What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Lawyer Thread Where We Stop Ruining Other Threads (2 Viewers)

I'm surprised to hear of so many ups and downs ("imposter syndrome").  Mine has been more of a solid trajectory up.  Definitely in years 1-3-ish I wondered how anyone could pay the rates they did to have me do what I did, but from there I felt I added clear value that has only increased along the way.  Maybe a litigator thing, since litigation is (I'm guessing) more out of your control, and where there is a clear "win" v "loss" that we don't experience?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm surprised to hear of so many ups and downs ("imposter syndrome").  Mine has been more of a solid trajectory up.  Definitely in years 1-3-ish I wondered how anyone could pay the rates they did to have me do what I did, but from there I felt I added clear value that has only increased along the way.  Maybe a litigator thing, since litigation is (I'm guessing) more out of your control, and where there is a clear "win" v "loss" that we don't experience?
It's not the wins and losses that cause those feelings, so much in the sense of winning or losing a case; for me it's more about just performance generally.  If I screw up in a hearing, or in a meeting even; if I don't outshine everyone or hang with lawyers with twice my experience; if I don't get praise from a client or other superior, I just feel like a total loser.  There are days when I smoke an expert in a deposition or on the stand, or senior partners of mine are telling me and others I may be the most talented trial lawyer in the firm, or when I unearth some great argument or view in a brief or in a meeting that others hadn't seen, and I truly believe I belong and am one of the best, and I'm a steal at my absurd billing rate.  But there are days when I miss big obvious issues; when I realize I don't know some of the most basic aspects of the law; when I look at my book of business compared to others' my age; when I go into a court hearing unprepared and absolutely blow it in front of a client; when I speak up in a meeting or in an e-mail chain and say something genuinely stupid, and on those days I feel so out of place and wonder how the hell I've snuck past so many checkpoints along the way.  Most of my partners are folks with incredible academics who were at the top of their class, or who came from ivy league schools, and who grew up the children of lawyers and doctors in affluent neighborhoods. I was a middle class kid who didn't learn how to study until first year of law school, and even then was just a decent student.  And I look at the big picture and I sometimes feel like the help who snuck into the ballroom in a tuxedo.

By the way, none of this is a complaint.  It's just an observation, and I had no idea this was actually a thing.  My stress, and the demands I place on myself, are probably how I ended up here in the first place.  I've got a great gig doing something that, despite all of the politics and stress and anxiety and hours and travel that come with it, I really enjoy doing, and it helps me support a nice home life.  And I'm so "sucked in" now, Mrs. O doubts I could ever be happy doing something with less stress and demands. She's probably right.

Highs and lows, baby.  Highs and lows.

Let's all get out there and lawyer our asses off today, and feel like we belong.

 
The first one is really a non-issue. Setting up an LLC is paralegal stuff, and its common practice for a single purpose real estate LLC to be named after the property. If the client doesn't make a point of asking for a particular name, I don't think he can complain if the para doesn't call to ask him what he wants to call his LLC. It can easily be changed anyway. The second one really depends on the circumstances.
I just can't imagine naming someone else's company for them without asking.  It's not an ethics or malpractice thing, obviously, just a lack of common courtesy. And the name can be changed with the state with a little bit of work, but now the wrong name is on everything - service contracts, leases, bank accounts.  It's not just snap your fingers and it's changed. 

 
I just can't imagine naming someone else's company for them without asking.  It's not an ethics or malpractice thing, obviously, just a lack of common courtesy. And the name can be changed with the state with a little bit of work, but now the wrong name is on everything - service contracts, leases, bank accounts.  It's not just snap your fingers and it's changed. 
I get that Thorn, but it's not a corner bakery or hardware store, it's a real estate LLC. RE investors might have dozens or hundreds of these set up, and it's pretty rare to have any sentimental value in the name, while it makes sense to name the holding entity using the address.

 
I get that Thorn, but it's not a corner bakery or hardware store, it's a real estate LLC. RE investors might have dozens or hundreds of these set up, and it's pretty rare to have any sentimental value in the name, while it makes sense to name the holding entity using the address.
Respectfully, I don't think you do get it.  I mentioned that this was his fourth or fifth building (not hundredth), and that he had named the prior ones after his kids.  And heck if you don't believe me that it matters, consider that this was the final straw for him firing his lawyer.

 
The cool thing about this job is it doesn't get old. Some days I feel like I'm one of the best in my firm, one of the best in the business, at what I do.  Other days I feel like a clown. I can't imagine many other professions causing such highs and lows. 

But it sure keeps things interesting. 
We all feel that way, gb.  Imposter Syndrome some days.
fwiw, I feel the same way about the architecture biz, and have had that same conversation with peers. but yeah, more of the pretender/imposter than clowns. but I get it, with your big, clownish hands and all...

