- Quickdraw McLaw
- Job Tips
- 27 Comments
- 204 Views
Most of us are smart enough to avoid the topic entirely, but from time to time the topic of politics pops up in the workplace. How do you deal with it? Do you join in the fun or run the other way? Does your firm lean a certain way? Do you lean the other? How do you deal with being the sole bleeding heart among a bunch of Trump loving conservatives? What do you do when your staff ask you who you’re voting for? Is there a difference when you’re talking about electing judges? Why?
I try to instigate as much as possible and then sit back and watch the fireworks! People take themselves way too seriously sometimes…
My firm is way to the right. I was on the right but have been shifting left. I try to avoid the topic as much as possible. When my boss mentions something about politics, I just nod and try to keep my mouth shut. I have no problem talking about judges because it's germane to our business and if we don't talk about it who will? At election time, I will discuss different races on an individual basis if someone asks, but I'm not wearing campaign buttons or handing out fliers (other than judges).
I listen politely and then explain that I used to be a liberal too – but then I grew up.
Anyone ever wonder if only one or two people actually comment on these posts, but posts as different posters to keep the conversation going or take off in different directions? Just a thought
🙂
No. I know for a fact there are at least three of us.
Its probably 4 of us, but I am at least two of them.
Slightly off topic: But if a firm says they want you to do pre-lit stuff for them are they essentially pigeon holing you into a case manager type of position? Will they expect you to be paid less than those attorneys who do "litigation."
I do not think it's "pigeon holing." To learn personal injury law, it is essential to have any lawyer new to that arena to do case manager-type pre-lit tasks. I went from being commercial litigation attorney into PI and was forced to do pre-lit for about a year (without any assistance); it allowed me to learn the ropes of PI for car accident cases.
It will be drudgery for a while, but great training for you now and in the future when you have your own firm. stick with it and take the long range picture.
Pre lit attorneys do get paid less than litigating attorneys. It is a more specialized skill set. But you do need to earn your stripes. Just like being the bag boy to the manager, and working your way up…the experience will help you. You will also probably be doing the negotiations, intakes, case manager questions/case review, and calls to the adjusters. Doesn't hurt to be a case manager, you will learn a ton. However, we would not trust a new hire with our cases, been burned too many times. Got to earn your stripes. It is not as bad as the 11:26 poster below makes it out to be. If you are working on the cases, it should not be as awful as you would not have let cases get that bad. 11:26 should find happiness and get a different profession.
Great anecdote from Entrepreneur.com: Nipsey Husdle saw success because he was willing to do any work, no matter how menial it may have seemed at the time. Even as he soared further and further toward the top, he still maintained a willingness to do the tasks that others might consider to be below them. “Most people want to skip the process,” he said, “not knowing that when you skip steps, you miss the lessons.”
Thanks to everyone for the info, I love the Nipsey Hustle reference! 🙂
Your job will consist of being yelled at by angry clients who have not been called back by their case managers, whose cars have been auctioned because no one told them to make sure they were pulled from the tow yard, or who have unrealistic expectations. You will run from fire to fire and it will be your fault when a client goes to a different firm.
You will also learn to negotiate liens and order medical records. Such fun!
As far as discussing judges in the work place, and in the court house, things seem to have really changed, and for the better.
These days, let's say you are speaking to a colleague while waiting for a hearing in the hallway, and you really light into some judge that you do not think highly of, it's a pretty safe discussion. The other attorney will either agree with you with enthusiasm,or somewhat agree with you, or at worse, will indicate that they don't have a major problem with that particular judge, and they will then tell you the ones who they really dislike, and the conversation progresses from there. Generally, you are on safe terrain with these types of conversations because our bar has grown quite a bit in the last three decades, is far less incestuous(figuratively speaking) and far less insular. Plus the general respect for our judiciary is far lower than it was 30 year ago.
But now let's get in the time machine and travel back 30 to 35 year, when I started practicing. The above referenced conversation would occur only at potentially great professional risk and peril. Unless you knew the attorney really well, you ran a real risk that he and/or his firm were big supporters and really tied in with the judge. While these days, the attorney being a "supporter" probably merely means that he/she covers their bets and donates to most incumbent judges, but they are seldom really aligned with the judge in any meaningful way. We are simply a much larger legal community.
So, if we lost a motion 30 or 35 years ago, and were convinced that the judge really blew the call, how did we handle it? Well, unlike today, it would be too risky to bitch to lawyers on the way out of the building(unless we knew and trusted them really well). Instead, we would wait till we returned to our office and bitch to an attorney at the firm, or, if we had a close friend who we took the bar exam with or something like that, we might bitch to him/her.
I recently had lunch with four other attorneys who have all been licensed for over 30 years, and when I mentioned all this, they remarked that now that they think about it, how true it all is. They all mentioned that they tended to bite their tongue, no matter how upset they were, when they were on court premises, and would never really feel safe to light into the judge until they were back at the office and speaking to another attorney who was their supervisor or who had worked on the motion with them.
So, in my view, things have changed for the better. There is more accountability in the sense that people speak a lot more openly about bad judges, and such judges also on occasion attract well-supported, well-financed opponents. That almost never happened 30 years ago, no matter how bad the judge was.
That all said, even today there are some instances where a firm is perceived as being really juiced in with a particular judge, so it is best to be careful. But this situation is nothing compared to how rampant this dynamic was three decades ago.
What would be the consequence for bitching about a judge to a lawyer who was "tied in" with the judge? They would rat you out to the judge later? You could expect more bad rulings based on the judge being biased against you for your comments?
In my experience, the conservative/libertarian types are fairly open minded and willing to discuss/debate most issue, except maybe abortion. The left ones have zero tolerance. I used to be able to joke around but not any more. Civil discourse is mostly dead.
Open-minded libertarian? Oh yeah, they're a dime a dozen.
Had a judge remark a bunch of anti immigrant rhetoric on the bench between headings. Didn't feel comfortable because I didn't want to say anything and prejudice my client.
I am a court reporter in town, looking at a recent transcript, I am shocked at how some of the judges speak to the attorneys, Bulla and Gonzales(sp), wow. Coming from San Diego, the judges did not disrespect attorneys the way the do here.
I do not know about Judge Gonzalez, but when she was Discovery Commissioner Bulla was, typically =rude, short and condescending with me. And I don't think it was the substance of my arguments, some were a stretch, but most were pretty mundane, run of the mill discovery issues. Just an overall hostile demeanor, at least with me.
No, she started accusing me of shit I did not do. Real classy lady.
10:12, I think we have a winner right here.
In sidebar I have had Judge say foul things, make fun of a party's looks, and tell me they had to get going for a lunch date … there's more but I'm still working haha
Reid lost his case. Jury decided they couldn't even tell if the right defendant was in the courtroom.
I hope he gets hit with a massive attorney fee award.