The Lawyer Thread Where We Stop Ruining Other Threads (5 Viewers)

[Chaos Commish]

what you're describing is unethical behavior. An attorney engaging in unethical behavior does not do so because the profession made him.instead, it is far more likely that the attorney was unethical before joining the profession.

I subscribe to Philip Zambardo's philosophy with regard to why good people sometimes do bad things. Situations and circumstances can result in slimey behavior. I think those circumstances occur more or less often in various professions. Do you disagree?

I disagree with the idiotic and insulting suggestion that lawyers violate an oath they took when joining the profession as a result of working on an hourly basis. Also with your spelling of the word slimy.

Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across. Bar none. A profession filled with people who don't give in to the most obvious of temptations over and over and over again. Are there exceptions? Of course. But let me give you an example.

Right now, today, I am a signatory on an account with more money in it than most people will ever make in their lives. And that their children will ever make in their lives. If I wrote a check on that account, the bank would call one person to verify whether the check was legit: me. The persons who are entitled to that money have no idea how much originally went in, not how much they are entitled to yet.

I could write myself a check for seven figures, and in all likelihood, no one would ever have any idea that it was gone. I could write myself a check for eight figures, get that money in cash, and be in Belize before anyone knew it was gone. That is never, ever going to happen.

Now hand that authority over to your gardener.

Every time I visit an offshore haven for expatriates, I find it littered with retired attorneys. Belize, Panama, Singapore, not mention the attorney swarm retired in the Caymens.

 

[Chaos Commish]

Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across.

Thanks for quickly ending the conversation. Have a nice day.

BAR NONE!!!

Name me another profession you'd allow to have a check for several million dollars written to on your behalf and assume you'll be getting it, other than your actual bank.

My gardner. In a heartbeat. Most ethical man I know.

 

[Henry Ford]

Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across.

Thanks for quickly ending the conversation. Have a nice day.

BAR NONE!!!

Name me another profession you'd allow to have a check for several million dollars written to on your behalf and assume you'll be getting it, other than your actual bank.

My gardner. In a heartbeat. Most ethical man I know.

That's a person. Not a profession.

 

[Henry Ford]

what you're describing is unethical behavior. An attorney engaging in unethical behavior does not do so because the profession made him.instead, it is far more likely that the attorney was unethical before joining the profession.

I subscribe to Philip Zambardo's philosophy with regard to why good people sometimes do bad things. Situations and circumstances can result in slimey behavior. I think those circumstances occur more or less often in various professions. Do you disagree?

I disagree with the idiotic and insulting suggestion that lawyers violate an oath they took when joining the profession as a result of working on an hourly basis. Also with your spelling of the word slimy.Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across. Bar none. A profession filled with people who don't give in to the most obvious of temptations over and over and over again. Are there exceptions? Of course. But let me give you an example.

Right now, today, I am a signatory on an account with more money in it than most people will ever make in their lives. And that their children will ever make in their lives. If I wrote a check on that account, the bank would call one person to verify whether the check was legit: me. The persons who are entitled to that money have no idea how much originally went in, not how much they are entitled to yet.

I could write myself a check for seven figures, and in all likelihood, no one would ever have any idea that it was gone. I could write myself a check for eight figures, get that money in cash, and be in Belize before anyone knew it was gone. That is never, ever going to happen.

Now hand that authority over to your gardener.

Every time I visit an offshore haven for expatriates, I find it littered with retired attorneys. Belize, Panama, Singapore, not mention the attorney swarm retired in the Caymens.

I assume that you believe these attorneys stole a bunch of money and ran off?

 

[Chaos Commish]

Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across.

Thanks for quickly ending the conversation. Have a nice day.

BAR NONE!!!

Name me another profession you'd allow to have a check for several million dollars written to on your behalf and assume you'll be getting it, other than your actual bank.

My gardner. In a heartbeat. Most ethical man I know.

That's a person. Not a profession.

Well hell, ianal.

 

[Chaos Commish]

what you're describing is unethical behavior. An attorney engaging in unethical behavior does not do so because the profession made him.instead, it is far more likely that the attorney was unethical before joining the profession.

I subscribe to Philip Zambardo's philosophy with regard to why good people sometimes do bad things. Situations and circumstances can result in slimey behavior. I think those circumstances occur more or less often in various professions. Do you disagree?

I disagree with the idiotic and insulting suggestion that lawyers violate an oath they took when joining the profession as a result of working on an hourly basis. Also with your spelling of the word slimy.Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across. Bar none. A profession filled with people who don't give in to the most obvious of temptations over and over and over again. Are there exceptions? Of course. But let me give you an example.

Right now, today, I am a signatory on an account with more money in it than most people will ever make in their lives. And that their children will ever make in their lives. If I wrote a check on that account, the bank would call one person to verify whether the check was legit: me. The persons who are entitled to that money have no idea how much originally went in, not how much they are entitled to yet.

I could write myself a check for seven figures, and in all likelihood, no one would ever have any idea that it was gone. I could write myself a check for eight figures, get that money in cash, and be in Belize before anyone knew it was gone. That is never, ever going to happen.