 
Sure.  Let me know when you end up in prison.  I might know someone who can slip you an extra jello cup on Sundays.
Orange or lime, maybe, but those cats get pretty serious when it comes to the black cherry flavor.  Fresh meat like him could get himself killed over a black cherry jello cup.

 
So my Office is an Amici on a Petition for Cert.  My boss asks me why, as a former law clerk who might know, why it is taking so long for the Supremes to rule.  I say I could only speculate absent some input, could I read the brief.  I did.  The following sentence is in the first paragraph of the brief, with emphasis added out of incredulity:

The Court of Appeal's foisting of the burden of medical expenses for injured suspects affects these municipalities directly and substantially.

I suggested to my boss that when we are trying to persuade the Supremes to do something for us that we may not want to state that their colleagues foisted costs upon us.  They may have "shifted" "transferred" or "assigned" them in error,  but they did not foist them.  My boss asked if the Courts really notice such matters.

 
I'm surprised to hear of so many ups and downs ("imposter syndrome").  Mine has been more of a solid trajectory up.  Definitely in years 1-3-ish I wondered how anyone could pay the rates they did to have me do what I did, but from there I felt I added clear value that has only increased along the way.  Maybe a litigator thing, since litigation is (I'm guessing) more out of your control, and where there is a clear "win" v "loss" that we don't experience?
Probably. 

Although I will say that in my areas of practice (criminal, family, occasional civil), "good" results don't always correlate to praise or client satisfaction because people don't always have reasonable expectations (heck, some maintain expectations that they've been told multiple times won't pan out).  Sometimes that gets to you, especially if you believe you've done a good job yet the dissatisfaction of the client or the client's family is obvious. Heck, I remember one particular case where I advised (more so pleaded with) a client numerous times to take what I considered to be a favorable plea agreement, stressed out when she refused to do so because of the trial risks and what I thought was overwhelming evidence against her, yet we somehow (according to the prosecutor who spoke to one of the jurors, they apparently manufactured some defense that didn't appear to have a basis in law or fact or was ever argued by me in closing) got an acquittal.  Instead of a thank you or something positive the client stared at me icily, said, "I told you so," and walked out.  I had just won what I thought was an un-winnable case yet felt like I didn't have near the "sense" for a case that I thought I had.   

I also work a lot of cases. So, it's quite common to have a day when I knock one case out of the park (say, win a big trial, get a great plea or settlement, etc.) only to have two nasty voicemails on my machine with complaints that may or may not be valid. It's also inevitable to, on rare occasion, miss a deadline, forget to call a client back or miss a meeting, whiff on a sentencing or judgment prediction, etc.  It's also inevitable to engage in discussions with colleagues where I'm awestruck with their superior knowledge of the law or watch another attorney just crush a cross examination or argument that seemed out of my league.  That'll wear on you kind of like how I imagine bad shots or frustrating losses weigh on say a pro golfer or something and these bad thoughts are tough to always keep out of the back of your mind.     

Personally, I've never felt I'm not worth what I'm paid or suffer from imposter syndrome.  But there are definitely days where the stress level is so high I feel like throwing up.  This feeling has only increased as a I take on higher paying private cases where the expectations are that higher fees always yield better, yet likely unattainable results.  Accordingly, I work longer hours (leaving the office early or leaving work on my desk stresses me out so much that I can't enjoy myself that night), drink and eat more than I have in the past, and seem to have less pride when telling others what I do for a living whereas, in my first year or two of practice, I pretty much always thought I was the coolest guy in the room because of what I did for a living. 

 
Respectfully, I don't think you do get it.  I mentioned that this was his fourth or fifth building (not hundredth), and that he had named the prior ones after his kids.  And heck if you don't believe me that it matters, consider that this was the final straw for him firing his lawyer.
I wouldn't want a client that would fire a lawyer over such a non-issue.  This is really the normal way that sole-asset LLC's are named.   If he didn't give a direction on naming it, that's his fault, not his lawyer's.  If it's that important, he could file a name change with the Secretary of State for like $20.

I'd be glad to be rid of him.

 
Probably. 

Although I will say that in my areas of practice (criminal, family, occasional civil), "good" results don't always correlate to praise or client satisfaction because people don't always have reasonable expectations (heck, some maintain expectations that they've been told multiple times won't pan out).  Sometimes that gets to you, especially if you believe you've done a good job yet the dissatisfaction of the client or the client's family is obvious. Heck, I remember one particular case where I advised (more so pleaded with) a client numerous times to take what I considered to be a favorable plea agreement, stressed out when she refused to do so because of the trial risks and what I thought was overwhelming evidence against her, yet we somehow (according to the prosecutor who spoke to one of the jurors, they apparently manufactured some defense that didn't appear to have a basis in law or fact or was ever argued by me in closing) got an acquittal.  Instead of a thank you or something positive the client stared at me icily, said, "I told you so," and walked out.  I had just won what I thought was an un-winnable case yet felt like I didn't have near the "sense" for a case that I thought I had.   

