Federal Blog

Well we have proposed a General Litigation Model for Bank of America which will save them 4B dollars a year in legal costs dropping their SGA from 53B to 49B or in-line with Wells Fargo on the same sales. This should result in companies which have nearly the same market value, and return Bank of America to the #2 largest bank from its current position as #3. Okay so by adding a wrinkle that Branch Managers including the Investment Bank will be charged for all litigation incurred to their book of Business, then we have to allow those Branch Managers to resolve their own legal charges. Since we know that a cause which goes to trial today costs at a minimum 330K dollars, and under the new format 660K dollars we should give branch managers to resolve federal claims which live between 75K dollars and 660K dollars in value to the customer themselves. We also have to give the branch manager the right to terminate that particular customer at the same time. For example, a customer has an...

Impacts of our Short litigation Cycle for Bank of America We expect a prevailing rate for Federal Litigators is 500.00 on an al la carte menu for general support, and 2X for court time (1000.00/hr). Furthermore, most law firms will not go to court without two litigators, and a legal assistant so the effective trial rate is about 2250.00/hr al la carte. Most law firms charge court time for depositions as well as the trial team also has to sit through the depositions in most cases.  Top Down Forecast We Took Bank of America's legal causes (about 30K per year) and divided by their published legal spending of 10B dollars a year for more than 10 years. Thus Bank of America is spending on average (including settlements) is 333K dollars per cause. Lets make some assumptions -> each cause averages 10 hours of court time -< 22,250 dollars, but depositions may easily be 5X more. So lets assume 50 hours of depositions for 10 hours of court time or 60 hours total at the higher ra...

We think yes. We think that US Circuit Courts should try any cause more than 10M dollars in civil or criminal penalties directly making them a real court of original jurisdiction. Everything else should proceed in State Court. In this model existing Federal Judicial resources from the Circuit would be assigned to State causes where Federal Criminal relief is plead, and State Judges could take combined Federal and Civil Causes that are appropriately marked. Why? Most Federal Judges come from their home states anyway. IE A US District Judge in Dallas Texas usually has already been a Texas State Judge anyway. That does not mean that the Federal Trials will not commence it simply means that Federal Courts would only be used for the largest causes. $75,000 is less than a simple trial retainer at a moderate law firm and thus 28 USC 1332 is in fact a statute which needs to be modified. The Jurisdiction for Federal Courts for Civil matters should be much higher, but to do so, Congress has ...

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure #1 requires that every cause in the Federal System be absolutely determined both by Rule, and protected by Statute. However that is not what happens in practice.  Why? For the simple fact that the Clerk of the Court, and The US Magistrates dismiss or delay most of what is filed until the litigants quit, or are forced to refile at a later time for one reason or another including filing of IFP's or request to proceed without fees which requires a judicial ruling in the Federal Courts, and is a task which the clerks of some states do for their judiciary (Texas, Pennsylvania). Moving to a Hyper Efficient Federal Legal System which costs significantly less We are proposing a simple set of steps which will result in most Federal Causes being determined in 3.15 hours of court time or less which is reasonable both for the litigants, and for the court. And of course such processes would eliminate non-court hours the magistrative judges spend today on ...

Well, I have spent a few weeks working on the JFK case. But I admit, I got help from tens of thousands of conspiracy buffs who have looked at all of the evidence many times, and have come up to their own conclusions. We also know that many researchers took a lot of time to get all of the primary witnesses on video tape depositions many of which were never transposed. I have read most of these analyses, reviewed original sources including video sources, and read the original transcripts from witnesses. What stands out to me in the cause, is that I believe most of the witnesses were honest, and told the truth about what they saw, heard, or believed based on where they were that afternoon. But there was one witness who was the most credible, and that was in fact Mr. Bowers who was a corporate Vice President of Operations for the areas's largest business and likely could have only had that position with many years of successfully protecting his company from damage. Mr. Bowers was ...

Saving Oswald We decided this Christmas to put things right on a very old problem of the guilt or innocence of Lee Harvey Oswald. Fortunately we actually have a lot of evidence thanks to Google, and its video content manager Youtube in regards to the JFK assassination and related topics on criminology, along with the public sources from the Warren Commission, and the House Committees formed thereafter. From these primary sources we have found the original interviews with many of the major witnesses on the scene, we have reviewed ballistic information, and read third party criminologists provide their views of the crime. Once we got the lay of the land we read most of the original documents from the Warren Report, and some of the testimony by Congress thereafter and reviewed the gap analysis done by many third parties which have been posted on the Public Internet. A View of Compliance First of all, Mr. Oswald was not completely innocent of all Federal Crimes. After all he was...