[Zaheer]

Hello,

I've had some issues with my university during my study of Bachelor of Applied Science in Architectural Science.
I've written to my university about the issue in a formal letter sent to the officials seeking compensation.
After several exchanges, THEY are threatening that i am attempting Blackmail and extorsion and that they will now only deal with lawyers.

I am pretty confident that i have a solid case but I am not sure whether all that hassle is worth it. But i sure do want to bring that educational institution down.

Any INTJ lawyer want to help?

[Doggzilla]

You dont need a lawyer to do things for you. If you can show a precedent, any lawyer will take the case. Funny thing is that most lawyers pay no attention to precedents outside of their own experience, and tend to be totally unaware of other types of law, or can even be totally unaware of precedents that would help themselves.
Get a good case together, get a lawyer to send them a letter or call them up, and proceed to watch them shit their pants.

When I had an issue with the lawyer I worked for, I walked all over them. It was like talking to any other person, except far less life experience, people skills, and common sense.

[ppu6502]

In my experience, lawyers don't like to help random people for free.

Good strategy, though, aligning with a group they are a part of (INTJ) to justify why you are special and deserve free help.

[Senseofrelief]

Talk to a lawyer, many work contingent on winning a case and taking a percentage of the spoils.

[beaherobeaman]

I love law (in theory, not in reality) and hate university administration. I am dying to know the details behind your summary.

[Doggzilla]

I dont know why you hate it in reality. Perhaps its because of all the bullshit "precedents" floating around. People love to post things about how people have no right because such and such case, when in reality, the same case set forth a reasonable expectation of rights.
You see a lot of cases over employment law that are won by the company, but set further precedents which make it easier to sue an employer. Its like this in every type of law I have seen.

The thing about practicing law is that you dont have to be perfect, you just have to present a better case than the other side. Even if the other side has the law on their side, if they arent aware of it, you can win. If you present an argument with precedents and laws to back it, they have to counteract what you are claiming.

---------- Post added 11-13-2011 at 05:47 PM ----------

Oh, and if you are anything like the intj's on here, you should have no problem finding precedents to support yourself, and be able to present a logical argument far superior to the university. They usually wont even try to prove you wrong, just make you look like a bad person. It usually does not work, I dont know why people even hire them anymore. I guess its like why people play the lottery.

[beaherobeaman]

	Originally Posted by Doggzilla To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The thing about practicing law is that you dont have to be perfect, you just have to present a better case than the other side. Even if the other side has the law on their side, if they arent aware of it, you can win. If you present an argument with precedents and laws to back it, they have to counteract what you are claiming.

I think this is precisely why I dislike the law in reality. Something shouldn't be decided by who presents a better case, it should decided by the truth. There are lot's of things that should be decided based on who has the better argument, but better logicians/rhetoricians are the same people who have put Abu-Jamal jail and keep him on death row to this day. You're right; you don't have to be perfect, you just have to "win". Isn't there something inherently wrong with these contrasting motivations, especially when the matter decides whether rights (and sometimes even life) can be stripped away?

But this is not the protest I was hinting at with the parenthetical I wrote above. My protest is that this country is so goddamn corrupt in every facet of its government that you never know what is going to happen. Without knowing the details of the case mentioned above and even with your confidence of him being able to find some precedent, you must admit that something as massive as a university has the upper hand, simply because of finances.

[Zaheer]

i actually built my own case and been dealing with the university for around 2 months now. But seems that pressuring them by finding numerous flaws in their systems didn't really help and as now THEY want to deal only lawyers to lawyers.

My strategy now is to report this to the ministries concerned and embassies since I was a foreign student. But i am wondering how to get as much compensation from them as possible if there is any way to, hence the need for professional (lawyer) help.

[Equinox]

Get a lawyer. I think you could do a lot of stuff on your own, but law is about more than just precedent. Sure, courts like to follow major decisions, but there's probably plenty of stuff in the facts that might affect your case. Also, there are many procedural factors you have to consider, and a lawyer knows about these things much better than any layperson would.

Also, people have been saying that "it's all about precedent" and "it doesn't matter who's right, only who has the better case," but that's not true. Lawyers are mercenaries, paid to fight for whoever hires them. Part of our obligation is to defend our clients' interests--not because they're paying us, but because we agreed to defend them. In order to defend clients' interests, we make the best case we can, or settle/plea bargain if we can't so that any harm to the client is mitigated. Part of defending the client is coming up with a good argument; naturally you're going to want to present things in a way that are favorable to your side, although you can't lie. (There's a difference between merely telling the truth and admitting everything.) Citing precedent is helpful but not necessarily outcome-determinative. Ultimately, your argument is "this is why my client should win," but it has to be supported. You can't just cite precedent and leave it at that, because you haven't given a reason. Anyone can give examples, but a lawyer takes precedent and makes a rational argument explaining why old rulings serve the public interest or why a rule should be thrown out because it's unfair. You CAN predict how a case will turn out, and most of the time it's pretty easy to do so. You just look at the governing principles, apply the facts, note any exceptions, and unless the judge is a complete idiot, they'll rule a certain way. If the facts and/or the laws aren't on your side, there's not much you can do to win.

Of course, this is talking about bench trials...jury trials are a whole different story.

[blatimir]

If your goal is to receive "maximum possible compensation" I could see how they perceived your advances as blackmail/extortion.

The whole way you have presented your search for a lawyer is malicious in nature. No wonder they only want lawyers to talk now.

[Thinker]

Originally Posted by Zaheer To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

i actually built my own case and been dealing with the university for around 2 months now. But seems that pressuring them by finding numerous flaws in their systems didn't really help and as now THEY want to deal only lawyers to lawyers. My strategy now is to report this to the ministries concerned and embassies since I was a foreign student. But i am wondering how to get as much compensation from them as possible if there is any way to, hence the need for professional (lawyer) help.

To sue you need to have lost something...that is the basis of compensation...to put you back in the position before they did whatever it was to you.

I agree with blatimir...you haven't explained what damages you have suffered.

I can suggest that embassies rarely if ever get involved in civil action (suing).
Government ministries/departments will also not get involved....that is not their purpose or the reason for their existence.

[JulietCapulet]

This situation sounds convoluted to me. When communicating in a legal situation (as in any situation), it is important to be careful with what you say and how you say it.

Having a lawyer represent you could be a wise choice.

[anticlimatic]

If, after you push them with a lawyer, and they offer you a settlement...seriously consider taking the money. I know a lot of companies offer settlements to employees that sue them, not because they'd lose the case, but because the cost of actually going through with the case is more to them. If the person refuses the settlement, the company will often throw everything they've got at them, and usually win.

[benr3600]

In for any details. God knows plenty of deranged shit happens at all kinds of schools, ranging from my stepmom's technical college to upper echelon universities.