Special Feature: The Mythical, Mystical Grey Wolf Answers Your TV Law Questions

Special Feature: The Mythical, Mystical Grey Wolf Answers Your TV Law Questions

MandM: Would jurors go to an on-site visit? Specifically in a civil case, against a land lord to see the bad apartment in question?

Grey Wolf: Yes, this happens regularly. The funny thing about it is that the Judge is actually required to wear his robe and carry his gavel on the on-site visit because Court is in session during the visit. It's pretty funny.

MandM: What is the highest sentence for a rapist? Specifically, this case takes place in RI, where a (one time, not serial) rapist comes forward 15 years after the fact, and the judge and the victim want to give Life in Prison?

Grey Wolf: In Rhode Island, the crime is called sexual assault (as opposed to Rape) and the penalty for first degree sexual assault is not less than 10 years in prison up to life in prison. RI General Law s 11-37-3. It is irrelevant as to whether the person is a serial rapist or when the rape occurred.

MandM: Let's say another plea bargain is made with the DA and the victim on board for 5 years. Can a judge say no and try to give the rapist life?

Grey Wolf: A judge can reject a plea agreement, but it rarely happens because judges are more concerned with clearing their calendars than anything else and a plea agreement takes the case off a judge's calendar. If the judge rejects the plea agreement, the case goes to trial. The judge cannot reject a plea agreement and then do his own sentence without a conviction at trial. This is because a plea agreement is a contract and if the defendant does not get the sentence he was promised in the agreement, there is no contract.

MandM: What's the maximum money you could be awarded in RI court in a civil case against a landlord? Is 20,000 compensatory and 600,000 punitive realistic for rat bites to a 6 year old?

Grey Wolf: There is no maximum. It's what the compensatory damages are as proven in trial supported by evidence and determined by the jury. In this scenario, the punitive damages are excessive. The rule is that a jury can only award punitive damages in an amount of 2-9 times the compensatory damages. So, the maximum allowable amount of punitives that can be awarded on a $20,000 judgment is $180,000. There have been cases where a jury has exceeded that limit, but the punitive damage award was struck down by the appellate court. However, this does not usually happen because a jury receives an instruction on the amount of punitive damages that can be awarded.

MandM: Is it possible for an employer or potential employer to check your bar results? Or can they hear through gossip? I assume real lawyers gossip at bars
after work like on TV?

Grey Wolf: Yes, but only whether you passed or failed. If you pass the bar, you will be sworn into the bar and, in California, you will be listed as a member of the bar on the Internet. Moreover, an employer can require that you obtain a certificate of good standing from the bar as a condition of employment. There was a famous case (in the legal community, it wasn't OJ level) where a law graduate didn't passed the bar, but told a big firm that he did pass the bar and they allowed him to start working at the firm. When they found out that he failed the bar, all hell broke loose because it was essentially malpractice to allow the person to work at the firm as a lawyer. After that case, it became common for firms to check that attorneys passed the bar.

MandM: Is there really an informal switching during opening statements? Shouldn't there be a more formal, "and now let's here from the defense?" And how do they decide who goes first? Flip a coin?

Grey Wolf: There is no informal switching. One side will finish and the other side then goes. Usually, the judge will say the other attorney's name and tell them to go. The order is determined by rule (not a coin toss). It is always the plaintiff goes first and then the defense. In closing, the plaintiff goes first, then the defense, then the plaintiff gets a short rebuttal.