I also work a lot of cases. So, it's quite common to have a day when I knock one case out of the park (say, win a big trial, get a great plea or settlement, etc.) only to have two nasty voicemails on my machine with complaints that may or may not be valid. It's also inevitable to, on rare occasion, miss a deadline, forget to call a client back or miss a meeting, whiff on a sentencing or judgment prediction, etc.  It's also inevitable to engage in discussions with colleagues where I'm awestruck with their superior knowledge of the law or watch another attorney just crush a cross examination or argument that seemed out of my league.  That'll wear on you kind of like how I imagine bad shots or frustrating losses weigh on say a pro golfer or something and these bad thoughts are tough to always keep out of the back of your mind.     

Personally, I've never felt I'm not worth what I'm paid or suffer from imposter syndrome.  But there are definitely days where the stress level is so high I feel like throwing up.  This feeling has only increased as a I take on higher paying private cases where the expectations are that higher fees always yield better, yet likely unattainable results.  Accordingly, I work longer hours (leaving the office early or leaving work on my desk stresses me out so much that I can't enjoy myself that night), drink and eat more than I have in the past, and seem to have less pride when telling others what I do for a living whereas, in my first year or two of practice, I pretty much always thought I was the coolest guy in the room because of what I did for a living. 
Interesting stuff in your first paragraph.  I think the skewed expectations come from the type of work you do and that your clients (necessarily and understandably) have a much more intense emotional interest in what you're doing.  I hadn't considered how that would affect expectations and therefore the "syndrome" that some described, and I can see how that would have an effect on people with practices like Henry Ford's, Yankee's, yours, etc.

To be clear, when I say I've never felt this "imposter syndrome" it has nothing to do with an absence of stress, long hours, and all the things many of us have described in our posts over the years (though my current job is a breeze compared to anything else I've ever done).  As I've lamented many times here, my prior jobs often involved 80+-hour weeks, stress to a point where I nearly broke, my 20+-year bout of insomnia, etc.  Hell, even with my relatively laid-back current job, I was up at 4 a.m. writing emails this morning because I couldn't get work out of my brain and thought of some things I should have said in emails I had sent on Sunday, a day I allegedly don't work.  

To the contrary, I think it's because I do stress so much, work so hard, care way too much that I've never felt the imposter syndrome.  Unlike anything else in my life,* my work is something where I feel I'm at the top of my game, just about always, and I'd put my results and abilities against pretty much anyone. :shrug:   Unlike you in your earlier life, I never thought that made me cool, though.  Quite the opposite.  I'd rather be good at something useful, like...well, anything, but after 24 years I've come to accept that this is what I have.

*Except parallel parking.  I'd be a gold-medal winner if that were an Olympic sport.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm curious about something, hopefully you guys can help me out here. I guess around a decade ago in the U.S. a restriction on pharmaceutical advertising was lifted and now we're bombarded with TV ads for all kinds of drugs. Most of the commercials spend as much time telling you how the pill might kill you as they do promoting it. Hey your rash will go away but you'll be suicidal and your kidneys may stop working.

So I've been seeing these commercials soliciting clients for a class-action suit against Invokana. I thought to myself, hey, that's a newer drug right? Sure enough, it's still being marketed and sold. So what gives? If studies were done that show a drug might cause ketoacidosis for example, I'm assuming the FDA makes some kind of risk/benefit calculation before they approve it. 1 in 100,000 patients will die, but the majority of the remaining 99,999 will show significant quality of life improvement, greater survival rate, etc. So the company releases the drug with all the appropriate warnings. How is it that patients can still sue for damages? They knew the risks. And shouldn't the FDA be liable?
Because tort law is broken in this country.

 
I was on Xarelto for a while and in the same evening I could watch Arnold Palmer et al pitch it to me and be asked whether I had suffered from serious internal bleeding while taking it.

 
Days I hate my job:

I'm putting together a JV.  Sent around documents and got comments from our potential partner.  Some are fine, some are not, usual stuff.  I needed buy-in from various groups, as usual, for some of the changes, and when I sent around my suggestions I got push back from Accounting on one provision.  OK, I made a different proposal that I thought would satisfy everyone and was a good, workable solution.

