When I look at my job, at my education, at all I’ve done with the professional side of my life, I realize more and more that I am, in the grand scheme of things, completely unnecessary. As an attorney, my job exists only at this particular time in history and only in this certain place. It exists only because of a complex and utterly manmade structure that did not exist in the past in its current form and is not guaranteed to exist for any part of the future. Without this fictional system, I have no professional usefulness at all. I cannot fix anything tangible (human or otherwise), I cannot create anything, I cannot go to another place or time and provide anything of value to anyone.
The more I think on these altogether unpleasant facts, the more I am committed to help the boys avoid ever being in this situation as adults. Yes, I want them to have a college degree; yes, I am fine with them being suited professionals scurrying off to an office every day. The critical difference is in what they do in that office: it has to be something that has universal applicability, that is creative in nature, and that provides a direct and tangible benefit to others. I want them to have skills that can survive any change in the fictional social system in which we currently live, that can transfer to any other environment and still be useful.
And as much as I want them to have a useful “educated” life. I also want the boys to be able to take care of things that most of my generation has lost the ability to take care of. They’re going to be men someday and as such they need to know how to shingle a roof, frame a house (I’d settle for a shed), plant a garden, and pour a sidewalk’s worth of concrete. For the most part our society has lost the knowledge that there is great value in skilled, creative work, and we need to change that, one person at a time. If my boys can grow up to see the great worth there is in working with their hands, we’re a small step down a long road to help people begin to respect such work again.
What of the boys in all this, you ask? What do they themselves gain in all my plans for them? Well, the fact that they will wake up at 40 and know that their work matters seems to be gain enough - at least it does to me. Additionally, they will have the satisfaction that comes with creating something yourself, helping someone in a tangible way, participating meaningfully in real life instead of in some fabricated facsimile thereof. If I can work as a parent to give them a fraction of that, then perhaps the usefulness of my personal life will somehow redeem the futility of my professional one. Please, may it be so.
Showing posts with label Lawyering. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lawyering. Show all posts
Friday, February 18, 2011
Friday, October 8, 2010
Being a Zealous Advocate
For many years, lawyers were called upon to be "zealous advocates" for their clients. This language has fallen out of favor with the attorney-ethics community, and now no state in the US uses such term. The Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct (and is that title so lawyerly or what? Why use two or three words when you can use more?) requires "competent and diligent" representation, although it does use some more high-flown language in its preamble, where both "zealous" and "advocate" appear - just not next to one another.
But what did it mean to be a "zealous advocate?" Why did that term motivate attorneys for over 200 years? I dug out the OED (and accompanying magnifying glass) and looked for the word etymologies and definitions to see if I could find a clue:
advocate ... [a. OFr. avocat, ad. L. advocatus, one summoned or 'called to' another, esp. one called in to aid one's cause in a court of justice; prop. pa. pple. of advoca-re, f. ad. to + vocaire to call. ... lit. one called in, or liable to be called upon, to defend or speak for. ... 2. fig. and gen. One who pleads, intercedes, or speaks for, or in behalf of, another; a pleader, intercessor, defender. ... b. Specially, applied to Christ as the Intercessor for our sins.
zeal ... 2. In a specialized sense: Ardent love or affection; fervent devotion or attachment to (a person or a thing).
zealous ... 1. Full of or incited by zeal; characterized by zeal or passionate ardour; feverently devoted to the promotion of some person or cause; actively enthusiastic.
So, in essence, attorneys are ones who are called to be a passionate and enthusiastic voice for their clients, to plead for the promotion of their cause with fervor, and to (how odd) have an attachment and affection for their client and their client's interests.
Boiled down, we speak for them. We are called to be their voice. In representing them, we act not on our own behalf but always on theirs - we give our voice to them and their interests, never to our own. All of which sounds fairly easy when you think of the classic lawyer example in fiction: Atticus Finch, who gives a voice to a man who has none in society. But none of which sounds like what we do each day when we walk into the office each morning and pick up where we left off the night before - and that office is just one of thousands in the sea of minnows that make up a large corporation.
It is hard to square being a zealous advocate with working for a large company, full of people with competing interests. It is confusing sometimes to sort out the true interest of our company as the client, and make that our goal - shutting out all the competing voices in an effort to remember whose voice we are called to be and on whose behalf we are really interceding. Nevertheless, it is a calling, and a noble one at that. Being given the opportunity to be a voice for another is no small responsibility; may we all fulfill that responsiblity in a way that would make Atticus proud.