Now hand that authority over to your gardener.

Every time I visit an offshore haven for expatriates, I find it littered with retired attorneys. Belize, Panama, Singapore, not mention the attorney swarm retired in the Caymens.

I assume that you believe these attorneys stole a bunch of money and ran off?

ok.

 

[Steve Tasker]

Any tax lawyers here? I'd love to get a day-to-day rundown of what you actually do.

It's March. You won't hear from tax guys for about 60 more days.

Right. Which is why I want to know what the #### they're doing this time of year....

Tax lawyers? Seriously? I've never known a tax lawyer to be wed to a time of year, or are you just talking about people who deal in individual income taxes? Aren't those generally...accountants?

I oversaw tax at my last job but was no tax lawyer. In that I'm generally dealing with M&A, our tax lawyers are generally structuring deals. Also I worked a lot with people who helped us with our international tax restructuring, researching and helping us set up structures that eventually comprised Singapore and Luxembourg as our primary vehicles. What kind of day-to-day are you talking about?

I'm a CPA (ANAL). We deal with attorneys fairly regularly from all across the spectrum....big law, large local, international, all the way down to the small guys. I kinda just wonder what they do every day. In my younger days I'd thought about going back to law school for tax law, but I don't have any desire to do that anymore.

Don't want to ask the ones you know as you think it might seem offensive? You're going to get very different answers from the groups you mention (as you know since I'm sure you interact with them in different types of situations). I've tended only to interact with BigLaw or in only one case, in- house (don't see many tax lawyers in-house). My impression was tons of research, plus they write and rewrite the parts of securities documents like prospectuses and M&A documents that none of the rest of us read. In M&A they can end up doing a lot of work getting letter rulings and the like, too. I did a Reverse Morris Trust deal (everyone scurries out of the thread), for instance, that was heavily dependent upon this element.

Perhaps I worded my question poorly. I didn't mean it in an offensive "what do you do all day?" implying that they don't do anything. I meant legitimately what do they do on an average day.I figured it varied widely, and my guess was mostly research.

 

[krista4]

Any tax lawyers here? I'd love to get a day-to-day rundown of what you actually do.

It's March. You won't hear from tax guys for about 60 more days.

Right. Which is why I want to know what the #### they're doing this time of year....

Tax lawyers? Seriously? I've never known a tax lawyer to be wed to a time of year, or are you just talking about people who deal in individual income taxes? Aren't those generally...accountants?

I oversaw tax at my last job but was no tax lawyer. In that I'm generally dealing with M&A, our tax lawyers are generally structuring deals. Also I worked a lot with people who helped us with our international tax restructuring, researching and helping us set up structures that eventually comprised Singapore and Luxembourg as our primary vehicles. What kind of day-to-day are you talking about?

I'm a CPA (ANAL). We deal with attorneys fairly regularly from all across the spectrum....big law, large local, international, all the way down to the small guys. I kinda just wonder what they do every day. In my younger days I'd thought about going back to law school for tax law, but I don't have any desire to do that anymore.

Don't want to ask the ones you know as you think it might seem offensive? You're going to get very different answers from the groups you mention (as you know since I'm sure you interact with them in different types of situations). I've tended only to interact with BigLaw or in only one case, in- house (don't see many tax lawyers in-house). My impression was tons of research, plus they write and rewrite the parts of securities documents like prospectuses and M&A documents that none of the rest of us read. In M&A they can end up doing a lot of work getting letter rulings and the like, too. I did a Reverse Morris Trust deal (everyone scurries out of the thread), for instance, that was heavily dependent upon this element.

Perhaps I worded my question poorly. I didn't mean it in an offensive "what do you do all day?" implying that they don't do anything. I meant legitimately what do they do on an average day.I figured it varied widely, and my guess was mostly research.

Oh it didn't offend me--I'm not a tax attorney. I was seriously asking if you hadn't inquired of the tax attorneys you know because you thought the question might be taken wrong.

ETA: I have great fondness for tax attorneys. They do a job that most people wouldn't want to do and seems often tedious, but they are really key to most of what I do and I have to rely heavily on their expertise. They also tend to be pretty good people.

 

[Henry Ford]

Any tax lawyers here? I'd love to get a day-to-day rundown of what you actually do.

It's March. You won't hear from tax guys for about 60 more days.

Right. Which is why I want to know what the #### they're doing this time of year....

Tax lawyers? Seriously? I've never known a tax lawyer to be wed to a time of year, or are you just talking about people who deal in individual income taxes? Aren't those generally...accountants?

I oversaw tax at my last job but was no tax lawyer. In that I'm generally dealing with M&A, our tax lawyers are generally structuring deals. Also I worked a lot with people who helped us with our international tax restructuring, researching and helping us set up structures that eventually comprised Singapore and Luxembourg as our primary vehicles. What kind of day-to-day are you talking about?