Accounting said they don't think this works, check with Operations.  Operations says it's fine.  Accounting doesn't believe it and says check with the legal group that supports Operations.  Then ensued a nearly endless email trail of everyone discussing various ideas and issues, making proposals, then changing those proposals slightly, until finally, the lawyer for Operations says how about this...I looked at it and suggested two minor changes, and everyone agreed that this final proposal was acceptable.

That agreed-upon proposal is exactly what I proposed ten days ago.  Not "substantially the same"; exactly the same.

Peril of corporate life #1 - too many cooks.

 
White collar client of mine killed himself this morning. I never saw it coming. I know it's not on me but I sent him his pre-sentence report last week while I'm away on vacation so I wasn't there to settle him down  he did leave a message saying we'd talk after I returned but I guess he couldn't wait. 

The government thought he was a conniving monster but he was just a guy trying to support his family through business practices that were constantly just over the line

sucks

 
Maybe I suck at googling, but where can I go to find out what questions I have to answer / my rights when pulled over for my particular state? 

On Friday my wife and I were at her parents house, and after dinner we went to go watch a movie, while her parents took our vehicle back to their place (since they were watching the kids, they needed the car seats and didn't want to mess with transferring them so we just swapped vehicles).  This is in an extremely small town, (they have 1 red light in the entire town).  We caught a late movie, then went to WalMart a few exits down to grab some random stuff and then headed back to her parent's place.  It was around 2am at this point, and the city we're in is right next to a college town.  

Anyhow, about a mile from her parents' house I see blue lights and pull to the side thinking he's driving past me, and instead pulls in right behind me.  Tells me that he's pulling me over for a headlight being out  turns out there was an issue with the brights on the vehicle as one of the hi-beam bulbs was out.  I couldn't find proof of insurance as the only one that my FIL had in the glove box expired a month ago.  He then asks for my wife's ID.  He grabs that, the registration and my ID and heads back to his car.  After a few minutes, he then returns and asks me if I had any drinks tonight (I hadn't), asks if my wife had been drinking (which was strange considering she wasn't even driving.  Asks if we've been doing any drugs.  Asks if there is any guns in the vehicle, then asks if we have any large amounts of cash on us.  At least point I asked him "what is the point of all this? what does any of that have to do with a lightbulb being out".  He told me he's trying to get a feel for the situation and who he's talking to, and again asks me about the insurance card.  I told him if he wants to follow me my vehicle, which is less than a mile away, at their house, I'll show them MY insurance card, but I couldn't get a hold of my inlaws as they were well asleep and not answering their phones.  He then asks me if he can look inside my trunk.  WTF?! Luckily at this point my wife had gotten a hold of her brother, who text us a picture of his insurance card, which he's on their account and the vehicle is listed.  After that he looks at the picture on my wife's phone and tells us to be safe and leaves.  Doesn't even mention fixing the bulb or write a ticket.  Guess he was just bored and trying to find something?

Did he have the ability to make me sit there while he asked me a ton of questions until I could find proof of insurance?  What does looking in my trunk have to do with a light bulb being out?  Just out looking for drunk drivers?  Just looking for somewhere that I can go to, to get more educated on what I can or can not do in those situations, particular for TN as it seems most states differ.

 
Maybe I suck at googling, but where can I go to find out what questions I have to answer / my rights when pulled over for my particular state? 

On Friday my wife and I were at her parents house, and after dinner we went to go watch a movie, while her parents took our vehicle back to their place (since they were watching the kids, they needed the car seats and didn't want to mess with transferring them so we just swapped vehicles).  This is in an extremely small town, (they have 1 red light in the entire town).  We caught a late movie, then went to WalMart a few exits down to grab some random stuff and then headed back to her parent's place.  It was around 2am at this point, and the city we're in is right next to a college town.  

Anyhow, about a mile from her parents' house I see blue lights and pull to the side thinking he's driving past me, and instead pulls in right behind me.  Tells me that he's pulling me over for a headlight being out  turns out there was an issue with the brights on the vehicle as one of the hi-beam bulbs was out.  I couldn't find proof of insurance as the only one that my FIL had in the glove box expired a month ago.  He then asks for my wife's ID.  He grabs that, the registration and my ID and heads back to his car.  After a few minutes, he then returns and asks me if I had any drinks tonight (I hadn't), asks if my wife had been drinking (which was strange considering she wasn't even driving.  Asks if we've been doing any drugs.  Asks if there is any guns in the vehicle, then asks if we have any large amounts of cash on us.  At least point I asked him "what is the point of all this? what does any of that have to do with a lightbulb being out".  He told me he's trying to get a feel for the situation and who he's talking to, and again asks me about the insurance card.  I told him if he wants to follow me my vehicle, which is less than a mile away, at their house, I'll show them MY insurance card, but I couldn't get a hold of my inlaws as they were well asleep and not answering their phones.  He then asks me if he can look inside my trunk.  WTF?! Luckily at this point my wife had gotten a hold of her brother, who text us a picture of his insurance card, which he's on their account and the vehicle is listed.  After that he looks at the picture on my wife's phone and tells us to be safe and leaves.  Doesn't even mention fixing the bulb or write a ticket.  Guess he was just bored and trying to find something?