Postscript: Many thanks to the Livesays, who used this "advocate" definition in another context and got the wheels of my brain turning on the subject.
But what did it mean to be a "zealous advocate?" Why did that term motivate attorneys for over 200 years? I dug out the OED (and accompanying magnifying glass) and looked for the word etymologies and definitions to see if I could find a clue:
advocate ... [a. OFr. avocat, ad. L. advocatus, one summoned or 'called to' another, esp. one called in to aid one's cause in a court of justice; prop. pa. pple. of advoca-re, f. ad. to + vocaire to call. ... lit. one called in, or liable to be called upon, to defend or speak for. ... 2. fig. and gen. One who pleads, intercedes, or speaks for, or in behalf of, another; a pleader, intercessor, defender. ... b. Specially, applied to Christ as the Intercessor for our sins.
zeal ... 2. In a specialized sense: Ardent love or affection; fervent devotion or attachment to (a person or a thing).
zealous ... 1. Full of or incited by zeal; characterized by zeal or passionate ardour; feverently devoted to the promotion of some person or cause; actively enthusiastic.
So, in essence, attorneys are ones who are called to be a passionate and enthusiastic voice for their clients, to plead for the promotion of their cause with fervor, and to (how odd) have an attachment and affection for their client and their client's interests.
Boiled down, we speak for them. We are called to be their voice. In representing them, we act not on our own behalf but always on theirs - we give our voice to them and their interests, never to our own. All of which sounds fairly easy when you think of the classic lawyer example in fiction: Atticus Finch, who gives a voice to a man who has none in society. But none of which sounds like what we do each day when we walk into the office each morning and pick up where we left off the night before - and that office is just one of thousands in the sea of minnows that make up a large corporation.
It is hard to square being a zealous advocate with working for a large company, full of people with competing interests. It is confusing sometimes to sort out the true interest of our company as the client, and make that our goal - shutting out all the competing voices in an effort to remember whose voice we are called to be and on whose behalf we are really interceding. Nevertheless, it is a calling, and a noble one at that. Being given the opportunity to be a voice for another is no small responsibility; may we all fulfill that responsiblity in a way that would make Atticus proud.
Postscript: Many thanks to the Livesays, who used this "advocate" definition in another context and got the wheels of my brain turning on the subject.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Bragging about my Husband
A co-worker of mine reports that a mutual friend told her yesterday:
"That man knows more about Texas law than any attorney I've ever met."
It's why I married him. Honest.
"That man knows more about Texas law than any attorney I've ever met."
It's why I married him. Honest.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Post-Ike Legal Advice
Ronnie Lipman has an article in the Chronicle today with good answers to common property law questions post-Ike (e.g., who pays to clean up the tree that fell in my yard?). Check it out.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Over-Billing and Ethics, or How to Make it Stop
McAfee is suing its former counsel for over-billing its files - to the tune of $12 million:
""[WilmerHale] intentionally overworked and churned the representation of Goyal; shamelessly employing over 100 WilmerHale timekeepers in the feeding frenzy," McAfee alleged in a complaint filed in the Eastern District of Texas earlier this year. "Defendant's bills reflect at least 16 partners, 34 associate attorneys, 10 legal assistants and 49 staff personnel -- how else could they amass this enormous trove of cash?" the complaint read."
When you bill that many hours, with that many people - all at rates of $300, $400, even $800 an hour - you're bound to make clients angry. I have no idea if Wilmer Hale is guilty in this case, but I do know that "churning the file" is SOP at many large firms. "I don't care how you do it, just bill 2,000 hours a year" has been told to far too many associates for this not to be the case.
Large law firms are the dinosaurs of the legal world; if only there was an asteroid with their names on it coming down the pike! But as long as large clients pay the bills, there won't be any such thing - just business as usual, with partners doing everything they can to maximize their own profits at the expense of the legal profession's reputation.
On a personal level, an attorney at one of these firms might ask - what does this rotten system have to do with me? I'm just doing my job. I hope things change, but until then, I have work to do, a family to provide for, and I can't do anything about it. I would say, in response to that, once you let that worm of greed, of uncaring, into your soul, you will never be the same again. You lose your principles, your perspective, your very life.
