I like being retired. I really do. But someone called a pandemic and everyone showed up.
My plans to travel the world have been on hold for a while. So, now and then I get bored. When that happens, I think about whether I should go back to work. Thankfully, the thought usually passes quickly.
Yet another public service. Lawyers are busy people and often do not have the time to get to personal stuff, so I thought that I would help by providing a first rough draft of New Year’s Resolutions for you. Of course, feel free to use this as a precedent and edit for your personal circumstances.
We lawyers like to use definitions in our writing. It makes the substance of the document easier to read because it allows the drafter to avoid repeating things or using terms in an inconsistent manner. I am going to try that here, knowing that I may offend someone or other.
In this article, ‘marriage’ means a romantic relationship (whether or not having a sexual component) between any two or more people of any genders or without a gender, whether or not sanctified by a religious or civil ceremony of any type, and ‘spouse’ means any of the human beings who are involved in such a relationship. I hope that I have included everyone, but I will not be surprised if I have not. Frankly, I am having trouble keeping up.
“Let me have men about me that are fat; Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o’nights: Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.
Shakespeare, Julius Caesar
I used to think too much. About my files. About my billable hours. About marketing. About how to run the firm better. And mostly, about how much in common I had with Cassandra.
One of the best compliments that I ever received when I was practicing law was that I had the ability to ‘see around corners,’ meaning that I was often able to predict where problems were going to arise out of a proposed course of action. That comes with general knowledge, thoughtfulness, experience, and a healthy (or unhealthy?) dose of paranoia.
Speaking of paranoia, some years ago I underwent one of those psychological assessments, where you answer a whole bunch of questions, and the computer tells you whether or not you are crazy (something that your loved ones can do without the testing.)
In my 6th year of practice, I represented an insolvent client in his negotiations with his Bank. The retainer came upon me suddenly as the client was summoned to a meeting with the Bank and its lawyers on virtually no notice and told to bring counsel.
I met the client for the first time just before the meeting, and off we headed downtown to meet with the Bank’s representatives and a senior insolvency lawyer at a large Toronto firm. I will call this lawyer Tom since I want to make it clear that he was an asshole, but I really do not want to be sued for writing this article. (Although I suppose that the risk of a successful lawsuit would be low since truth is a complete defense).
In my first four years of practicing law, I learned how to be a lawyer through the “sink or swim” approach. I did this by working 12 hours a day and 6 ½ days a week, without supervision, mentoring or training. I was also worrying 24 days a day, 7 days a week, and waking up screaming at night. I do not recommend this approach to learning the practice of law.
I am, of course. But I don’t have to make sure that everyone else knows it. Whenever I forget this simple truth, the client ends up paying for it somehow.
I have observed over the years that it is an interesting aspect of human nature (or at least the nature of lawyers) that people tend to value most what they themselves do well.
Law firms being partnerships, someone must decide how to split the pie at the end of the year, and except in some small firms, the pie is rarely split evenly. The task of deciding how large a slice of the profits should be given to each partner in medium and large firms usually falls to the compensation committee. One might think that the compensation committee would consist of human resources professionals with specialized knowledge in evaluating job performance, and perhaps that is the case in some firms, but in many firms the primary qualification for membership on the compensation committee is a large client base and big billings.