LawTube - Lawyers sperging at each other on YouTube

[ChromaQuack]

This might be a silly observation among all the amazing digging you are all doing, but I could not help but notice that most if not all of lawtube channels have somewhat neutral names.

You have RekietaLaw (not a law channel) , PotentiallyCriminal, LegalMindset, etc. etc.

Then you have the guy who calls himself "Good Lawgic", advertising that not only is he a lawyer but he is postively a good one, he has good logic!

And he's the absolutely fucking worst lawyer out of all of them. Same vibes as someone saying "I'm a good person" unironically.

 

[Darkholme's Dungeon]

Is he really lawtube though? He actually practices. The true dyed in the wool lawtuber streams more than he practices.

Yes, but I shall attempt to create and invoke Crakieta's law:

Every lawyer who tries to argue or explain "the law" to random viewers frequently, only has experience loosing in practice, is a non-practicing lawyer, or has completely ideologically driven retard (lolbertarian) takes no reasonable person would agree with.

What the backstory on Nate the Lawyer

Nigger moment happened, sued retard democratic operative nigger over X tweet for deframation. Lost on summary judgement.

 

[AnOminous]

Problem is, because the "subpoenas" aren't legit, they wouldn't be on file with the court. So other people would have to come forward.

Most subpoenas (and most discovery material) never end up filed with the court unless they become a subject of dispute. And dispute is greatly discouraged. Generally whoever loses a discovery dispute, like Fatrick Hamlinson, has to pay the attorney fees for the other side because parties are supposed to act like adults and handle discovery between themselves without involving the court.

In fact, the subpoena presented as an exhibit (the one that led to the FDCPA lawsuit) is not stamped by the court. In all respects, though, it looks like a subpoena, is entitled "subpoena duces tecum" and otherwise purports to be a document with legal force.

 

[Permanent Resident Cope]

Does Joe have a driver's license? Inquiring minds want to know.

He's done streams while driving before.

(if it is indeed him and not a fanboi impersonating him)

He confirmed recently on a stream that that was him.

 

[Chirping Smoke Detector]

He's done streams while driving before.

While his wife drove?

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

While his wife drove?

Nope, he was driving himself, while also eating/drinking and placing his phone on the passenger seat.

I believe it was during the Baldwin trial where they did a legal panel.
Joe and Nate both showed up late, from phones, had bad audio, were streaming from public places and were just overall super disrespectful.

Guess Joe was scrambling trying to get a certain case dismissed

 

[im5!XxhO]

Nope, he was driving himself, while also eating/drinking and placing his phone on the passenger seat.

So he didn't even have some fixture to put his phone in? What is it with those boomers just doing everything to have their streams to be as shit as possible.

Also if you sent out legal documents without even checking their content/doing minimal due diligence you should loose your law license. Or at least have it suspended for a while. That kind of shit is beyond reckless and can fuck people up.

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

@Balldo's Gate The Joe transcript is absolutely wild.
He is lying and lying and lying. What a scumbag.

Here is Joe talking about his fake subpoena that he is trying to walk back while also admitting that it was supposed to look like it was real. lol


When it is pointed out to him, he tries to shift blame to "Vera" who apparently had the misfortune of working for this lying sack of shit.
And also claim that "there is nothing wrong in the document"., trying to shift the narrative so that if the judgement is real, his document is technically ok. (It's not)


The tries to weasel his way out by claiming that he never actually sent a real subpoena. lmao

 

[Captain Manning]

Then you have the guy who calls himself "Good Lawgic", advertising that not only is he a lawyer but he is postively a good one, he has good logic!

And he's the absolutely fucking worst lawyer out of all of them. Same vibes as someone saying "I'm a good person" unironically.

I think most of us figured he's another crappy lawyer when he sucked Rekieta's dick after the arrest, and purported that Rekieta had a good chance of getting the warrant tossed.

You don't actually have to despise Rekieta to take the opposite position. Sean doesn't seem to outright hate Rekieta. You just have to know what you're talking about and be honest.

What's being revealed now is he's a deeply unethical lawyer in addition to being a bad one.

 

[Canard]

I think most of us figured he's another crappy lawyer when he sucked Rekieta's dick after the arrest, and purported that Rekieta had a good chance of getting the warrant tossed.

You don't actually have to despise Rekieta to take the opposite position. Sean doesn't seem to outright hate Rekieta. You just have to know what you're talking about and be honest.

What's being revealed now is he's a deeply unethical lawyer in addition to being a bad one.

To anyone with basic understanding of process it should have been clear that whole thing is very cut and dry case. Nothing special apart from the video being on Internet. Entirely normal drug possession and well standards for warrants are what they are. Or there would be far far fewer people prosecuted or in prison...