I'm a CPA (ANAL). We deal with attorneys fairly regularly from all across the spectrum....big law, large local, international, all the way down to the small guys. I kinda just wonder what they do every day. In my younger days I'd thought about going back to law school for tax law, but I don't have any desire to do that anymore.

Don't want to ask the ones you know as you think it might seem offensive? You're going to get very different answers from the groups you mention (as you know since I'm sure you interact with them in different types of situations). I've tended only to interact with BigLaw or in only one case, in- house (don't see many tax lawyers in-house). My impression was tons of research, plus they write and rewrite the parts of securities documents like prospectuses and M&A documents that none of the rest of us read. In M&A they can end up doing a lot of work getting letter rulings and the like, too. I did a Reverse Morris Trust deal (everyone scurries out of the thread), for instance, that was heavily dependent upon this element.

Perhaps I worded my question poorly. I didn't mean it in an offensive "what do you do all day?" implying that they don't do anything. I meant legitimately what do they do on an average day.I figured it varied widely, and my guess was mostly research.

I've got a good friend who's a tax attorney with his LLM from a high end school and most of what he does all day right now is advise businesses about the Affordable Care Act.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

There arent any real estate lawyers here though are there? RE lawyers bug the #### out of me. I can't count the number of times I had a deal about to be signed, eagerly waiting for a big fat commission, and some dumb #### RE lawyer jumps in and screws everything up.

I actually have a bottle of scotch in my office that I only open and drink from when I kill a real estate deal because some moronic realtor wrote an initial contract that a dog would know was a bad idea.

 

[Steve Tasker]

Truth be told, I don't have a good enough relationship with the attorneys we work with to ask them questions like that, for the most part. I'm one of the lower people on the totem pole...the work gets referred to one of my bosses (or vice versa), and then I work on it. I'm not really worried that the question is offensive so much as it may be considered intrusive.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Hooper, I am not a lawyer but I work closely with them and I can tell you straight out that most lawyers absolutely prefer to settle rather than go to court. That doesn't mean that either side will capitulate just to avoid trial but if there's a settlement to be had they'll take it with pleasure. Doesn't mean there aren't evil, money hungry, jackholes out there but most are out to help their client more than to aggrandize themselves

Most "litigators" rarely go to trial...mostly because it's hard, and it cuts into profits.

And because juries aren't all that reliable.

Don't be so nice. They are nucking futs.

 

[Henry Ford]

Hooper, I am not a lawyer but I work closely with them and I can tell you straight out that most lawyers absolutely prefer to settle rather than go to court. That doesn't mean that either side will capitulate just to avoid trial but if there's a settlement to be had they'll take it with pleasure. Doesn't mean there aren't evil, money hungry, jackholes out there but most are out to help their client more than to aggrandize themselves

Most "litigators" rarely go to trial...mostly because it's hard, and it cuts into profits.

And because juries aren't all that reliable.

Don't be so nice. They are nucking futs.

I'm more and more convinced that juries are more reliable than judges.

 

[bigbottom]

Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across.

Thanks for quickly ending the conversation. Have a nice day.

Now you have three anecdotes.

 

[Henry Ford]

Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across.

Thanks for quickly ending the conversation. Have a nice day.

Now you have three anecdotes.

If I'd been charging him hourly, I really would have drawn it out.

 

[Henry Ford]

Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across.

Thanks for quickly ending the conversation. Have a nice day.

Sorry to hear your insulting notions about lawyers aren't popular in a thread full of lawyers. Don't let the door hit you too hard.

Sorry to hear you believe this is true. Several times in the thread I stated that I believe situations can cause good people to do bad things. I think the profession is inherently laced with situations that will cause good people to do bad things. I don't believe I insulted any of the lawyers in the thread. I thought I was careful to make sure I shared where my perspectives came from.

And to be clear on your final comment above, I don't believe any profession is going to be populated with a higher percentage of ethical people (including my own). If you think so, more power to you.

Thanks!So, just to be clear, you think that, say, strip club managers should have just has many ethical people as, say, lawyers and school teachers?

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Hooper, I am not a lawyer but I work closely with them and I can tell you straight out that most lawyers absolutely prefer to settle rather than go to court. That doesn't mean that either side will capitulate just to avoid trial but if there's a settlement to be had they'll take it with pleasure. Doesn't mean there aren't evil, money hungry, jackholes out there but most are out to help their client more than to aggrandize themselves

Most "litigators" rarely go to trial...mostly because it's hard, and it cuts into profits.

And because juries aren't all that reliable.

Don't be so nice. They are nucking futs.

I'm more and more convinced that juries are more reliable than judges.

Maybe. Then again I only drag a case out for more money so I'm giddy if an appeal is possible.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across.

Thanks for quickly ending the conversation. Have a nice day.

Sorry to hear your insulting notions about lawyers aren't popular in a thread full of lawyers. Don't let the door hit you too hard.

Sorry to hear you believe this is true. Several times in the thread I stated that I believe situations can cause good people to do bad things. I think the profession is inherently laced with situations that will cause good people to do bad things. I don't believe I insulted any of the lawyers in the thread. I thought I was careful to make sure I shared where my perspectives came from.

