are served, supposedly to be answered within 30 days…depositions are scheduled and, inevitably re-scheduled, more than once. Yes there are all kindsa rules designed to truncate or at least regulate the time involved, in Pa long ago there was a rule of civil procedure that cases had to go to trial, or at least be praecipied for trial, within 240 days of commencement. THAT didn’t last long.
Long story short, or Vice-versa:
It. Takes. YEARS.
So, um, how is it possible that Kari Lake’s lawsuit, filed less than one month ago, challenging the Arizona election results, has ALREADY (a) gone to trial and (b) been terminated in Hobbs’ favor?
This is a TV-lawyer-show timeline!
I read that she had to prove “intent” to mess with the election results, and the judge said she hadn’t. . Wouldn’tcha need lotsa discovery, every Email ever generated and especially, depositions, to even begin to do that?
It was the same in 2020, of course, where all the suits filed on behalf of Trump were (as I understood it) preliminarily dismissed for lack of “evidence”. But see, usually, you file a complaint, then spend months or years GATHERING evidence. . I mean yuh, the complaint should contain averments to present a “colorable” claim, but if it does,the court won’t dismiss it out of hand but will wait so see if the allegations can be proven at trial, after extensive discovery.
Of course I understand the truncation of the timeline for a TV drama; you gotta accommodate the sponsors, etc. But for real -life lawsuits affecting the future course of the ships of state of the federal or state governments? Wouldn’tcha think those would require MORE time, not less time , than your garden variety civil suits or criminal prosecutions?
Welp—I reckon Lake’s and Trump’s lawsuits had to accommodate “our sponsors”, too.
And as they used to say, those show trials did indeed “sell soap”.