Anyone believing or saying otherwise either have too much trust in their own(and others') cleverness or have something to sell... With clearly first one applying to Joe and later one to Branca...

 

[Balldo's Gate]

@Balldo's Gate The Joe transcript is absolutely wild.
He is lying and lying and lying. What a scumbag.

It's stunning how evasive, if not deceptive, he was.

The fake "subpeoena" wasn't intended to trick him, just get information that they would be entitled to have. At one point after one of those answers opposing counsel is so stunned he just asks Joe to rate his honesty and ethics out of 10.

It's not like the plaintiff is much better. He apparently "forgot" whether he had a judgment against him.

But ultimately something like this is going to happen if you are a lawyer letting non-lawyers send out "subpoenas" bearing your signature.

He's created a nice precedent for treating attorney fees (in a state court) as a cognizable harm in and of themselves for the purposes of a federal FDCPA suit. I don't think this is unique to New York or the Second Circuit but it was apparently covered as a significant case.

He's already famous now!


https://casetext.com/case/henry-v-collection-profl-1

 

[TherapyMan]

Form letters? Sure. In some cases that's even justifiable, I guess. Some debt collection is similar enough to other debt collection. "Dear X, please pay Y."

But bullshit form fake subpoenas? That's a new one on me

You'd be surprised. Form subpoenas—especially post-judgment subpoenas—are common in debt collection since the type of information you're seeking generally remains the same and you get a lot of similar circumstances where you're looking to get information after a default judgment since most debtors do not respond. It would not be out of character for an inattentive debt collector lawyer to task their paralegal with doing a drag and drop subpoena and pray the information was actually accurate.

"Did we get the default judgment on Mr. Levy?" says Joe Lawgic, a stooge and not actually checking.

"Yeah boss," says the paralegal, not actually checking either. Nobody actually remembers what this case is about.

"Okay, send out post-judgment discovery, I'm busy checking out this new 'LawTube' Thing. No need for me review." Joe slithers away.

Paralegal drafts, rubberstamps with Joe's signature, and sends. Over $100K, gone.

Edit: Rereading the petition, it appears Joe did not really even know how to do a post-judgment subpoena to begin with considering the many, many deficiencies with the document. Laziness or malice? At some point, the two become indistinguishable.

He's already famous now!

Amazing. Good Lawgic contributing to development of debt collection law.

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

He's already famous now!

View attachment 6486308
https://casetext.com/case/henry-v-collection-profl-1

Joe's legacy will be this case being cited over and over in cases where lawyers beat collection agents over the head with this decision.
The dodgy intimidation tactics are the norm for the business and every agent who keeps doing it will run full steam ahead into this precedent.

[EDIT] Clarification. By which I mean creating fake documents that give the impression of being official to trick debtors into responding where they are not obligated to.

 

[Amateur Shoelace Tyer]

What the backstory on Nate the Lawyer and Legal Vices? Is there even one decent person in Lawtube?

Nate is in New York and was a cop so that's a lot working against him already, but I'm yet to see anything outright malicious from him.

Legal Vices is profoundly boring however, like Nate, I haven't seen anything as pants-on-head retarded or schystery.

Sean is funny, I disliked him at first but I've been enjoying his streams while dealing with traffic or anything else I could use some background noise during. He puts in effort to find content and will even go through trials that have come and gone if he thinks people will find it interesting.

It's still pretty crazy to think that there is this whole cottage industry centered around the legal system of all things. Court stuff is BORING! Yet here we all are (on just this forum) with hundreds of pages of discussion, hundreds of hours of video from several different people across the world, reading scans of legal docs, and laughing at lawyers. It's incredible.

 

[Finger Pistols]

Did every person mailed documents like this retain a lawyer to see if it was enforceable?
I somehow doubt it.

If I were an ambulance chasing lawyer I would start seeing dollar signs on this case for a class action or whatever it's called.

Imagine the ammount of people defrauded by the schizter lolyer Joe GoodLawgic! I would start contacting every person that has paid this dumbfuck, informing them of a possible case against their debt collector for being a sloppy retard at best and a scammer at worst. Imagine the treasure trove of fake and sloppy documents that you could poke holes through.

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

If I were an ambulance chasing lawyer I would start seeing dollar signs on this case for a class action or whatever it's called.
View attachment 6486671
Imagine the ammount of people defrauded by the schizter lolyer Joe GoodLawgic! I would start contacting every person that has paid this dumbfuck, informing them of a possible case against their debt collector. Imagine the treasure trove of fake and sloppy documents that you could poke holes through.

Class action are usually a group of people who suffered some form of damage suing one big entity for compensation.