And to be clear on your final comment above, I don't believe any profession is going to be populated with a higher percentage of ethical people (including my own). If you think so, more power to you.

Like what? What bad thing do lawyers do?

 

[Mister Martie]

what you're describing is unethical behavior. An attorney engaging in unethical behavior does not do so because the profession made him.instead, it is far more likely that the attorney was unethical before joining the profession.

I subscribe to Philip Zambardo's philosophy with regard to why good people sometimes do bad things. Situations and circumstances can result in slimey behavior. I think those circumstances occur more or less often in various professions. Do you disagree?

I disagree with the idiotic and insulting suggestion that lawyers violate an oath they took when joining the profession as a result of working on an hourly basis. Also with your spelling of the word slimy.

Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across. Bar none. A profession filled with people who don't give in to the most obvious of temptations over and over and over again. Are there exceptions? Of course. But let me give you an example.

Right now, today, I am a signatory on an account with more money in it than most people will ever make in their lives. And that their children will ever make in their lives. If I wrote a check on that account, the bank would call one person to verify whether the check was legit: me. The persons who are entitled to that money have no idea how much originally went in, not how much they are entitled to yet.

I could write myself a check for seven figures, and in all likelihood, no one would ever have any idea that it was gone. I could write myself a check for eight figures, get that money in cash, and be in Belize before anyone knew it was gone. That is never, ever going to happen.

Now hand that authority over to your gardener.

Whoa, you could steal millions of dollars but don't? I'm impressed.

 

[T Bell]

Hooper, I am not a lawyer but I work closely with them and I can tell you straight out that most lawyers absolutely prefer to settle rather than go to court. That doesn't mean that either side will capitulate just to avoid trial but if there's a settlement to be had they'll take it with pleasure. Doesn't mean there aren't evil, money hungry, jackholes out there but most are out to help their client more than to aggrandize themselves

Most "litigators" rarely go to trial...mostly because it's hard, and it cuts into profits.

And because juries aren't all that reliable.

Jury unpredictability is something lawyers use to talk clients into settling.

It happens to be true. But it's not just the jury. You might have a good idea how your case looks, but you just never now exactly how a witness will come across while giving his or her testimony, that is even if they don't testify differently at trial than they did in deposition or in some prior statement that they gave. There are always at least one or two close evidentiary rulings for judges to make, and sometimes those rulings can have a great amount of impact.

The potential variables seem endless at times.

 

[T Bell]

So, just to be clear, you think that, say, strip club managers should have just has many ethical people as, say, lawyers and school teachers?

What does it matter? Lawyers are better people than everyone else. We're not first, so we're all in a tie for last. Kudos to you for starting a thread to let the rest of the world know how awesome you are.

Your ex-wife's divorce lawyer is her new husband, isn't he.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

So, just to be clear, you think that, say, strip club managers should have just has many ethical people as, say, lawyers and school teachers?

What does it matter? Lawyers are better people than everyone else. We're not first, so we're all in a tie for last. Kudos to you for starting a thread to let the rest of the world know how awesome you are.

Well to be fair you actually did generalize our entire profession based on two circumstances and you will fund that moat of us here and in general actually don't do what you accuse us of. And Henry Ford was specifically correct. . Our ethical rules prohibit us from doing what you accuse us of. But I'm willing to bet you are mixing several different acts of representing someone and taking them out of context. Real quick example.If I am going to trial I must have done depositions. If I didn't do them I will be sued by my client when I lose because of it. But I hold off on doing them in most cases as long as possible because they are massively expensive. So it looks like I am dragging discovery longer than I should. But it actually saves my client money to do it that way.

Context of your complaint matters. A great deal. And frankly I usually tell people like you to do something anatomically impossible when they throw that complaint at me. I took 6 legal services cases last week to help them with their overload. And they aren't close to my first six cases. My first I litigated for 6 years through state and federal court for free. Hourly I would have billed over 150 grand in fees. On that one case.

So while I am genuinely curious as to the context of your complaint, if you are going to go the nuclear option right away and say we are all unethical pigs you will I hope forgive me when I tell you to repeat that anatomically impossible act.

 

[Henry Ford]

So, just to be clear, you think that, say, strip club managers should have just has many ethical people as, say, lawyers and school teachers?

What does it matter? Lawyers are better people than everyone else. We're not first, so we're all in a tie for last. Kudos to you for starting a thread to let the rest of the world know how awesome you are.

Please don't cry. I hate it when they cry.

 

[Zow]

Can this double as the complaining lawyers thread??

In the sense that I anticipated that you would come here and that you would complain when you did, it was assumed that this would be a complaining lawyers thread.

I will also repeatedly discuss how much I hate discovery, undoubtedly.

In the civil litigation I referenced above one of the defense lawyers involved keeps put "discovery" into quotes every time the word is needed in an e-mail. For example, his e-mail response to mine updating him on when he could expect certain pieces of discovery may/likely read as follows:

"I too am looking forward to getting 'discovery.' Once I get your 'discovery' I would your your claims off to my adjuster and respond to your settlement offer."

