The trial against the WAIC is over. We began Monday with pretrial hearings. My clients, a couple of nice homeowners who had a pool construction deal go south on them, were the defendants. Defendants normally go second during trials. However, going second is a big disadvantage.
I hate disadvantages.
So when I took over the case from another attorney, I added a claim for injunctive relief. My clients should have been able to enforce an injunction against the contractor -- he violated a number of laws during the project -- but more importantly, injunctive claims usually proceed in a bench (judge) trial before the jury trial begins. And rulings made in those proceedings generally bind the jury. And when the case is tried in this manner, the party seeking the injunctive (or other equitable) relief generally goes first. That's a big advantage.
I love advantages.
So on Tuesday, the real case began with the judge pointing to me, rather than the WAIC, saying "Call your first witness." I called the WAIC's client. He wasn't ready for it.
The WAIC clearly expected to go first, and I am quite sure his plan was to call my clients as witnesses before his client took the stand. You know, to see how their testimony shakes out, then prepare his client accordingly. It didn't work.
Of all the witnesses I have ever had the pleasure of grilling in open court, the has never been any as ill-prepared as the WAIC's client. Consequently, he was one of the two worst witnesses I have ever seen testify. I caught him in several big lies, and he speculated so many times when he wasn't sure of a point that he ended up committing to several inaccuracies that we revealed in the afternoon session. His admissions left his case in shambles. By 4:30 p.m., even though he hadn't even started his case yet, he had lost any chance of enforcing any of his alleged claims against my clients, and he had admitted to half of the liability we were claiming, while unconvincingly refuting the other half.
The WAIC didn't realize how badly his case was going until today. Last night, after the WAIC's client had made a liar, and fool and a jerk of himself on the stand, the attorney representing the bond surety for the WAIC's client had seen enough. She wanted to settle.
We showed up this morning and the court sent us to a settlement conference, saying that this case "needed to be settled." Since she was the trial judge, she didn't want to say anything substantive about the evidence so far, but she added "there's nothing I could tell you that wasn't painfully obvious to everyone yesterday."
By the end of the day, rather than demanding $28,000 plus another $30,000 in attorney's fees, the WAIC's client and his bonding company were offering to give my clients -- the defendants -- a payment of $18,000 and a stipulated injunction. To say that I felt relieved would be a big understatement. It is no great triumph that I was winning the case. Any high school kid who could win, place or show in a moot court competition could have done as well against the WAIC. But if I had lost.... I don't think I could have handled the self-critical pounding I'd have given myself.
After the settlement, I remained cordial, even though I think very little of the WAIC or his client. But inside, I was thinking "I told you so, I told you so, I told you so, I told you so...."
That was fun. I'll sleep well tonight.
Comments