Did he have the ability to make me sit there while he asked me a ton of questions until I could find proof of insurance?  What does looking in my trunk have to do with a light bulb being out?  Just out looking for drunk drivers?  Just looking for somewhere that I can go to, to get more educated on what I can or can not do in those situations, particular for TN as it seems most states differ.
My Link

 
White collar client of mine killed himself this morning. I never saw it coming. I know it's not on me but I sent him his pre-sentence report last week while I'm away on vacation so I wasn't there to settle him down  he did leave a message saying we'd talk after I returned but I guess he couldn't wait. 

The government thought he was a conniving monster but he was just a guy trying to support his family through business practices that were constantly just over the line

sucks
That does suck.  Seems like those defendants have a much higher rate of committing suicide.  We just had a guy here locally (not my client) "only" looking at like 3.5 years, had a pretty good case, and killed himself prior to the last day of trial. 

 
Maybe I suck at googling, but where can I go to find out what questions I have to answer / my rights when pulled over for my particular state? 

On Friday my wife and I were at her parents house, and after dinner we went to go watch a movie, while her parents took our vehicle back to their place (since they were watching the kids, they needed the car seats and didn't want to mess with transferring them so we just swapped vehicles).  This is in an extremely small town, (they have 1 red light in the entire town).  We caught a late movie, then went to WalMart a few exits down to grab some random stuff and then headed back to her parent's place.  It was around 2am at this point, and the city we're in is right next to a college town.  

Anyhow, about a mile from her parents' house I see blue lights and pull to the side thinking he's driving past me, and instead pulls in right behind me.  Tells me that he's pulling me over for a headlight being out  turns out there was an issue with the brights on the vehicle as one of the hi-beam bulbs was out.  I couldn't find proof of insurance as the only one that my FIL had in the glove box expired a month ago.  He then asks for my wife's ID.  He grabs that, the registration and my ID and heads back to his car.  After a few minutes, he then returns and asks me if I had any drinks tonight (I hadn't), asks if my wife had been drinking (which was strange considering she wasn't even driving.  Asks if we've been doing any drugs.  Asks if there is any guns in the vehicle, then asks if we have any large amounts of cash on us.  At least point I asked him "what is the point of all this? what does any of that have to do with a lightbulb being out".  He told me he's trying to get a feel for the situation and who he's talking to, and again asks me about the insurance card.  I told him if he wants to follow me my vehicle, which is less than a mile away, at their house, I'll show them MY insurance card, but I couldn't get a hold of my inlaws as they were well asleep and not answering their phones.  He then asks me if he can look inside my trunk.  WTF?! Luckily at this point my wife had gotten a hold of her brother, who text us a picture of his insurance card, which he's on their account and the vehicle is listed.  After that he looks at the picture on my wife's phone and tells us to be safe and leaves.  Doesn't even mention fixing the bulb or write a ticket.  Guess he was just bored and trying to find something?

Did he have the ability to make me sit there while he asked me a ton of questions until I could find proof of insurance?  What does looking in my trunk have to do with a light bulb being out?  Just out looking for drunk drivers?  Just looking for somewhere that I can go to, to get more educated on what I can or can not do in those situations, particular for TN as it seems most states differ.
Clearly he had the ability.  Whether it was lawful is a different question.  Whether there's any actual relief you can seek if it was lawful is a whole other question as well. What the specifics motives of this officer probably vary as well, are are unattainable since nobody can read the officer's mind. 

These situations can be frustrating and you should consult with a criminal defense attorney in this jurisdiction to get actual advice.  I wouldn't recommend searching for answers on the internet; at least if you're looking for reliable answers. 

 
White collar client of mine killed himself this morning. I never saw it coming. I know it's not on me but I sent him his pre-sentence report last week while I'm away on vacation so I wasn't there to settle him down  he did leave a message saying we'd talk after I returned but I guess he couldn't wait. 

The government thought he was a conniving monster but he was just a guy trying to support his family through business practices that were constantly just over the line

sucks
I'm sorry.  Client suicides suck.

 
White collar client of mine killed himself this morning. I never saw it coming. I know it's not on me but I sent him his pre-sentence report last week while I'm away on vacation so I wasn't there to settle him down  he did leave a message saying we'd talk after I returned but I guess he couldn't wait. 