You would have to do a case for each collection agent and prove for each individual case that deceptive practices and fake legal documents caused damages.

 

[Melty Butter]

What the backstory on Nate the Lawyer and Legal Vices? Is there even one decent person in Lawtube?

Nate the Lawyer: His father was an abusive (to his mom) crack addict, Nate was a drug runner briefly in his youth. Cop, prosecutor, defense lawyer, and college lecturer at a law school - all in NYC. Two daughters. Wife is either a professor or lawyer or both (I forget). Recently relocated to TX. (I assume he's in Houston bc he's streamed together with Kurt/Uncivil Law.)

Legal Vices: Maritime law. Former Mormon raised in Logan, Utah, I believe he did his mission in S Korea and eventually moved there. Divorced. 1 grown child with a Korean woman. Seems to have a large ex-pat friend group in S. Korea (he had a stream preparing Thanksgiving dinner.). Utah family does not know he's a streamer. He streamed from a closet to cover the Read trial when he was back stateside on holiday.

None of them are practicing attorneys.

Except that's not exactly true. It varies widely; a few have decades of experience.

The issue you're flagging is that LawTubers tend to believe their degree allows them to comment on all aspects of law/politics/popular culture versus focusing on their specialty. That's not particularly unusual in the "commentary community."

The following is my understanding of LawTubers' current practice work or lack thereof. There may be some errors that I've attempted to flag.

* = Over 200K subs (though viewership would be a better gauge of popularity - that's a bigger project)
† = At least 15 years of full-time legal work in history according to them
? = Info is unclear

Full-Time Practicing Lawyers

• PotentiallyCriminal (criminal defense)
• TheLeadAttorney*† (family)
• Runkle* (criminal defense, gun rights)
• Law&Lumber* (family)
• NatalieLawyerChick (criminal defense)
• Gosney† (criminal defense/capital murder, soft porn and kids book author) - I'm keeping him in this category; he'll be rehired soon if he wants to be.
• LegalVices† (Maritime law)
• ? HoagLaw† (tech/entertainment) - Is he still practicing after the stroke? He did have an active practice.
• ? Ron Coleman† (real estate/corporate law) - He may be semi-retired; he's still a partner at the Dhillon Law Group, Inc. Argued in front of SCOTUS

Part-time Practicing Lawyers aka 'Attorney on Record' for Select Cases Presently

• TheLawyerYouKnow* (slip falls, insurance) - He talks about active cases with his dad.
• GoodLawgic† (small business/debt collection and constitutional Trump nonsense)
• NateTheLawyer* (prosecutor & criminal defense) - Currently running ? a class action suit against Google/Chrome for privacy issues.
• DUIGuy* (criminal defense) - I believe he still has a shingle out; he was very successful in his field.

Law-Related Work Like Consulting But Not as a Named 'Attorney on Record' for Cases

• LegalMindset (corporate law historically) - I have no idea what he actually does. Relocation to Asia services?
• LawofSelf-Defense† (criminal defense historically) - Active consulting and "education" grift.
• Barnes*† (constitutional law... I guess?) - I'm unclear if he's actively consulting.

Full-time LawTubers With No Active Cases or Consulting

• Emily D Baker*† (prosecution historically)
• Nick Rekieta* (criminal defense historically... or something, but not really anything)
• Andrea Burkhart† (criminal defense) - Very recent switch to full-time LawTubing
• Dani Ahn Direct (family)- Very recent switch, gossip is she's trying to get pregnant.
• LegalBytes* (??? - don't think she ever practiced, perhaps corporate?)
• Viva* (??? contract law in beforetimes, I believe)
• UncivilLaw (copyright)

I didn't include full-time YT lawyers like Legal Eagle, Robert Gouveia, etc. because they have never associated themselves with LawTube..

 

[Clayton cadidlehopper]

Article today about Joe's application to the Supreme Court

MAGA YouTube urges Supreme Court to lift Trump hush money gag order

 

[RudyRayMoore]

Article today about Joe's application to the Supreme Court

MAGA YouTube urges Supreme Court to lift Trump hush money gag order

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/supreme-court-good-lawgic-trump-gag-order.pdf

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

Joe is a retard fishing for attention by hitching a ride on the long slimy coattails of the Orange Messiah.

What should happen instead is that everywhere he goes people mention that he is a shady debt collection agent who tries to trick, bully and intimidate people and owes $117k in a judgement against himself without any liability insurance.

[EDIT] Just found out someone has been going around since September 30th, on an obvious sock account on Twitter (never X), posting a screenshot of the judgement and asking if Joe is running a grift with his Trump gag order gofundme to pay this judgement with.

Has anyone seen this gofundme?
[EDIT2] Not a gofundme, but I Found it