« "And a thousand telephones that will not ring..." | Main | Charon QC »
October 21, 2006
The Kid From Brooklyn sounds off on 1st, 14th amendments.
It's here. See his website. Hear his other podcasts. Forget about his language. KFB, or Big Mike, provides a service. He is neither liberal nor conservative. He's just honest, and I wish lawyers all over the world had 1/3 of his courage rather than persisting in hiding behind our cocktail party civility and our prissy, overly-diplomatic facades. KFB may help not only to destroy the epidemic of political correctness--but also prompt lawyers to drop our weasel ways and just say it every once in a while.
Lawyers, as KFB has noted in other posts, need to get over themselves. In America, nearly anyone with a college degree can become a lawyer. And that has happened. Clients and juries are often way smarter than the attorneys involved. Which would be amusing--if it weren't for the fact that most of us aren't even that good at our practice areas, don't care about the profession, and never understood for longer than an hour that clients are the main event. It's all lip service and b.s. Clients and the general public notice it.
All over the world, lawyers have become an insular "club", diminishing in prestige, and with little interest in clients or the public good. The club for many lawyers has become a third-rate bowling alley with watered-down drinks, bad food and a lousy staff. None of us, including the inspiring exceptions, have ever been royalty. Now, it's getting worse. We are quite comfortable with mediocrity in lawyering, a stale and smug provincial culture, and a focus off our clients.
Posted by JD Hull at October 21, 2006 04:33 PM
Comments
JD
Your self serving BS is over the top this time. What you say is true, but only about big clients, big law, and the wanna bes to big law.
Clients are not the main event. Never have been and never will be, for two reaons. First, business clients are dishonest and stupid, driven by greed, who know only dishonesty and leverage.
Take a look at HP or the option back dating bs. Who could say that clients are way smarter than the attorneys involved. Dunn is going to jail with some of her in-house lawyers. Same for Merck or asbestos or Enron---the list is just endless.
Second, business clients have made the courts so political that no decent person would even attempt to become a judge today. We have a long retention ballot in November, with 20 judges who barely got 50% approval from the bar on the ballot. The only reason I am going to vote "yes" is the known, unknown---their replacements could be worse.
The latest is that the CC wants a special court for claims against the big 4 accounting firms---fearful that their frauds are going to put them out of business and leave them with no one to "audit" the books.
That is just too funny, How hard is it to count cash. Of course, the answer is that counting cash only means no lies and deceptions. When one learns that all the accounting rules are adopted by shadow voting one starts to get the picture. Shadow voting is where a motion is made on an accounting rule and a mock vote is held to see the likely result. Then matters are recessed so that the industry can be consulted, pressure can be brougt to change votes, etc. It is sick sick stuff.
In the future show some courage. If you want to blast the profession, give us the first paragraph of the newspaper story---who, what, when, where, how, and best yet "why?" You vague generalities are just self-promotion. You say there is a case where the jury was smarter than the attorney. Show me, I have never seen such a case, but a lot of bad verdicts come to mind (OJ, for starters)
Posted by: Moe Levine at October 22, 2006 03:00 AM
Moe--It's just my experience over the last 20+ years. Nearly all of our client reps are GCs. GCs are smarter, and much better, since the 1980s. Corporate counsel know what the are getting/not getting in their outside counsel. On the other hand, based on what I and lawyers in my firm (and others) are seeing every day, the quality of lawyers in larger firms--of, say, 500 plus--has noticeably gone down. Really down. (A lot of that is attributable to the fact that lawyers don't like what they are doing that much.) Mega-firms got big by acquiring lawyers they would not have even interviewed 20 years ago. Re: jury members and individual non-corporate clients, they are quite smart unless they have a peasant-mentality about the superiority of lawyers. Most of them don't. And they shouldn't. Lawyers are great people but as professionals they are mediocre, a dime a dozen, and they are just folks. That's happening at all size firms. Dan
Posted by: Dan Hull at October 22, 2006 11:03 AM
JD
Given the sheer number of option back dating investigations, alone, it is impossible to argue that GCs today have more honesty, integrity, and judgment than 20 years ago.
As for the quality of big law lawyers, the latest HBReview says it would help if they would have some balance in their life and get some sleep. Interesting stuff--you should read it---has some great pointers on jet lag and sleeping every day.
When I see big firm lawyers I see nothing but mendacity or worse and the associates seem to think that is what their job is about---they are qualified to work for Karl Rove in propaganda but that is about all.
Posted by: Moe Levine at October 22, 2006 03:38 PM
me spam? surely not
regardless, the sleep stuff in the HBReview is worth reading.
second, did you get the link to the up and out piece on why law firms push associates out the door?
Posted by: Moe Levine at October 24, 2006 09:41 AM
Moe--Send me the up/out link again. I was even thinking about it this AM. Can't find it. Dan
Posted by: Dan Hull at October 24, 2006 09:50 AM