Telling My Grandkids Judge Aileen Cannon Was Just Andy Kaufman Doing A Bit

Episode Notes

Transcript

[Music]

Joe Patrice: Hello.

Kathryn Rubino: Hello.

Chris Williams: Hello.

Joe Patrice: Everybody jumped the gun there. So we’ll just edit it to start with me saying hello, welcome to the — oh.

Kathryn Rubino: Oww, you just want to be special.

Joe Patrice: No, it doesn’t matter. I just want one person to do it. That’s all. That’s all I ask. It doesn’t have to be me. Anyway.

Chris Williams: And the person has to be me. That’s the implication. That’s why you you’ve been saying it. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm.

Joe Patrice: It doesn’t is my point.

Kathryn Rubino: But you understand that it brings me joy to interrupt you.

Joe Patrice: I do. I mean, that says a lot more about where your life is at I guess.

Chris Williams: I’ll tell you what mine is, again, the reason I like the interruption is that it just brings me (00:00:51) to see Joe’s face so. This is democracy, really. You got to keep going.

Kathryn Rubino: There you go. The majority has ruled Joe. It has been decided.

Chris Williams: Two always win.

Joe Patrice: This is Thinking Like a Lawyers. It’s the Above the Law. Okay. This is the weekly Above the Law roundup of big stories in the legal universe of the week.

Kathryn Rubino: Big stories.

Joe Patrice: Okay. And yeah, and Joe Patrice from the Above the Law, those are other people who work at Above the Law.

Kathryn Rubino: My name is Kathryn Rubino.

Chris Williams: And I’m Professor Williams.

Kathryn Rubino: There you go.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, that’s right, that’s right. Have you started that teaching gig? Or is that still coming?

Chris Williams: Today.

Joe Patrice: Today? All right.

Chris Williams: Today is the first day. I’m officially a professor at Rutgers Newark.

Joe Patrice: There you go.

Chris Williams: It’s wild. People keep investing me with authority. I’m like, “Do you not hear the things I say?” Well, yeah, I guess it’s small topic whether, what have you. That’s when you do the thing.

Joe Patrice: Oh wait, what is it?

Chris Williams: You know, small talk.

Kathryn Rubino: There you go.

Joe Patrice: That’s right. Small talk time.

Chris Williams: There we go, there we go.

Kathryn Rubino: I have just accepted my fate on this one so.

Chris Williams: Yeah, this is —

Kathryn Rubino: We just do annoying sound effects. Sorry folks.

Chris Williams: Hey, I’m not sorry. Do you know, I wake up and I’m not a particularly religious man but every day I pray to Joe Pesci and I say, “Joe Pesci, help me fuck with Joe Patrice.” You know they paved the way.

Joe Patrice: Yeah. Sounded right.

Chris Williams: But yeah. Along with the lovely viewers and listeners here, I’ll be pissing off another audience with my musings about black culture. I’ll be teaching a course in Africana studies and what I feel like it’s really on-brand for me. I’m starting this semester off with a initial reading because everybody expects dead white Germans when they’re like, “Okay, how can I learn more about black people.” I’m really looking forward to it.

Joe Patrice: Nice.

Chris Williams: Pretty interesting the essays on the use and abuse of history because in my mind I’m like I should assume that my — of course I should assume that whatever version of African-American history my students have coming in is Obama becoming president was the greatest thing ever. It made everything race neutral. And what I want to start with is a reading from 1800 that’s like, “Oh, history is a fractured thing.” The way that we use and teach history has aims it and it’s interesting to think of history as a rhetorical device. And if I have a black office saying that they’ll be like, “Oh, this is a thing, some black person said for the purpose of black history” but have a white office saying that maybe they might think it has something to do with things outside of this course. So I’m going to start with the White German. And then we’ll have some fun readings and we’ll do the traditional Martin Luther King stuff and I have like one to two classes at most about slavery, but it’d be a good time.