I can't tell if the dude just loves quotations or is totally ####### with me because he searched my background and realized I'm like 95% criminal defense.

 

[Henry Ford]

So, just to be clear, you think that, say, strip club managers should have just has many ethical people as, say, lawyers and school teachers?

What does it matter? Lawyers are better people than everyone else. We're not first, so we're all in a tie for last. Kudos to you for starting a thread to let the rest of the world know how awesome you are.

Well to be fair you actually did generalize our entire profession based on two circumstances and you will fund that moat of us here and in general actually don't do what you accuse us of. And Henry Ford was specifically correct. . Our ethical rules prohibit us from doing what you accuse us of. But I'm willing to bet you are mixing several different acts of representing someone and taking them out of context. Real quick example.If I am going to trial I must have done depositions. If I didn't do them I will be sued by my client when I lose because of it. But I hold off on doing them in most cases as long as possible because they are massively expensive. So it looks like I am dragging discovery longer than I should. But it actually saves my client money to do it that way.

Context of your complaint matters. A great deal. And frankly I usually tell people like you to do something anatomically impossible when they throw that complaint at me. I took 6 legal services cases last week to help them with their overload. And they aren't close to my first six cases. My first I litigated for 6 years through state and federal court for free. Hourly I would have billed over 150 grand in fees. On that one case.

So while I am genuinely curious as to the context of your complaint, if you are going to go the nuclear option right away and say we are all unethical pigs you will I hope forgive me when I tell you to repeat that anatomically impossible act.

No, lawyers aren't unethical. Our profession just makes us do unethical and slimy things. That's a distinction, apparently.

 

[Henry Ford]

Can this double as the complaining lawyers thread??

In the sense that I anticipated that you would come here and that you would complain when you did, it was assumed that this would be a complaining lawyers thread.I will also repeatedly discuss how much I hate discovery, undoubtedly.

In the civil litigation I referenced above one of the defense lawyers involved keeps put "discovery" into quotes every time the word is needed in an e-mail. For example, his e-mail response to mine updating him on when he could expect certain pieces of discovery may/likely read as follows:"I too am looking forward to getting 'discovery.' Once I get your 'discovery' I would your your claims off to my adjuster and respond to your settlement offer."

I can't tell if the dude just loves quotations or is totally ####### with me because he searched my background and realized I'm like 95% criminal defense.

I think he's probably hoping you'll refer to the discovery in question by its specific type. Interrogatories, RFP, RFA, depositions, etc. So, yes, probably screwing with you.

 

[T Bell]

So, just to be clear, you think that, say, strip club managers should have just has many ethical people as, say, lawyers and school teachers?

What does it matter? Lawyers are better people than everyone else. We're not first, so we're all in a tie for last. Kudos to you for starting a thread to let the rest of the world know how awesome you are.

Well to be fair you actually did generalize our entire profession based on two circumstances and you will fund that moat of us here and in general actually don't do what you accuse us of. And Henry Ford was specifically correct. . Our ethical rules prohibit us from doing what you accuse us of. But I'm willing to bet you are mixing several different acts of representing someone and taking them out of context. Real quick example.If I am going to trial I must have done depositions. If I didn't do them I will be sued by my client when I lose because of it. But I hold off on doing them in most cases as long as possible because they are massively expensive. So it looks like I am dragging discovery longer than I should. But it actually saves my client money to do it that way.

Context of your complaint matters. A great deal. And frankly I usually tell people like you to do something anatomically impossible when they throw that complaint at me. I took 6 legal services cases last week to help them with their overload. And they aren't close to my first six cases. My first I litigated for 6 years through state and federal court for free. Hourly I would have billed over 150 grand in fees. On that one case.

So while I am genuinely curious as to the context of your complaint, if you are going to go the nuclear option right away and say we are all unethical pigs you will I hope forgive me when I tell you to repeat that anatomically impossible act.

No, lawyers aren't unethical. Our profession just makes us do unethical and slimy things. That's a distinction, apparently.

 

[Zow]

Can this double as the complaining lawyers thread??

In the sense that I anticipated that you would come here and that you would complain when you did, it was assumed that this would be a complaining lawyers thread.I will also repeatedly discuss how much I hate discovery, undoubtedly.

In the civil litigation I referenced above one of the defense lawyers involved keeps put "discovery" into quotes every time the word is needed in an e-mail. For example, his e-mail response to mine updating him on when he could expect certain pieces of discovery may/likely read as follows:"I too am looking forward to getting 'discovery.' Once I get your 'discovery' I would your your claims off to my adjuster and respond to your settlement offer."

I can't tell if the dude just loves quotations or is totally ####### with me because he searched my background and realized I'm like 95% criminal defense.

I think he's probably hoping you'll refer to the discovery in question by its specific type. Interrogatories, RFP, RFA, depositions, etc. So, yes, probably screwing with you.

