![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
captainsblogI'll be the first to admit that I have no obligation, reason or need to punch a clock in and out in the style of the old Dolly Parton song. When I'm in Buffalo, I slink among home desk, office office and assorted appointments without really keeping track. But Rochester days typically require a sign-in (and if I'm not too zonked, a sign-out) because they're big enough to follow actual contact tracing protocols. Even then, I'll usually go in there only for whatevs-I-have right before it's scheduled, and then leave right after. Today, though, I came as close as I ever do to putting in the real thing of the Workingman: I signed in at 9:15 and out at 4:45.
That's because I had an 11 a.m. court appearance in a real courtroom, with prep necessary for it ahead of time, and then the leftover 4 p.m. appointment from last Wednesday that I had to reschedule when my vaccination got moved to that afternoon. So I wasn't actually in there for that whole stretch, but it was still exhausting enough, with long drives either side, that I wondered if we'd make it through our virtual book lecture tonight.
Ultimately, we did, but I'll be turning in soon and not repeating that schedule any time soon.
----
That actual court appearance- my second in eleven days and only the third in the preceding six months- completed the trifecta of Ostensible Fail that can befall someone in my line of work. For in the seven day window that began last Friday at noon and ended a bit past that today, I was fired by one client (last Friday), not hired by a second (yesterday), and finally, told by a judge today that I (and my opponent) were both disqualified from representing our respective clients in the trial we'd gone there to conduct.
I briefly mentioned both of these first two circumstances after they occurred in Monday's and yesterday's posts here. Confidentiality rules, as well as good taste, preclude details of those and of today's as well, but I think I can reveal at least this much as to each:
Last Friday- client redacted my redacted and didn't like how I redacted in front of redacted when we got out of redacted. His opponent's lawyer called to tell me the redacted called HIM to tell HIM my client had redacted redacted, and the new lawyer redacted that just before noon Friday.
Yesterday- much redacted client hadn't gotten back to me about redacted redacted over an issue with redacted. When I didn't hear and redacted about it, I kinda gave up, but he got back yesterday to tell me he'd come up with an redacted, redacted and redacted way to redacted without needing my services. I told him I liked the way he redacted.
And then today. I'd previously told my opposing attorney, generally a redickted as well as being one to me in this case, that he might well be redacted on account of his having redacted both the redacted and the redacted as well as his own current redacted, and that I would redacted as well if he thought that was fairer. He of course redacted me, but when the judge heard my client testify that this guy had redacted all of these redacted, the proceedings came to a complete halt and we were both told we could no longer proceed.
We talked briefly afterward about settling after all of that, and if he turns down my client's final offer, he can go redact himself. Net result? Got out of court much earlier than expected. Nothing redacted about that:)
----
It meant, among other things, that I had time in the office to look some information up on one of my rare actual criminal matters. The information came through a defense lawyer's website, and as often happens when surfing to one of these, an annoying chatbot popped right up and tried to hustle my business. I hate these and go out of my way to try to break them. Like so:
That'll redact 'em:P
We were both exhausted from our respective days/weeks/months/years/pandemics, but we set aside all that by 8 to catch the stream of the local literary series now done entirely virtually:
The author of Housekeeping, Gilead and its latest progeny Jack spoke with our host for about an hour about the process, the outcome, her guilty pleasures (a new cat!), and not only being awarded an honor by President Obama but having him come out to Iowa to interview her:) She also noted that one of the newly elected Republi-QAnons made reference to armed slave rebellions in defending their right to keep and arm bears right into their Congressional offices. Marilynne outright called them out as "lamebrains," and said, in response to their false-equivalence of their ammosexuality with John Brown, “He used weapons to liberate; they’re using it to swagger.”
Burn. No need to redact THAT.
----
One more workday. Maybe I'll get confused and fire or disqualify someone myself:)
That's because I had an 11 a.m. court appearance in a real courtroom, with prep necessary for it ahead of time, and then the leftover 4 p.m. appointment from last Wednesday that I had to reschedule when my vaccination got moved to that afternoon. So I wasn't actually in there for that whole stretch, but it was still exhausting enough, with long drives either side, that I wondered if we'd make it through our virtual book lecture tonight.
Ultimately, we did, but I'll be turning in soon and not repeating that schedule any time soon.
----
That actual court appearance- my second in eleven days and only the third in the preceding six months- completed the trifecta of Ostensible Fail that can befall someone in my line of work. For in the seven day window that began last Friday at noon and ended a bit past that today, I was fired by one client (last Friday), not hired by a second (yesterday), and finally, told by a judge today that I (and my opponent) were both disqualified from representing our respective clients in the trial we'd gone there to conduct.
I briefly mentioned both of these first two circumstances after they occurred in Monday's and yesterday's posts here. Confidentiality rules, as well as good taste, preclude details of those and of today's as well, but I think I can reveal at least this much as to each:
Last Friday- client redacted my redacted and didn't like how I redacted in front of redacted when we got out of redacted. His opponent's lawyer called to tell me the redacted called HIM to tell HIM my client had redacted redacted, and the new lawyer redacted that just before noon Friday.
Yesterday- much redacted client hadn't gotten back to me about redacted redacted over an issue with redacted. When I didn't hear and redacted about it, I kinda gave up, but he got back yesterday to tell me he'd come up with an redacted, redacted and redacted way to redacted without needing my services. I told him I liked the way he redacted.
And then today. I'd previously told my opposing attorney, generally a redickted as well as being one to me in this case, that he might well be redacted on account of his having redacted both the redacted and the redacted as well as his own current redacted, and that I would redacted as well if he thought that was fairer. He of course redacted me, but when the judge heard my client testify that this guy had redacted all of these redacted, the proceedings came to a complete halt and we were both told we could no longer proceed.
We talked briefly afterward about settling after all of that, and if he turns down my client's final offer, he can go redact himself. Net result? Got out of court much earlier than expected. Nothing redacted about that:)
----
It meant, among other things, that I had time in the office to look some information up on one of my rare actual criminal matters. The information came through a defense lawyer's website, and as often happens when surfing to one of these, an annoying chatbot popped right up and tried to hustle my business. I hate these and go out of my way to try to break them. Like so:
That'll redact 'em:P
We were both exhausted from our respective days/weeks/months/years/pandemics, but we set aside all that by 8 to catch the stream of the local literary series now done entirely virtually:
The author of Housekeeping, Gilead and its latest progeny Jack spoke with our host for about an hour about the process, the outcome, her guilty pleasures (a new cat!), and not only being awarded an honor by President Obama but having him come out to Iowa to interview her:) She also noted that one of the newly elected Republi-QAnons made reference to armed slave rebellions in defending their right to keep and arm bears right into their Congressional offices. Marilynne outright called them out as "lamebrains," and said, in response to their false-equivalence of their ammosexuality with John Brown, “He used weapons to liberate; they’re using it to swagger.”
Burn. No need to redact THAT.
----
One more workday. Maybe I'll get confused and fire or disqualify someone myself:)
Redact 'Em If They Can't Take a Joke, I say!
Date: 2021-03-19 11:07 am (UTC)LOVED. THIS! Thanks for the chuckle. :)