As for not being able to do anything about this? Here is a quote from Jan de Hartog's The Peaceable Kingdom - it's a fictionalized history of the founding of the Quakers. Margaret Best (one of the original Quakers) is talking to her husband, Tom (a judge), about the deplorable fact that children are in prison, and how she is going to go into prison to care for those children:
"In a last effort to save her from herself he went toward her, took her by the shoulders and said, 'Look, dear heart, of course thou art right. I too am deeply distressed that the law imposes such an inhuman penalty on children... I am yearning for the day when this will no longer be necessary' ... 'Tom, love, doesn't thou see, that time is now ... the moment thy conscience tells thee something is wrong, that is the time to stop it.'"
If you don't participate in a broken and greed-fueled system, it will stop existing. If you do nothing, then nothing will change.
""[WilmerHale] intentionally overworked and churned the representation of Goyal; shamelessly employing over 100 WilmerHale timekeepers in the feeding frenzy," McAfee alleged in a complaint filed in the Eastern District of Texas earlier this year. "Defendant's bills reflect at least 16 partners, 34 associate attorneys, 10 legal assistants and 49 staff personnel -- how else could they amass this enormous trove of cash?" the complaint read."
When you bill that many hours, with that many people - all at rates of $300, $400, even $800 an hour - you're bound to make clients angry. I have no idea if Wilmer Hale is guilty in this case, but I do know that "churning the file" is SOP at many large firms. "I don't care how you do it, just bill 2,000 hours a year" has been told to far too many associates for this not to be the case.
Large law firms are the dinosaurs of the legal world; if only there was an asteroid with their names on it coming down the pike! But as long as large clients pay the bills, there won't be any such thing - just business as usual, with partners doing everything they can to maximize their own profits at the expense of the legal profession's reputation.
On a personal level, an attorney at one of these firms might ask - what does this rotten system have to do with me? I'm just doing my job. I hope things change, but until then, I have work to do, a family to provide for, and I can't do anything about it. I would say, in response to that, once you let that worm of greed, of uncaring, into your soul, you will never be the same again. You lose your principles, your perspective, your very life.
As for not being able to do anything about this? Here is a quote from Jan de Hartog's The Peaceable Kingdom - it's a fictionalized history of the founding of the Quakers. Margaret Best (one of the original Quakers) is talking to her husband, Tom (a judge), about the deplorable fact that children are in prison, and how she is going to go into prison to care for those children:
"In a last effort to save her from herself he went toward her, took her by the shoulders and said, 'Look, dear heart, of course thou art right. I too am deeply distressed that the law imposes such an inhuman penalty on children... I am yearning for the day when this will no longer be necessary' ... 'Tom, love, doesn't thou see, that time is now ... the moment thy conscience tells thee something is wrong, that is the time to stop it.'"
If you don't participate in a broken and greed-fueled system, it will stop existing. If you do nothing, then nothing will change.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
The Singing Husband
Now that Husband has his new job, his spirits are so high I wonder sometimes if he's actually touching the floor. It's an amazing thing to see. He worked so hard for this opportunity; in-house jobs in his field of law are hard to find, and he put in a lot of hours at his former job, working hard and waiting patiently for something like this to come along. In moving from one position to another he's also been able to see how much his clients, co-counsel and even opposing counsel appreciated him at his former job - the stack of emails he's received are something else. I am so proud of him.
Here's a secret: when he's happy, Husband sings. And sings. And sings some more. Just because I love to share, here are some of his favorites:
Smiling Face
Rudy
Fly Me to the Moon
Naive Melody
How Sweet it is
Here's a secret: when he's happy, Husband sings. And sings. And sings some more. Just because I love to share, here are some of his favorites:
Smiling Face
Rudy
Fly Me to the Moon
Naive Melody
How Sweet it is
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Goodbye to All That
I try not to talk about my job(s) on this blog, mostly out of a lawyerly sense of caution. But today is the last day of a long work project for me, and I want to say a little bit about it and the people I've worked with through it.
For the past 18 months I've been supporting sales teams at my former employer. I stopped being a full time employee there in 2005, and came back as a part time contractor to take on this project. This time around it's been a great assignment, mostly due to the people I've had the privilege of working with.
Sales people get a lot of grief, but the people I've been supporting deserve none of it. So here's my tribute to y'all: Tammy, Michelle, Nona, Tom and Tom, Jack, Kevin, Joe, Kathy, Jon, Ahmad, David, Ann, and everyone else. Thanks guys, for a great time.