Actually now that I think about it I may or may not have been referencing the police and medical reports as "discovery" and he was probably poking fun at my lack of knowledge of the distinction between "disclosure" and "discovery."

 

[Henry Ford]

what you're describing is unethical behavior. An attorney engaging in unethical behavior does not do so because the profession made him.instead, it is far more likely that the attorney was unethical before joining the profession.

I subscribe to Philip Zambardo's philosophy with regard to why good people sometimes do bad things. Situations and circumstances can result in slimey behavior. I think those circumstances occur more or less often in various professions. Do you disagree?

I disagree with the idiotic and insulting suggestion that lawyers violate an oath they took when joining the profession as a result of working on an hourly basis. Also with your spelling of the word slimy.Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across. Bar none. A profession filled with people who don't give in to the most obvious of temptations over and over and over again. Are there exceptions? Of course. But let me give you an example.

Right now, today, I am a signatory on an account with more money in it than most people will ever make in their lives. And that their children will ever make in their lives. If I wrote a check on that account, the bank would call one person to verify whether the check was legit: me. The persons who are entitled to that money have no idea how much originally went in, not how much they are entitled to yet.

I could write myself a check for seven figures, and in all likelihood, no one would ever have any idea that it was gone. I could write myself a check for eight figures, get that money in cash, and be in Belize before anyone knew it was gone. That is never, ever going to happen.

Now hand that authority over to your gardener.

Whoa, you could steal millions of dollars but don't? I'm impressed.

Don't be impressed. It's a small example of what thousands and thousands of lawyers do every day. It's a tiny amount of money compared to what many/most lawyers are in charge of. And it's only one of the thousands of ways we could do something unethical if we wanted to. You think Yankee has never had a hot female client throw herself at him while he's representing her in a divorce? Or that fish has never had an opportunity to push his client to settle for less in order to get some guaranteed money in the bank for his practice during the lean years? That's what this job is. And when people have a bad experience with a lawyer, I'm sorry, but that's something that happens. It doesn't impart any immutable truths about our profession, which really is a series of ethical decisions every single day. Which 99% of us get right 99% of the time.

 

[mr roboto]

Interesting turn of events that the non-lawyers ruined the thread in which lawyers were supposed to post so as to not ruin other threads.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Can this double as the complaining lawyers thread??

In the sense that I anticipated that you would come here and that you would complain when you did, it was assumed that this would be a complaining lawyers thread.I will also repeatedly discuss how much I hate discovery, undoubtedly.

In the civil litigation I referenced above one of the defense lawyers involved keeps put "discovery" into quotes every time the word is needed in an e-mail. For example, his e-mail response to mine updating him on when he could expect certain pieces of discovery may/likely read as follows:"I too am looking forward to getting 'discovery.' Once I get your 'discovery' I would your your claims off to my adjuster and respond to your settlement offer."

I can't tell if the dude just loves quotations or is totally ####### with me because he searched my background and realized I'm like 95% criminal defense.

I think he's probably hoping you'll refer to the discovery in question by its specific type. Interrogatories, RFP, RFA, depositions, etc. So, yes, probably screwing with you.

Actually now that I think about it I may or may not have been referencing the police and medical reports as "discovery" and he was probably poking fun at my lack of knowledge of the distinction between "disclosure" and "discovery."

Meh. I really hate when guys are too technical. Do you have best practices rules? We really are required to work with each other as much as possible.

 

[Zow]

Can this double as the complaining lawyers thread??

In the sense that I anticipated that you would come here and that you would complain when you did, it was assumed that this would be a complaining lawyers thread.I will also repeatedly discuss how much I hate discovery, undoubtedly.

In the civil litigation I referenced above one of the defense lawyers involved keeps put "discovery" into quotes every time the word is needed in an e-mail. For example, his e-mail response to mine updating him on when he could expect certain pieces of discovery may/likely read as follows:"I too am looking forward to getting 'discovery.' Once I get your 'discovery' I would your your claims off to my adjuster and respond to your settlement offer."

I can't tell if the dude just loves quotations or is totally ####### with me because he searched my background and realized I'm like 95% criminal defense.

I think he's probably hoping you'll refer to the discovery in question by its specific type. Interrogatories, RFP, RFA, depositions, etc. So, yes, probably screwing with you.

Actually now that I think about it I may or may not have been referencing the police and medical reports as "discovery" and he was probably poking fun at my lack of knowledge of the distinction between "disclosure" and "discovery."

Meh. I really hate when guys are too technical. Do you have best practices rules? We really are required to work with each other as much as possible.

We do (called the "Zlaket pleading rules"). He's been cool with me and me with him regarding extensions, Amended Answers, Uniform Interrogatories, etc. Just didn't entirely get his quoting my broad usage of the term.

 

[T Bell]

Can this double as the complaining lawyers thread??

In the sense that I anticipated that you would come here and that you would complain when you did, it was assumed that this would be a complaining lawyers thread.I will also repeatedly discuss how much I hate discovery, undoubtedly.