Kathryn Rubino: That sounds fun. Congratulations. Best of luck. Also to Chris’ students, best of luck. Joe, how was your weekend?

Joe Patrice: Good, good. Watched some sporting events. They mostly cut against me.

Kathryn Rubino: Yikes.

Joe Patrice: But, you know, it was fun. Since I last was recorded, I guess I saw the last match that Serena Williams won in person. I did go to that and she won.

Kathryn Rubino: That’s impressive.

Joe Patrice: She was not expected to and it prolonged her career yet another match and then she lost the next one which I didn’t go to, but it was exciting to see kind of the end of that era. What about you?

Kathryn Rubino: I did some barbecuing and I’m from the north. So by that I mean grilling.

(00:05:00)

But I managed to not burn myself which is the first time that’s happened all summer. So points for me. Yeah, I mean, it was getting bad. Like I kept on just having like a series of like marks on my arm from when I apparently keep on bumping into my grill every time it’s on. It’s a terrible, terrible plan that’s not recommended it all. But I was very pleased that I was able to at the final barbecue of the summer not burn myself. I’ve been barbecuing for years by the way and only this year I seem to have developed this problem. Not entirely sure why, but yeah, thanks for coming along on that journey with me.

Chris Williams: A quick question. Have you considered just not?

Joe Patrice: Burning yourself.

Chris Williams: Or just not. You know the barbecue — smokey meats are wonderful but just don’t. Not get hurt.

Kathryn Rubino: I mean, the first time I was just surprised that I done it and I just kept on and yeah, I tried not to.

Joe Patrice: Oh, you tried but this is a legal podcast. Is there a design flaw with the grill? Are we are we hearing the beginnings of a class action against the grill?

Chris Williams: I’m hearing user error.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, I am too.

Kathryn Rubino: I mean, again, since I’ve used this girl for multiple years without any burns seem to have just burned myself in the summer of 2022 for some unclear reason, I’m hoping I’ve kicked the problem.

Joe Patrice: I need an ambulance sound effect for ambulance chaser over here.

Kathryn Rubino: I’m not trying to have a lawsuit here. I even wore long sleeves one of the times when I was grilling. I was like, “Oh, this way I won’t burn my arms.” And I did through the shirt. It wasn’t great and I left a mark on the shirt.

Joe Patrice: I’m sorry Kathryn, we’re out of time for small talk. We should get into our —

Kathryn Rubino: You’re so damn petty.

Joe Patrice: Yeah. This show began with I run my life around making you upset Joe. Like, come on.

Kathryn Rubino: You understand that that’s why —

Joe Patrice: Anyway, the first topic —

Chris Williams: It’s not even petty, it’s just a tradition at this point.

Joe Patrice: Fine. So, the first topic for anybody out there, we did last week, talked a little bit about this bizarre issue spotter that is the challenge to the Trump warrant. We now have an order on that, it is —

Kathryn Rubino: Just as bad as you thought.

Joe Patrice: It’s actually kind of impressive.  And not in a good way.  I really did think when I — I thought there would be a little bit more effort put into it to attempt.

Kathryn Rubino: L-O-L.

Joe Patrice: To make it look like it was vaguely justified by anything. It is not. It is a —

Kathryn Rubino: It just makes it a lot easier for the Appellate Court though.

Joe Patrice: I mean, it should in a real way. I mean, I don’t have a lot of faith in any of these courts at this point which is that judicial crisis thing that John Roberts should be concerned about. But I mean, it’s bad. It has whole sections where she tries to order. She orders that there be a special master. Still no explanation why that would ever be. What we still don’t actually have jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction as far as anyone can tell.

Kathryn Rubino: That is not being clarified.