For the past 18 months I've been supporting sales teams at my former employer. I stopped being a full time employee there in 2005, and came back as a part time contractor to take on this project. This time around it's been a great assignment, mostly due to the people I've had the privilege of working with.
Sales people get a lot of grief, but the people I've been supporting deserve none of it. So here's my tribute to y'all: Tammy, Michelle, Nona, Tom and Tom, Jack, Kevin, Joe, Kathy, Jon, Ahmad, David, Ann, and everyone else. Thanks guys, for a great time.
May the road rise up to meet you.
May the wind be always at your back.
May the sun shine warm upon your face; the rains fall soft upon
your fields and until we meet again,
may God hold you in the palm of His hand.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Let's Kill All the Lawyers
This is disgusting, but unfortunately common:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/03/the_lawyers_party.html
This "something is wrong - let's blame a lawyer" attitude has to go. Does anyone with this grievance mentality ever stop to think how few attorneys are actually involved in the kind of litigation that makes them so hot under the collar? A large "full-service" law firm is not composed strictly of litigators but also includes specialists in tax, corporate law, bankruptcy, wills and estates, intellectual property, energy law, securities, labor & employment, banking regulation, insurance law, international trade, health care, environmental, private equity, construction and real estate - the list goes on, With the exception of bankruptcy lawyers, none of the aforementioned specialists goes to court frequently if at all.
The vast majority of attorneys spend their time assisting business in its day to day operations; the financial markets and just about everything else would grind to a halt pretty quickly if it weren't for these attorneys. Insulting hardworking people like this only adds to the divisiveness already rife in our political culture, and it needs to stop.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/03/the_lawyers_party.html
This "something is wrong - let's blame a lawyer" attitude has to go. Does anyone with this grievance mentality ever stop to think how few attorneys are actually involved in the kind of litigation that makes them so hot under the collar? A large "full-service" law firm is not composed strictly of litigators but also includes specialists in tax, corporate law, bankruptcy, wills and estates, intellectual property, energy law, securities, labor & employment, banking regulation, insurance law, international trade, health care, environmental, private equity, construction and real estate - the list goes on, With the exception of bankruptcy lawyers, none of the aforementioned specialists goes to court frequently if at all.
The vast majority of attorneys spend their time assisting business in its day to day operations; the financial markets and just about everything else would grind to a halt pretty quickly if it weren't for these attorneys. Insulting hardworking people like this only adds to the divisiveness already rife in our political culture, and it needs to stop.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Big Firms S*ck
This a long but well-worth-it read, compliments of Instapundit (who else?):
http://abovethelaw.com/2008/05/paul_hastings_farewell_email_a.php
Any attorney or law student who deludes themselves into thinking that this kind of treatment is unusual is just that - delusional. This is how big firms operate - it's the bottom line and nothing else. They treat people worse than the largest and greediest corporations ever dream of; after all, who is going to hire an attorney who sues his/her former firm? Law firms know they are almost bullet-proof, and frequently fire people (or shove them out the door) without any severance or warning whatsoever. The fact that this firm offered this asssociate money is real proof of how guilty they feel - most attorneys get nothing more than help carrying their boxes to the curb.
Read and learn.
http://abovethelaw.com/2008/05/paul_hastings_farewell_email_a.php
Any attorney or law student who deludes themselves into thinking that this kind of treatment is unusual is just that - delusional. This is how big firms operate - it's the bottom line and nothing else. They treat people worse than the largest and greediest corporations ever dream of; after all, who is going to hire an attorney who sues his/her former firm? Law firms know they are almost bullet-proof, and frequently fire people (or shove them out the door) without any severance or warning whatsoever. The fact that this firm offered this asssociate money is real proof of how guilty they feel - most attorneys get nothing more than help carrying their boxes to the curb.
Read and learn.
Friday, May 2, 2008
Bowery Bum Fridays
We don't have casual Friday in my office, we have dress-like-a-hobo day. I swear, most of the people around here look like they spent the night in the bus station. Jeans have dragging, ripped hems, Man Mumus* abound, and sandals - if you are a man I do not want to see your toes in the office, please.
I worked a long time at a software company, and I've seen sloppy. I'm also a Northeastern girl and have pretty much dumbed down the dress code at every place I've worked. But these people got lost on the way to clean out the garage today. Maybe they're just as tired as I am.