In the civil litigation I referenced above one of the defense lawyers involved keeps put "discovery" into quotes every time the word is needed in an e-mail. For example, his e-mail response to mine updating him on when he could expect certain pieces of discovery may/likely read as follows:"I too am looking forward to getting 'discovery.' Once I get your 'discovery' I would your your claims off to my adjuster and respond to your settlement offer."

I can't tell if the dude just loves quotations or is totally ####### with me because he searched my background and realized I'm like 95% criminal defense.

I think he's probably hoping you'll refer to the discovery in question by its specific type. Interrogatories, RFP, RFA, depositions, etc. So, yes, probably screwing with you.

Actually now that I think about it I may or may not have been referencing the police and medical reports as "discovery" and he was probably poking fun at my lack of knowledge of the distinction between "disclosure" and "discovery."

Meh. I really hate when guys are too technical. Do you have best practices rules? We really are required to work with each other as much as possible.

We do (called the "Zlaket pleading rules"). He's been cool with me and me with him regarding extensions, Amended Answers, Uniform Interrogatories, etc. Just didn't entirely get his quoting my broad usage of the term.

Ah, small world. I went to law school with Morty Zlacket's son.

 

[Mister Martie]

Interesting turn of events that the non-lawyers ruined the thread in which lawyers were supposed to post so as to not ruin other threads.

It's payback time.

 

[Mister Martie]

what you're describing is unethical behavior. An attorney engaging in unethical behavior does not do so because the profession made him.instead, it is far more likely that the attorney was unethical before joining the profession.

I subscribe to Philip Zambardo's philosophy with regard to why good people sometimes do bad things. Situations and circumstances can result in slimey behavior. I think those circumstances occur more or less often in various professions. Do you disagree?

I disagree with the idiotic and insulting suggestion that lawyers violate an oath they took when joining the profession as a result of working on an hourly basis. Also with your spelling of the word slimy.Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across. Bar none. A profession filled with people who don't give in to the most obvious of temptations over and over and over again. Are there exceptions? Of course. But let me give you an example.

Right now, today, I am a signatory on an account with more money in it than most people will ever make in their lives. And that their children will ever make in their lives. If I wrote a check on that account, the bank would call one person to verify whether the check was legit: me. The persons who are entitled to that money have no idea how much originally went in, not how much they are entitled to yet.

I could write myself a check for seven figures, and in all likelihood, no one would ever have any idea that it was gone. I could write myself a check for eight figures, get that money in cash, and be in Belize before anyone knew it was gone. That is never, ever going to happen.

Now hand that authority over to your gardener.

Whoa, you could steal millions of dollars but don't? I'm impressed.

Don't be impressed. It's a small example of what thousands and thousands of lawyers do every day. It's a tiny amount of money compared to what many/most lawyers are in charge of. And it's only one of the thousands of ways we could do something unethical if we wanted to. You think Yankee has never had a hot female client throw herself at him while he's representing her in a divorce? Or that fish has never had an opportunity to push his client to settle for less in order to get some guaranteed money in the bank for his practice during the lean years? That's what this job is. And when people have a bad experience with a lawyer, I'm sorry, but that's something that happens. It doesn't impart any immutable truths about our profession, which really is a series of ethical decisions every single day. Which 99% of us get right 99% of the time.

I'll never look at lawyers the same way again.

 

[Henry Ford]

Any other lawyers watch Justin Bieber's deposition and just salivate? That kid is going to get destroyed.

 

[Silver & Black]

As a Manhattan attorney of 21 years, I can honestly say it all starts with Pennoyer v. Neff and ends with the rule against perpetuities.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

There arent any real estate lawyers here though are there? RE lawyers bug the #### out of me. I can't count the number of times I had a deal about to be signed, eagerly waiting for a big fat commission, and some dumb #### RE lawyer jumps in and screws everything up.

You're on my list.

 

[fatness]

Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across.

Thanks for quickly ending the conversation. Have a nice day.

BAR NONE!!!

Name me another profession you'd allow to have a check for several million dollars written to on your behalf and assume you'll be getting it, other than your actual bank.

My gardner. In a heartbeat. Most ethical man I know.

That's a person. Not a profession.

It's a bad question. Nobody would allow "a profession" to handle a large check. They'd choose an individual they trust, lawyer or non-lawyer.

 

[TxBuckeye]

The Lawyer Thread Where We Stop Ruining Other Threads

Fail. Please change the thread title.

 

[njherdfan]

Any former clerks in here? I have a bunch of clerkship interviews coming up, and I guess I'm looking for general feedback. Did you enjoy the experience? Has it helped you with 2nd or 3rd (or beyond) jobs? Is it worth taking if I'm offered?

 

[-fish-]

The Lawyer Thread Where We Stop Ruining Other Threads

Fail. Please change the thread title.

The Lawyer Thread Where We Ruin This Thread and Continue to Ruin Other Threads with Impunity?

