PDA

View Full Version : Outing the Lawyers defending the other side.


nicki
06-06-2011, 10:53 AM
Law Firms are scrambling to maintain clients, so it is important for them to maintain their image that they are competent, that they give sound legal advice and that they win cases, and when they can't, that they can negotiate settlements in the best interest of their clients.

The law firms that Alan Gura smacked down were some big name law firms, yet they have run back into the dark like the cockroaches they are.

Perhaps we need to permanently spotlight that not only that they lost in both MacDonald and Heller, but bring up key points of their defense of the cities gun bans.

Most people have no idea of the history behind the "Slaughterhouse cases and Cruinshak".

The majority of Americans also have no idea of how the purpose of early gun control laws was to disarm freed blacks so that it would make it possible to strip them of other rights and keep them down.

This type of "Negative Publicity" is the type of "Publicity" that could cost law firms paying clients.

This would discourage lawyers from volunteering to defend the cities in future lawsuits. This is something that must spread beyond our threads.

What do you guys think?

Nicki

yellowfin
06-06-2011, 10:56 AM
I completely agree with the second part of educating the public about Slaughterhouse and Cruikshank, and really wonder why it wasn't addressed 20-30 years ago. It wasn't any less despicable then and we could have really used the advantage.

notme92069
06-06-2011, 11:26 AM
Law Firms are scrambling to maintain clients, so it is important for them to maintain their image that they are competent, that they give sound legal advice and that they win cases, and when they can't, that they can negotiate settlements in the best interest of their clients.

The law firms that Alan Gura smacked down were some big name law firms, yet they have run back into the dark like the cockroaches they are.

Perhaps we need to permanently spotlight that not only that they lost in both MacDonald and Heller, but bring up key points of their defense of the cities gun bans.

Most people have no idea of the history behind the "Slaughterhouse cases and Cruinshak".

The majority of Americans also have no idea of how the purpose of early gun control laws was to disarm freed blacks so that it would make it possible to strip them of other rights and keep them down.

This type of "Negative Publicity" is the type of "Publicity" that could cost law firms paying clients.

This would discourage lawyers from volunteering to defend the cities in future lawsuits. This is something that must spread beyond our threads.

What do you guys think?

Nicki

Good idea. How do we accomplish this?

Falconis
06-06-2011, 11:38 AM
I like it. Do you have a list of law firms or one started atleast. Also, do you have a plan on how to do this or get it started?

Mesa Tactical
06-06-2011, 11:49 AM
You mean like Paul Clement?

AJAX22
06-06-2011, 11:54 AM
Nicki you're jumping the gun, lets revisit this subject in a month or so ok? ;)

Glock22Fan
06-06-2011, 11:54 AM
Although this sounds like a plan, lawyers argue their clients' sides.

Although one would imagine that lawyers from LCAV are anti-gun, lawyers are not always closely associated with the side they argue.

Take Clements (sp?) Argued against Gura at SCOTUS (and lost), now does outstanding work for the NRA.

I think the lesson is to make sure that any lawyers being "outed" are outed for their own views, as well as for the cases they lose.

Then you run into the problem of how can we, with relatively few resources, do these guys any damage? We don't have the cash for a big advertising campaign. Anyway, a lot of the people seeing adverts that John Doe esq. had lost against the NRA/CGF etc. would take his side and criticise the judges for having made the wrong decision.

Letters to CEO's might be more effective ("Do you know your lawyers lost a huge case at SCOTUS the other day?") but would probably be binned at the secretary level.

Not to be too negative, but I think there are better uses for our time and energy.

zhyla
06-06-2011, 12:10 PM
Although this sounds like a plan, lawyers argue their clients' sides.

Yes.

And arguing a case for a disreputable client doesn't necessarily hurt a lawyer's reputation. For instance, Shapiro got OJ off and I'm sure hasn't had trouble finding work ever since.

wash
06-06-2011, 12:17 PM
We can certainly out lawyers and firms that do pro bono work defending anti-gun legislation.

Glock22Fan
06-06-2011, 12:26 PM
We can certainly out lawyers and firms that do pro bono work defending anti-gun legislation.

That sounds like a plan. They define their personal position that way. Although, if it is relevant, I'd blame the law firm concerned rather than the junior associate who is just allocated work that the partners want done and has no personal say in it.

SJgunguy24
06-06-2011, 12:40 PM
That sounds like a plan. They define their personal position that way. Although, if it is relevant, I'd blame the law firm concerned rather than the junior associate who is just allocated work that the partners want done and has no personal say in it.

I was thinking that as well, can't blame the pee on for doing his/her job. The boss is the one to go after.

wash
06-06-2011, 1:48 PM
I would like to see the tax write-offs go away for law firms doing pro bono work on the unconstitutional side of things.

Let them pay for abusing our rights.

That's probably a dream but I do dream.

blakdawg
06-06-2011, 5:35 PM
I would like to see the tax write-offs go away for law firms doing pro bono work on the unconstitutional side of things.


There is no tax writeoff for donated time.

The employees' salaries are deductible to the employer whether they spend their work hours on paying clients' work, pro bono work, playing Minesweeper, or posting to CGN.

AJAX22
06-06-2011, 6:08 PM
There is no tax writeoff for donated time.

The employees' salaries are deductible to the employer whether they spend their work hours on paying clients' work, pro bono work, playing Minesweeper, or posting to CGN.

