Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Lawyer Offers $1M For Proof His Client Could Have Done It; Oops

Posted by samzenpus on from the choose-your-words-carefully dept.

A Florida attorney, Cheney Mason, made the mistake of offering a million dollars on a TV show to anyone who could prove that his client, Nelson Ivan Serrano, was able to travel across two states and kill four people in the time that prosecutors had alleged. Having a lot of free time, South Texas College of Law graduate Dustin Kolodziej decided to take Mason up on his dare. Dustin traveled the route prosecutors say Serrano took, completed the trip under the time allowed, and videotaped the whole process. He is now suing Mason in the federal district court — because the attorney doesn't want to pay, saying that his statement was just a joke.

8 of 362 comments (clear)

  1. Technically.. by bsDaemon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Technically, all that was proven was that this Kolodziej kid was able to traverse a distance in a given period of time, not that anyone else, least of all the defendant, was able to do the same. Plus, as far as we know, Kolodzeij did not need to take time out in order to kill anyone.

    I may not be a fancy big New York Country Lawyer or anything, but it seems to me that this guy doesn't really have a case. Plus, everyone knows you're not supposed to believe anything until its been posted on at least two different blogs. TV just isn't a reliable source of information anymore.

    1. Re:Technically.. by Weedhopper · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Huh? Who gives a flying flip about the trial?

      I want the LAWYER to get a lesson in unilateral contracts from the law student. That's what makes this interesting. I couldn't give two hoots about the guilt of the lawyer's client.

    2. Re:Technically.. by thej1nx · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Unfortunately, the lawyer cannot use that excuse either.

      He will make the situation worse for himself, since he will be guilty of incitement of crime. Offering to pay people to commit murder is also illegal the last time I checked. If he actually uses that excuse, he will then simply avoiding paying the one million, only to be arrested and sent to jail for conspiracy to murder. Especially if some nutcase actually did go and commit the murders, just to take him up on his dare. Which in America, seems a bit more likely than other places, in my opinion.

      Any particular reason why you are so keen on finding excuses for the lawyer to weasel out of his promise?

      There are a number of such public challenges made. Ansari X comes to mind. There are various individuals who invest significant effort, time and money based on the promise of the award. The person/organizations making the promise are not allowed to weasel out later and renege on their promise, causing severe damage to those who invested significant money completing the challenge, based on the promise. He didn't state it was a joke. He was not on a comedy show. He had not been asked to make a joke. Until the challenge had actually been completed, he had full rights to even publicly withdraw it. He did not do so. So he is legally obliged to pay.

      The lawyer is being just a weasel, based on his obvious advantage of not requiring to hire a lawyer to defend himself. His legal expenses in defending himself will be significantly less than the other guy.

      There is a reason why L-A-W-Y-E-R sounds like L-I-A-R.

    3. Re:Technically.. by OzRoy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That seems to be what the guy has done. The lawyer asked for proof that his client was ABLE to travel across two states and kill four people in the time that prosecutors had alleged. Not whether he actually did do it.

      Dustin Kolodziej was able to make the journey in that time, and therefore provided evidence that Nelson Ivan Serrano also was able to make that journey.

    4. Re:Technically.. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The lawyer asked for proof that HIS CLIENT, Nelson Ivan Serrano, was able to travel across two states and kill four people in the time that prosecutors had alleged.

      Not that someone else could do it.

      You're splitting hairs. I think it's safe to assume that there is no question that Serrano had the motive and the opportunity, the question was more along the lines of did he have the means? The lawyer was saying that "Serrano couldn't have done because nobody could have done it," but clearly Kolodziej proved that someone could have done it, hence Serrano could have done it, all else being equal.

      --
      My blog
  2. Re:Pepsi points by aitikin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yes, but a legal entity, such as a lawyer, making a statement such as this one on public TV is much different than an advertisement, which can hardly (especially in this country), if ever, be taken seriously.

    My law professor gave the example that if I said, "I'll give anyone who climbs the flagpole naked 1000 bucks," and they don't do it, I'm in the clear. IF they do, I'm screwed out of 1000 bucks because I made a public statement that a number of people witnessed. Even if they start up and I tell everyone, the person climbing included, that I won't follow through, they can sue me and win for the verbal contracted initiated.

    IANAL and not studying to be one, just taking a couple law classes cause they're interesting.

    --
    "Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
  3. Re:sanctions? by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What he didn't think of is that with the current recession, people have a lot of time on their hands and, hey, a million is a million. And appearantly at least one person thought (rightfully) that it is not impossible.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  4. Re:Pepsi points by 91degrees · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As for the Pepsi Harrier case, I thought there was a slightly happier ending, but I can't find anything online about that part. I could swear that for the sake of PR, they give him something nice. Maybe I'm just remembering it wrong.

    Burma Shave once had a problem of offering someone a trip to Mars for 900 jars. They offered the winner a trip to Moers instead, which was accepted, but that was probably because the winner was media savvy enough to fight this out in the press rather than in court. If he'd have tried to get the media on his side, Pepsi would probably have been happy to offer a decent adventure holiday if they could have got some decent PR out of it.