 

[bigbottom]

Any former clerks in here? I have a bunch of clerkship interviews coming up, and I guess I'm looking for general feedback. Did you enjoy the experience? Has it helped you with 2nd or 3rd (or beyond) jobs? Is it worth taking if I'm offered?

What career do you plan to pursue after your clerkship? (I assume you're talking about a judicial clerkship)

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Any other lawyers watch Justin Bieber's deposition and just salivate? That kid is going to get destroyed.

From the small excerpt I saw, it seemed the lawyer taking the dep was having difficulty framing decent questions. I don't know a thing about the case so won't judge him, but he seemed unprepared or inexperienced.

 

[njherdfan]

Any former clerks in here? I have a bunch of clerkship interviews coming up, and I guess I'm looking for general feedback. Did you enjoy the experience? Has it helped you with 2nd or 3rd (or beyond) jobs? Is it worth taking if I'm offered?

What career do you plan to pursue after your clerkship? (I assume you're talking about a judicial clerkship)

Yeah. Sorry for not clarifying. I have an interest in softer IP but I'm really just interested in general litigation, at least for now. Obviously, if I want to focus on copyright or trademark I'd need a federal clerkship, but beyond that, any info would be great.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Any former clerks in here? I have a bunch of clerkship interviews coming up, and I guess I'm looking for general feedback. Did you enjoy the experience? Has it helped you with 2nd or 3rd (or beyond) jobs? Is it worth taking if I'm offered?

I suppose it depends on the court. I did a two year stint with a bankruptcy judge that was great. Great experience all around that has opened doors for me throughout my career.

 

[Henry Ford]

Lawyers are, for the most part, the most ethical group of people you will run across.

Thanks for quickly ending the conversation. Have a nice day.

BAR NONE!!!

Name me another profession you'd allow to have a check for several million dollars written to on your behalf and assume you'll be getting it, other than your actual bank.

My gardner. In a heartbeat. Most ethical man I know.

That's a person. Not a profession.

It's a bad question. Nobody would allow "a profession" to handle a large check. They'd choose an individual they trust, lawyer or non-lawyer.

Even if you don't have a lawyer you trust, there's a pretty good chance some of your money is in the hands of a lawyer at some point in the next few years. Class action checks included.

 

[bigbottom]

Any former clerks in here? I have a bunch of clerkship interviews coming up, and I guess I'm looking for general feedback. Did you enjoy the experience? Has it helped you with 2nd or 3rd (or beyond) jobs? Is it worth taking if I'm offered?

I suppose it depends on the court. I did a two year stint with a bankruptcy judge that was great. Great experience all around that has opened doors for me throughout my career.

Are you a bankruptcy lawyer? I've heard that bankruptcy clerkships are huge if you want to practice in that area. As for general litigation, purely from an experience standpoint, my personal view is you'll get more experience working as a litigator for a year than you will clerking for a year. And depending on the job you're foregoing, you may get paid a whole lot less. My view is that unless you think it will be an enriching experience from a personal standpoint (you really want to do it), or you're pursuing a career where a clerkship will be important (bankruptcy, academia, appellate), you're probably better off starting your job out of law school if you already have an offer. But that's my view from a BigLaw litigation perspective. Others may disagree.

I think Fatguy clerked. Hopefully he'll stop in the thread to offer his perspective.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Any former clerks in here? I have a bunch of clerkship interviews coming up, and I guess I'm looking for general feedback. Did you enjoy the experience? Has it helped you with 2nd or 3rd (or beyond) jobs? Is it worth taking if I'm offered?

I suppose it depends on the court. I did a two year stint with a bankruptcy judge that was great. Great experience all around that has opened doors for me throughout my career.

Are you a bankruptcy lawyer? I've heard that bankruptcy clerkships are huge if you want to practice in that area. As for general litigation, purely from an experience standpoint, my personal view is you'll get more experience working as a litigator for a year than you will clerking for a year. And depending on the job you're foregoing, you may get paid a whole lot less. My view is that unless you think it will be an enriching experience from a personal standpoint (you really want to do it), or you're pursuing a career where a clerkship will be important (bankruptcy, academia, appellate), you're probably better off starting your job out of law school if you already have an offer. But that's my view from a BigLaw litigation perspective. Others may disagree.

I think Fatguy clerked. Hopefully he'll stop in the thread to offer his perspective.

I did chap 11 work almost exclusively for 15 years before moving in-house. The clerkship experience has been extremely valuable to me in many ways.

 

[bigbottom]

Any former clerks in here? I have a bunch of clerkship interviews coming up, and I guess I'm looking for general feedback. Did you enjoy the experience? Has it helped you with 2nd or 3rd (or beyond) jobs? Is it worth taking if I'm offered?

What career do you plan to pursue after your clerkship? (I assume you're talking about a judicial clerkship)

Yeah. Sorry for not clarifying. I have an interest in softer IP but I'm really just interested in general litigation, at least for now. Obviously, if I want to focus on copyright or trademark I'd need a federal clerkship, but beyond that, any info would be great.

Where are you working this upcoming summer? (a description, not the name)