The government thought he was a conniving monster but he was just a guy trying to support his family through business practices that were constantly just over the line

sucks
That happened to me a few years ago. It really sucks.  My guy probably was guilty of some false statements in a federal contract bid, but I'm still not sure they were intentional and there was no way that was the actual target of the investigation (I think they were looking for actual bribes to DC officials).  But they kept broadening the scope of the grand jury subpoena until the legal and discovery fees were killing the company. 

What was frustrating is that I was junior on the case, and I kept saying "we have to shut this down, this is getting outrageous," but no one had the appetite to actually pick a fight with the AUSA.  They hadn't indicted him yet.  Just kept re-opening the GJ subpoena.

 
Judge removed after allegedly allowing lawyer to hear cases, wear robe

A veteran Cook County Circuit Court judge allegedly allowed a lawyer who is running for election to the bench this fall to wear a robe and hear cases at the Markham courthouse late last week, a breach of judicial ethics as well as a potential violation of the law.

The move prompted the county's chief judge, Timothy Evans, to remove the judge from the bench Wednesday until further notice.

The incident occurred in the Markham courtroom of Judge Valarie Turner, who allegedly allowed lawyer Rhonda Crawford to take her place on the bench, Evans said in a statement. Crawford, an employee in Evans' office, presided over at least two cases Aug. 11, both of them traffic cases. One involved a ticket for driving without insurance, the other for driving on the median.

It is not known how Crawford ruled. But both cases will be heard again in front of a real judge, said Pat Milhizer, Evans' spokesman.

Milhizer declined to say if Evans referred the matter to criminal authorities for investigation or to the state disciplinary agencies that handle misconduct allegations against judges and lawyers. Legal experts, though, said the agencies would likely take a keen interest in the matter.

A spokeswoman for Cook County State's Attorney Anita Alvarez said prosecutors, who learned of the incident from a Tribune report, found it "deeply concerning" and planned to review it. Officials at the Judicial Inquiry Board, which oversees and disciplines judges in the state, and the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission, which licenses and disciplines lawyers, declined to comment.

The incident is an embarrassment for Evans and comes at a difficult time for him. The chief of Cook County's courts since 2001, Evans faces challenges from two judges seeking to oust him in internal court elections next month. Thomas Allen, a former Chicago alderman, and Sandra Ramos, a former state prosecutor, are running against Evans to lead one of the largest court systems in the nation with more than 400 judges.

The judge and the lawyer allegedly involved in the incident have operated in relative anonymity in Cook County's bustling legal circles.

Turner, a graduate of Northwestern University and the University of Chicago Law School, is a former federal prosecutor who also worked as an associate at the Kirkland & Ellis law firm. First elected to the bench in 2002, she hears municipal cases in Markham.

Crawford, records show, has worked for Evans' office as a law clerk/staff attorney since 2011. In March, she handily defeated two opponents in the Democratic primary for the 1st Judicial Subcircuit, which includes parts of the South Side and some of the south suburbs.

She is unopposed in the November general election.

The incident shocked judicial ethics experts, who said it would be such an ethical lapse — and possibly a violation of the law for the impersonation of a judge — they were surprised any judge would allow it and any lawyer would actually take the bench. It also raised a host of issues, from questions about the validity of any judgment Crawford might have rendered to the cost and inconvenience of rehearing cases she handled.

Finally, the incident raised questions about the judgment of any lawyers who took part in the cases knowing that Crawford is not a judge, as well as the conduct of any clerks, courtroom deputies or other county employees who regularly work with Turner in her courtroom.

Steven Lubet, a professor at the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law who specializes in legal and judicial ethics, pointed to several rules of professional conduct for judges and lawyers that Turner and Crawford might have violated when Crawford took the bench.

"The alleged conduct presents multiple violations of the ethics rules for both judges and lawyers that prohibit any conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice," Lubet said. "Any judge or lawyer should know that only judges can rule on cases, and it's plainly wrong for a non-judge to sit on the bench in a robe and rule on cases."

Clifford Scott-Rudnick, a professor at The John Marshall Law School in Chicago, said the alleged incident was simply stunning.

"I can't see how someone else can just sit and be a judge," said Scott-Rudnick, who specializes in legal ethics. "Obviously, if you're entitled to have a judge hear your case, it has to be a real judge."

Turner and Crawford could not be reached for comment.

Evans also suspended Crawford from her job pending an internal investigation. She makes nearly $57,000 a year.

Evans made the moves after a meeting with an executive committee of the county's 17 presiding judges.

"The public's confidence in the judiciary is the cornerstone of our system of justice, and I have taken the steps necessary to preserve that confidence," Evans said in the statement. "Because the investigation is pending, I believe it is inappropriate to comment further at this time."

