Miscellaneous desk
< May 26	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 28 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 27[edit]

Lethargy[edit]

My lethargy, though having enormous contacts and practical ideas, has making me unsuccessful in all areas namely, family life, financial and health. I have a name of good worker when I worked with various organisations. I need to know the obstacle in me and I want to remove it and be successful. Is it Procrastination? If so how to overcome it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vijayakrishnam (talk • contribs) 10:31, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If the lethargy is ruining your life, then you ought to consult a doctor -- it is possible that you are seriously depressed, or have some sort of illness. Looie496 (talk) 13:27, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I second that. See a doctor. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:28, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Procrastination is the act of postponing, delaying or putting off, from Latin prō ("to") + crāstinus (“of tomorrow”), from crās (“tomorrow”). While procrastination is often associated with feelings of laziness and guilt, there is enough scope for normal people to procrastinate for rational reasons and/or as part of their coping strategy in complex situations for it not by itself to amount to a Mental disorder. 84.209.89.214 (talk) 14:07, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You know very well that medical advice is prohibited here. You have no way to know what the OP's real issue is. Only a professional, in a face-to-face meeting, can provide possible answers to whatever might be ailing the OP. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:15, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Baseball bugs here...but then we don't really apply our standards to the reference desk. We let editors get away with breaking Arb com sanctions and nothing happens so...give whatever advice you want. No one really cares that much...but be careful, you could also destroy someone's life by pretending to know what is wrong with Them.

We need to start putting our foot down on the reference desk and stick to policy. Otherwise this is just a secondary venue for editors to bypass our policies and guidelines.--Mark Miller (talk) 21:47, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Arb Com Sanctions", User:Mark Miller? Can you be more specific? μηδείς (talk) 15:57, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vijayakrishnam, you may benefit from the short book The War of Art.[1] It talks about how to remove the obstacles you describe. Joe Rogan and many artists, writers, and celebrities swear by it. Good luck. Viriditas (talk) 22:15, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons for granting or denying a motion for summary judgment[edit]

What percentage of motions for summary judgment are granted or denied for lack of jurisdiction, failure to state a claim, a contested issue of fact or some other reason? Raquel Baranow (talk) 16:27, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oddly enough.....I had this information at one time but cannot, for the life of me, remember where I found it.--Mark Miller (talk) 21:49, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It should be taught in law school. What are your chances of winning, is it a waste of time or the client's money? Is filing such motions like churning stocks to gain commissions? Raquel Baranow (talk) 03:28, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is this what you wanted? Richard-of-Earth (talk) 08:36, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No Richard-of-Earth, I've seen that, what I'm looking for is probably pay-walled or I'm not using the right search terms. I think there might be some good articles about lawyers using motions to increase income but it can't be too obvious that the motion has no merit. Raquel Baranow (talk) 14:25, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another way of framing my question would be: Lawyers churning motions for summary judgment knowing there's a contested issue of fact. Two reasons to do this -- like with stock-broker fees: the attorney bills you for his work or, the lawyer files the bogus motions to weaken the adversary or defendant by draining their funds. Again, the Motion must be crafted so it doesn't look frivolous or the judge may sanction the attorney and the client may sue for malpractice. Raquel Baranow (talk) 16:34, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This 2006 paper indicates that there is considerable variation among studies in finding what percentage of summary judgment motions is successful. If we can't even get good numbers on the success rate for motions generally, I would not be optimistic with respect to more specific inquiries. John M Baker (talk) 19:15, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can't give you the stats, but there's something odd about your question. Your first two reasons for denial are easily handled under Rule 12(b)(6) reasons. In fact, most of those denials will never reach summary judgment stage. Your third reason is by far the primary reason such motions are granted. You could never grant a summary judgment motion for jurisdiciton, except for some posture where that was the only material fact, which in most cases would be rare. I'm sure there are exceptoins to all of my generalizations. This would be a good law review article: textually analyze summary judgment decisions. Unfortunately you'll find few of them are published; you'll have to troll pacer, and moreover, you'll have to break them down. If you have westlaw access perhaps you could do some keysight searches. Shadowjams (talk) 03:56, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's only anecdotal. But an artist I know had sold some works of art on commission to a client who received them, but refused to pay. After hearing preliminary testimony, the judge asked the parties to confirm that the facts of the commission and consideration were stipulated, that the defendant was in possession of the art, that he refused to pay, and that he intended to destroy the art rather than return it. The judge made an immediate (summary, without full trial) judgment in favor of the plaintiff, and issued an injunction to have the bailiff restrain and escort the defendant to the location of the art where it was to be seized and given to the plaintiff. Apparently the defendant had made the mistake of representing himself in court and admitting to four conditions which allowed this judgment. μηδείς (talk) 04:09, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]