Professional services can be handled as an in-kind donation if it is structured correctly.

blakdawg
06-06-2011, 7:48 PM
Professional services can be handled as an in-kind donation if it is structured correctly.

Do you have a cite to support your claim? That sounds like Internet garbage to me.

wash
06-06-2011, 8:15 PM
Yeah, well business expense isn't taxed like profit and the money they spend on a lawyer to abuse our rights is money that doesn't get taxed.

Either way there should be a price they pay.

Maybe we should sue for reparations?

Funtimes
06-06-2011, 8:26 PM
Google turns up a dozen results if you search for 'in kind' and professional services.... you can take your pick of which to believe, they all say the same thing.

Here is a nice straightforward explanation.

http://990taxhelp.com/inkind-donations-part-2-2/

You can believe me or not, but I've spent the last week on the phone with lawyers working on structuring 501c3's to properly take advantage of this form of donation to further the 2A.

It is tricky, there are restrictions, but it CAN be done.

I would love more information on what you have found.

AJAX22
06-06-2011, 8:26 PM
Yeah, well business expense isn't taxed like profit and the money they spend on a lawyer to abuse our rights is money that doesn't get taxed.

Either way there should be a price they pay.

Maybe we should sue for reparations?

with professional services it is tabulated at fair market rate (regardless of cost) but there are a number of different ways to arrive at what 'fair market rate' is... although most firms will just use their normal billing rate for equivalent work.

with capital goods, or skilled labor (like plumbing/construction etc) the calculation becomes more tricky, but legal services are pretty straightforward.

berto
06-06-2011, 8:27 PM
Doesn't matter unless you can bring pressure on large clients to withdraw business from firms doing the evil work of LCAV, Brady, MAIG, etc. An enemies list means squat until Corporation X puts a large firm in the position of choosing Corporation X's billables or some dopey partner's feel-good inquisition against 2A rights. Make it painful enough and the other partners will put a stop to such nonsense. Good luck with that.

blakdawg
06-06-2011, 8:43 PM
Google turns up a dozen results if you search for 'in kind' and professional services.... you can take your pick of which to believe, they all say the same thing.

Here is a nice straightforward explanation.

http://990taxhelp.com/inkind-donations-part-2-2/

You can believe me or not, but I've spent the last week on the phone with lawyers working on structuring 501c3's to properly take advantage of this form of donation to further the 2A.

It is tricky, there are restrictions, but it CAN be done.

The page you linked to doesn't discuss whether or not the donor can deduct the value of the services, it talks about how the donee should record the transaction on its books. Those are distinct and essentially unrelated questions.

AJAX22
06-07-2011, 3:59 AM
The page you linked to doesn't discuss whether or not the donor can deduct the value of the services, it talks about how the donee should record the transaction on its books. Those are distinct and essentially unrelated questions.

Its possible that I may be approaching this from the wrong perspective and have confused the reporting requirements with the deductibility. (

I still believe that it may be able to be structured in such a way that it can be deducted under carefully tailored circumstances.

i.e. perhaps legal services cannot be deducted, but if you transfer the intellectual property rights to the written materials generated that may be deductible....

I will delve deeper into this and get back to this thread.

TKM
06-07-2011, 5:36 AM
Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
Napoleon Bonaparte
French general & politician (1769 - 1821)

Are you sure we should encourage them to get better lawyers?

AJAX22
06-07-2011, 5:41 AM
Its increasingly looking like you are correct and that I was confusing reporting requirements with deductions.

More to the point, its clear that LCAV et all do not provide any deductions as such.

There still may be a work around, (for instance, if you donated the intellectual property rights to the boiler plate for NFA trusts that you had generated, for which there was a established and easily determined market price, it could fall under the IP donation rules.

The issues I've been dealing with, it turns out, are involved with the nonprofit "publicly supported charity test"

This allows a non profit to account for in kind donation of services as part of the revenue it generates from the public as opposed to private foundations. thereby maintaining its tax status as a publicly supported charity.

Up until just recently in kind donations were not counted towards 'public support' but this has recently changed.

I'll keep digging into this, but It looks like I was mistaken in most if not all cases.

ccmc
06-07-2011, 6:18 AM
The real home run is if any the attorneys on the other side have CWFLs themselves a la Dianne Feinstein. There is a rumor the leading opponent of shall issue in the MD State Senate (who is an attorney) has a Maryland Handgun Permit, but this hasn't been confirmed.

oaklander
06-07-2011, 7:32 AM
Pro tip!

PR is what is being discussed here. One thing that will help is positioning gun rights as PURE civil rights.

Once anti gun work is seen as "racist" or homophobic then no sane law firm will touch the work.

Think in terms of amici, plaintiffs, etc.

Just my 3 cents!

this is not my idea but rather is something that was not possible before the most recent cases. Now you will start to see this dynamic.

The trick is to NEVER minimize the experiences of disenfranchised groups by trying to "rank" gun rights in comparison to other rights. Rather include self defense rights as another example of things that certain people just don't get to have (based on their race etc).

I can explain this more after some coffee!

Via Android. Excuse brevity.

wash
06-07-2011, 9:49 AM
That's why I mentioned reparations, to frame it like slavery.

Still, wether they can deduct the expense or just reduce the income they report, when law firms do pro bono work for the antis the whole country sees less tax revenue. It's just not right and the firms doing it should have to pay with their taxed income when they attempt to abuse our civil rights.