Lawyers were left slack-jawed by the alleged incident as well. Barry Spector, a longtime criminal defense lawyer, said he had seen instances where judges in training would take the bench as a supervising judge stood over them to make sure they handled their cases correctly.

"But that's after they've been sworn in," he said Wednesday. "This is unheard of."
Ah, Cook County. SNAFU  :lmao:

 
That does suck.  Seems like those defendants have a much higher rate of committing suicide.  We just had a guy here locally (not my client) "only" looking at like 3.5 years, had a pretty good case, and killed himself prior to the last day of trial. 
You're absolutely right about the white collar guys committing suicide. This guy knew he was looking at a a likely sentence of around 3 and a max of less than 5. He knew it'd be at a federal minimum camp with other white collar guys. He had a buddy who was already at one of those camps and told him it wasn't really that bad. 

The only other suicide I had in the last decade or so was a guy summonsed in on a low level fraud case. He was a plumber and probably looking at no jail.  I never even met the guy as he didn't show up for the arraignment and was found dead a couple days later. 

It's totally senseless

 
Clearly he had the ability.  Whether it was lawful is a different question.  Whether there's any actual relief you can seek if it was lawful is a whole other question as well. What the specifics motives of this officer probably vary as well, are are unattainable since nobody can read the officer's mind. 

These situations can be frustrating and you should consult with a criminal defense attorney in this jurisdiction to get actual advice.  I wouldn't recommend searching for answers on the internet; at least if you're looking for reliable answers. 
Maybe you misunderstood, or I'm misunderstanding your use of relief.  I'm not wanting anything after the fact, I just want a basic understanding of what I'm allowed to reply with when he starts probing.  Do I even have to answer his question about how much money I have on me?  What does that have to do with anything.  I read @Ditkaless Wonders's encounters when he's pulled over and always seems to know exactly what to say and what his options are, that has to be written somewhere, right?  Do I really need to call a local criminal defense attorney just to understand what questions I do or do not have to answer when being pulled over for a headlight being out?

 
At the risk of turning this into the "ask the adult lawyers for career advice" thread, I have another question I could use some opinions on. 

Context: I spent the the summer with an MBB consulting firm, and received a full time offer. At this point I am 99% sure I don't want to practice law (a few of you can throw in an I told you so there if desired, I get it). In the meantime I have taken a couple basketball writing jobs, and a coaching position with a team. When I finish my degrees I will either be going straight to a basketball team or to the consulting firm.

The question: Are there downsides to taking the bar, if you don't intend to practice? I can see a few upsides but thought I'd ask for experienced opinions. Yall have always been one of the more helpful and supportive groups on FBGs so I appreciate it. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
t the risk of turning this into the "ask the adult lawyers for career advice" thread, I have another question I could use some opinions on. 

Context: I spent the the summer with an MBB consulting firm, and received a full time offer. At this point I am 99% sure I don't want to practice law (a few of you can throw in an I told you so there if desired, I get it). In the meantime I have taken a couple basketball writing jobs, and a coaching position with the school's team. When I finish my degrees I will either be going straight to a basketball team or to the consulting firm.

The question: Are there downsides to taking the bar, if you don't intend to practice? I can see a few upsides but thought I'd ask for experienced opinions. Yall have always been one of the more helpful and supportive groups on FBGs so I appreciate it. 
You've come too far to not finish it.  It will never be easier than it is right now, which is not to say it will be easy.  At this point keep your options open.  If nothing else it may give you some bona fides in your chosen field.  With the current direction of sport the law is quite relevant.  If you have an assignment editor looking to send somebody to player X's paternity case, weapons case, murder trial, or litigation against the league over discipline for drugs or domestic violence it may give you the edge up on getting the assignment even if you have never practiced.  It may turn out  to be a handy credential.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Take the bar.  Keep up with the CLE.  Even if you never intend to use it you have no idea what could happen in your chosen career field in a few years and if all hell breaks loose, you can fall back on a law degree and bar membership to get a job.  No need to think about any more than an insurance policy.

 
I think it's a huge mistake to not take the bar. You can always go on inactive status, but you don't want some employer a few years down the line thinking you couldn't pass. Non-law people don't really understand how all this works. The bar isn't that hard and it covers a base for later plus it keeps your options open. Take it. 

 
Inactive status means no CLE (at least in the three states where I'm inactive) and much lower bar dues (about 1/3 of the cost).  Seems like a no-brainer to take the bar and then go inactive. It's not hard.

 
Been doing a little research. Looks like a number of states reciprocate. 

How ow many don't have CLE? What's DC have?
DC has no CLE requirement. I took VA bar and waived into DC. I went inactive in VA (after getting into the DC bar), just so I don't have to deal with CLE.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Instinctive said:
At the risk of turning this into the "ask the adult lawyers for career advice" thread, I have another question I could use some opinions on. 