Joe Patrice: But nonetheless, this judge goes forward and says that there needs to be a special master to review the documents. Now, that normally would be attorney-client privilege of which there aren’t any documents here, but she’s arguing that it should be executive privilege. Not quite clear why the former president would ever have any executive privilege visa vie, the executive branch that exist now. She blows past that and says that there needs to be a special master to look at all the documents to see if there are valid claims of executive privilege. She doesn’t set any standards on what that would be. She claims that the current administration has not waived executive privilege, though it has which is also in that record. So it’s unclear how that goes. And then she makes the really bold claim that the Department of Justice is barred from continuing to investigate the case while this is settled which —

Kathryn Rubino: Bold.

Joe Patrice: Bold. You really can’t tell the DOJ to stop an investigation no matter what. But here we are. The claim that she makes which this is the one that’s the most hilarious and most likely to I think Bradley Moss who famed National Security lawyer made this Tweet about it pointing out that this section is going to be cited by every criminal defense lawyer in the world for the next several decades, probably. Even though inevitably it’s going to turn into either getting overruled instantly or more likely given Republican courts, it’s going to turn into a rule that exists just for Donald Trump and for nobody else.

(00:10:01)

But she has a long segment where she says that the mere act of being accused of something is it can really hurt your reputation. So before a grand jury is allowed to indict anybody, you have to give the defendant full access to all of the evidence so that they can run it through a special master.

Kathryn Rubino: That is very, very bad decision.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, you know, I mean, if you’re trying to get Tony Soprano, you absolutely need to tell him every one of the people who works for him who has a wire before you can possibly arrest or indict him.

Chris Williams: For the one who was listening when it’s the end of your final period in your criminal — a professor is looking over the bullshit you put on the essay, this is what it looks like to everyone else.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.

Chris Williams: When you’re just throwing like a spaghetti at the wall and seeing if it sticks, you can’t charge the defendant with murder because there’s a contract issue. This is what it looks like.

Joe Patrice: That’s a good point. This looks like a bad one essay in that it pulls threads that seem reasonable in the abstract and then you think about them for a second, it’s like no. Yes, an indictment is reputationally damaging to people even if they’re ultimately acquitted. That is true in every case. That does not mean you can’t indict people without giving them a roadmap of which guys in their organization to whack.

Kathryn Rubino: I think Neal Katyal kind of said this decision is so bad. I don’t know where to begin. And he actually explicitly said that any of his first year law students would have written a better opinion than this.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, former acting solicitor general and guest of this show Neal Katyal does have a great thread taking this down.

Kathryn Rubino: Mm-hmm, definitely, definitely worth a look if you want to know a non-exhaustive but still detailed list of everything wrong with Judge Cannon’s decision.

Joe Patrice:  Yeah. So, clearly this is going to get appealed I would think if for no other reason than the continued lack of jurisdiction as far as I could tell. But the part that says that grand juries are illegal basically in any functional way, that’s pretty damning to all criminal prosecution in this country. And I don’t think anybody’s going to let that stand.

Kathryn Rubino: It’s a really bad decision. And also like totally way to like mess up the vibes at the end of a long weekend. Like, “What?” “Why?” I’m just trying to watch a little Netflix before I have to go to sleep. Like, why?

Joe Patrice: It is though somewhat embarrassing for the whole judge universe. There had been some of them. Elie Mystal, former co-host of this show did a lot of talking over the weekend about how these Trump judges can’t be trusted, and they’re all political actors. And, you know, fair enough.

Kathryn Rubino: Not wrong.

Chris Williams: Probably not wrong.

Joe Patrice: Well, you know, here’s the thing that I that I say. Like during the whole big lie effort where Trump was trying to get various federal judges that he’d appointed to declare that he’d actually won the election. Routinely those judges were saying, no. So there was an effort on the part of some of these people to distance themselves from the idea, they were political actors and Aileen Cannon just doesn’t want to do that apparently because she really has leaned into, I will make my public record that I write gibberish as her brand,

Kathryn Rubino: You have to imagine this is also problematic and embarrassing for Gibson, Dunn where she worked for a couple years as a junior associate. Also, she was an Assistant U.S. attorney, right? Like, she should really know better.

