During my career, I was fortunate to work with three phenomenal law clerks. I trained two of them. The third was trained on Bay Street. Each of them was exceptional because they were intelligent, capable, motivated, well-trained, and empowered.
Rarely accused of being overly immodest, I will take credit for empowering them.
How good were they?
For those of you who never watched Boston Legal, my all-time favourite television show about lawyers, Denny Crane was the senior partner of Crane Poole & Schmidt.
Obviously, it would be utterly impossible to comprehensively address the topic of ‘Why I Hate the Law Society’ in the depth that it so richly deserves while complying with the LinkedIn limit on the length of a post. So, I will try to just hit the high points.
So, what exactly do I hate about the Law Society? Primarily its arrogance, and the high-handed nature of its decision making.
I met more than a few lawyers who were ‘easily inconvenienced.’ For these individuals, any challenge, no matter how inconsequential it might have appeared to be to others, was a major problem. It was never a good time for their associates or assistants to take a vacation. Their work not being given top priority by an associate who reported to several lawyers – a catastrophe. Their shared assistant working for another lawyer at the exact moment that they wanted something done – a disaster. Staff members attending a half-day training session on new technology – a real problem. Funds for closing being delayed for an hour for whatever reason – the world was ending.
I suppose that the initial reaction of a law firm client to the question of how they can be a great client may be, “Why should I care?” I certainly met my fair share of clients who could not possibly have cared less about whether their lawyer thought that they were a great client.
Since lawyers tend to think that they know a great deal more than they do about just about everything, they often choose to do things themselves rather than pay money to experts to do them.
One of the things that lawyers typically do poorly is performance reviews.
In the first draft of this post, I set out as a fact that I had a question which would stump 95% of all lawyers. My wife read the draft and said that I was wrong. There is nothing unusual about that. I am wrong plenty and she is quick to notice when I am.
Bob, Ted, Carol, and Alice own a company. They have a shareholder’s agreement. The only divorce mechanism is a right of first refusal (“ROFR”).
Bob wants out. He goes to Ted, Carol and Alice and asks them to buy his shares. They refuse. They tell him to use the ROFR.
When I was young, so much younger than today, I completely bought into the fairy tale that the best and brightest lawyers are all at the large law firms and that everyone else is just not that good. After all, they practically teach you that at law school, although they never quite say it aloud, so I imagine that they have plausible deniability.
My father had a rocky start to his career. There were many years at the outset of his working life when he did not make much money and struggled to pay his bills. When creditors would call, he would explain to them about the payment hat. He would tell them that once a month he turned his fedora upside down and put all of his monthly bills in the hat. He described how he would then mix the bills up and pull them out and pay them until the money ran out.
Finally, he would warn the creditors that if they kept calling him and annoying him, their invoices were not going into the hat.