Something about Mark Draughn of WindyPundit:
I recently had a problem in federal court: my client had been ordered to pay restitution for a bank robbery, and had been made jointly and severally liable with his five coactors. After getting out of prison, he wanted to work hard and improve himself. He paid off a sixth of the restitution; his coactors paid off almost nothing. Under the terms of the order, my guy was still liable for the the other five sixths of the restitution. (That’s what joint-and-several liability means.) The five clowns who were also liable had shown no interest in paying their share, so my client had two options: work hard and pay almost the entire judgment himself, or join the clowns and have a judgment hanging over him forever.
He didn’t think that was fair, and neither did I.
The judge had statutory authority to modify the order and discharge my guy’s debt, but in my estimation “we don’t think it’s fair” was not going to persuade her. What I figured I needed was an economic argument.
So I emailed my friendly blawgospheric-neighborhood economist for his ideas. Mark considered the problem, and generously sent me his suggestions. I incorporated his arguments into my motion, and we prevailed.
Thank you, Mark, and congratulations for ten years in the blogging dodge. I’m glad to know you.