Joe Patrice: I mean, Yeah. In fairness, not to ding the Department of Justice, there’s a lot of great people there, but there is something to be said for when you hold as much power as the Department of Justice does, sometimes AUSAs, a lot of AUSAs come out and their crack lawyers and can just move right on. And then a lot of them come out like they smoke crack. Just because they hold all the cards so much, there’s not like a lot of skill development sometimes. Depending on what branch of the U.S. attorney’s office you’re in, some of those departments you get cases that you’re going to win 100% of the time every lawyer is going to make a deal with you 100% of the time, you don’t necessarily get the experience to get better at certain things.

Kathryn Rubino: Also on the shameless I think, is the University of Michigan where she got her JD.

Joe Patrice: Yeah. So this is a zany opinion. Who knows where this goes from here? I mean, what we know it’s at least going to get appealed on some grounds.

(00:15:01)

The query is whether this gets turned into a series of delay motions. It gets appealed, a part gets overturned, but they find some stupid reason to send it back down with some kind of limiting language and force it. You just delay, delay, delay such that you can avoid justice forever, that sort of thing. Anyway, it’s unfortunate. Is there anything else on this topic or?

Kathryn Rubino: We’re just waiting now. I mean, that is where it is.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, okay. So, it’s been a busy time.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah, yeah. You know how I know it’s busy?

Joe Patrice: How?

Kathryn Rubino: Because we’ve had the phone ringing off the hook.

Joe Patrice: Off the hook. Is it really on a hook?

Kathryn Rubino: Well I think that it’s one of those phraseology.

Joe Patrice: The idioms that you’re just not going to let go of.

Kathryn Rubino: I’m not going to but you know what I will let go of? My need to actually answer the telephone.

Joe Patrice: Okay, okay, and how would you do that?

Kathryn Rubino: Virtual receptionist services.

Joe Patrice: All right. That makes some sense.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah, it really does.

Joe Patrice: So let’s hear from Posh about that.

Female: As a lawyer, ever wish you could be in two places at once? You could take a call when you’re in court, capture a lead during a meeting. That’s where Posh comes in. We are live virtual receptionists who answer and transfer your calls so you never miss an opportunity. And the Posh app lets you control when your receptionist steps in. So, if you can’t answer, Posh can. And if you’ve got it, Posh is just a tap away. With Posh, you can save as much as 40% off your current service provider’s rates. Start your free trial today at posh.com.

Craig Williams: Today’s legal news is rarely as straightforward as the headlines that a company know. On Lawyer to Lawyer, we provide the legal perspective you need to better understand the current events that shape our society. Join me, Craig Williams, and a wide variety of industry experts as we break down the top stories. Follow Lawyer to Lawyer on The Legal Talk Network or wherever you subscribe to podcasts.

Joe Patrice: There has been another big development in — well, not so much the lawyerly world but partially in the lawyerly world and definitely and the world of people who are higher educated as a whole. We’ve had some debt relief come down the pipe.

Kathryn Rubino: Woohoo!

Joe Patrice: Yeah, and there’s a particular lawyer who is not all that happy because it’s not going to help her all that much but.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah, the New Yorker had done a story on the aging of student debtors in America and one of the stories that they illuminate there stood out for Above the Law purposes was a 91-year-old who took out $29,000 in student loans to attend NYU Law and it doesn’t end good this story. But now at 91 owes over $329,000.

Chris Williams: How has that even happen?