*Man Mumu: printed, oversized Tommy Bahama-style shirts, worn untucked to hide your joe.
I worked a long time at a software company, and I've seen sloppy. I'm also a Northeastern girl and have pretty much dumbed down the dress code at every place I've worked. But these people got lost on the way to clean out the garage today. Maybe they're just as tired as I am.
*Man Mumu: printed, oversized Tommy Bahama-style shirts, worn untucked to hide your joe.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Heller and the 2nd Amendment
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120579647855943453.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries
Great piece that clearly sets out the issues in Heller, the Supreme Court case challenging DC's complete ban on the possession of operable weapons. It also discusses how a ruling in Heller might/might not affect similar bans around the country.
Great piece that clearly sets out the issues in Heller, the Supreme Court case challenging DC's complete ban on the possession of operable weapons. It also discusses how a ruling in Heller might/might not affect similar bans around the country.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Why I love being a lawyer
My firm has been given a chance to have some of its members write about "why I love being a lawyer" for one of the Bar journals. I'm cetainly not going to raise my hand and volunteer, but I was fascinated by the topic, so I'll write about it here instead.
I love being a lawyer for very selfish reasons. I wish I could say that I love it because I help the poor or bring justice to the oppressed. No, this is not standard Tari sarcasm. I believe God wants me to use my talents for His purposes, and I can't say that my law practice does that. I have a hard time with that part of things - it disappoints me. But I do like what I do; it suits me.
I like that every question is different from the last one. That facts change answers and every analysis is different. I like it when my clients are smart, as they frequently are, and that they teach me new things about their business that enable me to help them more. I like it that I can have at least a superficial conversation about a thousand different subjects, frequently just because I've reviewed or drafted documents relating to them. I've learned how developers create software code, the general layout of a power generating plant, that the US government funds IT development in Israel as a part of military aid, and that however much Americans complain about how much money US lawyers make, you've never been truly soaked until you've hired overseas outside counsel. These kinds of things make it easier to talk to all kinds of people. I have a hard time talking to people I don't know well, so all these bits and pieces mean more to me than just the work I performed or the project that someone else completed with my help.
I like that my practice allows me to work from anywhere. I can pick my boys up from school every day, take them to swimming and work from there. I love my firm for giving me this flexibility. I love that an equity partner in the office has much the same schedule; I love knowing that, if I ever get that far down the road in my career, that flexibility won't go away.
I love that the people in my office are smarter than me and have so much to teach me. I also love that sometimes we're holding hands in the dark together, learning about a new issue. Being surrounded by people who can say "I don't know" and accept that from you as well - at least as a starting point for going after the answer - is a true blessing. Egos aren't welcome in my office. I may like that reason better than all the others combined.
I love being a lawyer for very selfish reasons. I wish I could say that I love it because I help the poor or bring justice to the oppressed. No, this is not standard Tari sarcasm. I believe God wants me to use my talents for His purposes, and I can't say that my law practice does that. I have a hard time with that part of things - it disappoints me. But I do like what I do; it suits me.
I like that every question is different from the last one. That facts change answers and every analysis is different. I like it when my clients are smart, as they frequently are, and that they teach me new things about their business that enable me to help them more. I like it that I can have at least a superficial conversation about a thousand different subjects, frequently just because I've reviewed or drafted documents relating to them. I've learned how developers create software code, the general layout of a power generating plant, that the US government funds IT development in Israel as a part of military aid, and that however much Americans complain about how much money US lawyers make, you've never been truly soaked until you've hired overseas outside counsel. These kinds of things make it easier to talk to all kinds of people. I have a hard time talking to people I don't know well, so all these bits and pieces mean more to me than just the work I performed or the project that someone else completed with my help.
I like that my practice allows me to work from anywhere. I can pick my boys up from school every day, take them to swimming and work from there. I love my firm for giving me this flexibility. I love that an equity partner in the office has much the same schedule; I love knowing that, if I ever get that far down the road in my career, that flexibility won't go away.
I love that the people in my office are smarter than me and have so much to teach me. I also love that sometimes we're holding hands in the dark together, learning about a new issue. Being surrounded by people who can say "I don't know" and accept that from you as well - at least as a starting point for going after the answer - is a true blessing. Egos aren't welcome in my office. I may like that reason better than all the others combined.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