Context: I spent the the summer with an MBB consulting firm, and received a full time offer. At this point I am 99% sure I don't want to practice law (a few of you can throw in an I told you so there if desired, I get it). In the meantime I have taken a couple basketball writing jobs, and a coaching position with a team. When I finish my degrees I will either be going straight to a basketball team or to the consulting firm.

The question: Are there downsides to taking the bar, if you don't intend to practice? I can see a few upsides but thought I'd ask for experienced opinions. Yall have always been one of the more helpful and supportive groups on FBGs so I appreciate it. 
If you're going to be a sports agent, there are several downsides to taking the bar, whether you pass or not.

 
This has been a very interesting calendar year so far.  The culmination of events that business and lawyer life have been through have nudged me to listen to some people telling me what my true talents are.  It might end up that they are not in my current practice in its current form.  Don't know if I necessarily agree, but the people I take advice from I trust with my life and so with them as backdrop and somewhat for gits and shiggles I did a small search for open positions that fit what I think is a better calling for me at this stage in my life.

And in about 10 seconds of searching online half heartedly, I found a listing for what I would consider pretty dang close to my dream job within the legal field.  In the sense that if I could literally write a job description for what I would be willing to give up private practice and having no boss for, I would have written this posting almost word for word.  

I don't take back anything I have said about going out on my own.  It's still the best professional thing I've ever done.  But I find myself more and more drained too much at the end of the day and not giving my family my all, something that is far more important to me than anything else.  And so, with all that as backdrop, I applied.  It might, and probably will, go nowhere.  It's a plumb opening that you would stupid not to want if you practiced in this state.  And the nature of the job requires me to not say anything about the job at all, so no specifics.

It's been an interesting weekend now because of it.  This is the first time since I went out on my own that I am giving any credence at all to changing that dynamic.  Still don't want to.  But if by some small chance I get called for an interview on this thing, and then by a smaller chance if I get an offer.  At this moment, right now, I think I'd be a moron of titanic proportions to not take it and run.  Probably all much ado about nothing though.  Still, the thought of doing away with some of the daily crap I deal with.......... it sounds good.

 
Seems like a pretty clear answer re: bar. Thanks team. 

Will have to figure out which state in a couple years when the time comes. 

 
I'm not a lawyerguy, but thought it was fascinating and wanted to throw this in here:

Debt collection service, as part of an asset seizure, buys the FDCPA lawsuit against them, then asks that the lawsuit be dismissed.  Honestly I'm horrifically impressed with the brass ones on the lawyers who pulled this off, but chagrined that the judge allowed this stunt through the system.  

Thoughts on the chances of this being upheld on appeal?

 
I'm not a lawyerguy, but thought it was fascinating and wanted to throw this in here:

Debt collection service, as part of an asset seizure, buys the FDCPA lawsuit against them, then asks that the lawsuit be dismissed.  Honestly I'm horrifically impressed with the brass ones on the lawyers who pulled this off, but chagrined that the judge allowed this stunt through the system.  

Thoughts on the chances of this being upheld on appeal?
Give credit where due that is brilliant if it works.

 
Yankee23Fan said:
This has been a very interesting calendar year so far.  The culmination of events that business and lawyer life have been through have nudged me to listen to some people telling me what my true talents are.  It might end up that they are not in my current practice in its current form.  Don't know if I necessarily agree, but the people I take advice from I trust with my life and so with them as backdrop and somewhat for gits and shiggles I did a small search for open positions that fit what I think is a better calling for me at this stage in my life.

And in about 10 seconds of searching online half heartedly, I found a listing for what I would consider pretty dang close to my dream job within the legal field.  In the sense that if I could literally write a job description for what I would be willing to give up private practice and having no boss for, I would have written this posting almost word for word.  

I don't take back anything I have said about going out on my own.  It's still the best professional thing I've ever done.  But I find myself more and more drained too much at the end of the day and not giving my family my all, something that is far more important to me than anything else.  And so, with all that as backdrop, I applied.  It might, and probably will, go nowhere.  It's a plumb opening that you would stupid not to want if you practiced in this state.  And the nature of the job requires me to not say anything about the job at all, so no specifics.

It's been an interesting weekend now because of it.  This is the first time since I went out on my own that I am giving any credence at all to changing that dynamic.  Still don't want to.  But if by some small chance I get called for an interview on this thing, and then by a smaller chance if I get an offer.  At this moment, right now, I think I'd be a moron of titanic proportions to not take it and run.  Probably all much ado about nothing though.  Still, the thought of doing away with some of the daily crap I deal with.......... it sounds good.
Well I am not a law guy but I understand needing to make a change. Best of luck my friend.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top