Kathryn Rubino: Well, that is a great question. Compound interest is most of the reason and actually, I got the most feedback on this story of kind of anything I’ve written in the last week and mostly people being like, “How does this happen?” Or “I don’t believe that this happened.” And I mean, listen, the New Yorker author had actually sat down with Betty and no last name and went through her paperwork and documents was able to kind of verify all this information. But it’s compound interest, right? That’s how this happens. $10,000, $20,000 if you had PAL loans is great. And I think it’s 45% of people that erases all of their student debt and that is wonderful for them but let’s not pretend that it’s over.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, that compound interest will get you especially if you are somebody whose —

Kathryn Rubino: The penalties and–

Joe Patrice: Yeah. Well, if you’re 91, if you retired and not kept working to pay all that off or even just paying the minimums, it’s going to outstrip that.

Chris Williams: I’m really am not sure if people generally will get the understanding of compound interest first or if physicist will understand how they Higgs boson adds mass. I mean they’re both difficult to understand.

Joe Patrice: I mean, this is the “I’m a lawyer, I was told there was no math.” But I’m trying to think back, compound interest, was that the perk thing? Remember that?

Kathryn Rubino: I don’t know.

Joe Patrice: I think that was the formula where it’s like principal and then that logarithm the E x rate and time. I think that’s how you calculate. Anyway.

Chris Williams: My money is on Higgs boson.

Joe Patrice: I’m pretty sure that where — anyway. Point is, yes, this can happen especially if you’re not paying your minimums and frankly if you are paying your minimums, you’re still going to be falling behind which that’s a whole other thing that we have credit in this country that explicitly charges minimums with an eye towards the fact that it will keep digging you deeper which is unfortunate.

(00:20:04)

Kathryn Rubino: And should be criminal. Whatevs.

Joe Patrice: And this is bad for people who aren’t getting access to any kind of public interest help. If they are going into the public interest where we do need people to be lawyers and if they aren’t getting any help in that area, then they’re very much falling behind in these loans and greatly need some relief. That said, largely this isn’t going to help lawyers just because it applies to people who are making under what is it?

Kathryn Rubino: 125.

Joe Patrice: 125 thousand which was a first-year salary when I started but is no longer a first-year salary generally.

Chris Williams: As a person that is affected, I am happy though.

Joe Patrice: Right. Yes. So if you’ve taken your law degree and decided to write for a legal publication, you are very much better off. If however you’ve taken your law degree —

Chris Williams: Take that friends and credit. Who’s really winning? You still.

Joe Patrice: — and become a lawyer, it is going to be harder for you to get access to anything.

Kathryn Rubino: And I think you’re right. The New Yorker story Betty Ann worked for a non-profit for years. Is now retired and that is the problem, right?

Chris Williams: Wait? What happened to the ten years for getting this thing?

Joe Patrice: No, that’s all new. And that’s all relatively recent too.

Kathryn Rubino: Right. She took this out in the 80s, these loas.

Chris Williams: 40 years?

Joe Patrice: Yeah.

Chris Williams: Yeah, math is not my strong suit, nor is it hers.

Joe Patrice: You knew that when they said NYU was 29,000 total for three years of a degree.

Kathryn Rubino: Right. She actually talked — one of the things that she talks about in the story too is tuition I guess at the time for a year was about $10,000 and as a black woman feeling very ridiculed by her classmates is one would just like be like, “Oh, this is my full tuition check from my father”, kind of thing and being kind of insulted and having her books pushed off tables and that kind of stuff. So, yeah, it’s not great. 

Joe Patrice: I mean, there is something to be said for the rise in school tuition and has been a great equalizer because now rich people need loans. But no, it’s problematic. And look, there’s a lot of people who are complaining about this debt relief. Most of those complaints are nonsensical. They say things like it’s going to raise your taxes which it won’t, it’s just not having to pay extra interest and doesn’t have much impact on that bottom line number. There is a mild speculative chance that it increases kind of a moral hazard and make schools feel like they can raise tuition more. The answer to that of course is clearly they haven’t been worried about that over the last several years no matter what’s been going on and it is very speculative. And it’s not a one-off policy like we can follow on this relief with some actual reform of how schools charge tuitions.

Kathryn Rubino: We absolutely should.

Joe Patrice: Yeah. Your clients are expecting you to know a lot of things about a lot of things, even topics like domain names.

Kathryn Rubino: Domains were definitely not covered in my law school classes.

Joe Patrice: Worse yet, your client might want a domain name to protect their brand or support a product launch that’s already taken.

Kathryn Rubino: Fortunately, GoDaddy’s Domain Broker Service can help. Expert brokers will help you securely and confidentially get that perfect domain.

Joe Patrice: To learn, more visit godaddy.com/dbs. All right, so closing out there was a New York Times Magazine article that was of great interest because it talked about one of our favorite firms.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah, I mean, I think the word favorite is a weird choice but certainly when we write about frequently let’s say that.

Joe Patrice: So Jones Day was the subject of a long-form piece in the New York Times Magazine that was very, very good and even longer form of it is available because it was written by the author of a new book ‘Servants of the Damned’ which is an article about how corporate law firms got involved in the various ethical lapses of the last administration, and obviously it’s not just Jones Day in that camp but it’s mostly Jones Day in that camp. So Jones Day obviously put a lot of the high-end officials in In the Trump White House, but the story of the history of the firm was very interesting. Obviously, this is an over a century old law firm but it really didn’t become this kind of conservative think tank until the early 2000s when it’s new management decided to actively position itself as an ideological law firm.

(00:25:07)

Yeah, and brought people on for that purpose and this prompted some controversy-ish over here at Above the Law because one of our columnists is a former Jones Day partner and he wrote a piece defending the firm and pointing out that —

Kathryn Rubino: And I think that the point that he makes his not — I have thoughts but the point is generally that the average attorney who works with the firm, it’s a massively large firm, the majority of folks do not work on any of these cases, they’re just kind of run-of-the-mill big law attorneys working on the scene and sorts of cases that you would imagine at any massive law firm, which is true.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, it’s a global law firm. Trust and estates lawyer working out of Paris office or something like that is not deeply involved in any of this. On the other hand.

Kathryn Rubino: They’re providing the money that funds all these pro bono efforts.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, and they aren’t pro bono but they are from the perspective of the firm’s bottom line, they probably are pro bono, right? I’m sure they charge the Republican party to represent them in the lawsuit to throw out all the Pennsylvania ballots, which is a thing that this firm did. That said, now they argue they didn’t try to throw them out, they tried to have them never count in the first place. So that’s their description.

Kathryn Rubino: Semantics.

Joe Patrice: Yeah. They didn’t argue on the backend, they tried to say that we should be allowed to just not let these people vote in the first place. Point is, those efforts, I’m sure they charged money but in the grand scheme of keeping the firm afloat, that’s not cutting it. The reason this firm is a top Am law firm is all the other nonpartisan corporate work they’re doing, right? And it makes you have to sit back if you’re saying, “Hey, well, not all these lawyers are involved in this stuff.” You kind of are because your whole work is to subsidize this.

Kathryn Rubino: Mm-hmm.

Joe Patrice: The firm leadership has made clear this is what they care about, this loss producing anti revenue center to push ideological causes and your work is just there to feed it. And at a certain point you have to sit back and go, “Do I want that to be my role?”

Kathryn Rubino: Listen, especially for folks who have a choice of what big law firms to work for, know that this firm comes with very specific baggage.

Joe Patrice: Mm-hmm.

Kathryn Rubino: If I am getting a resume across my desk and I see Jones Day for the last ten years, I think certain things, and if those things are not you, maybe you should be looking for another location.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, it’s interesting. And you know, Jones Day also hires a lot of clerks and gives them massive bonuses, but there’s a cost to that. I mean, you are literally working for the firm from the Tom Cruise movie basically.

Kathryn Rubino: A lot intense running though I imagine.

Joe Patrice: I don’t know.

Kathryn Rubino: Like physical running? I don’t know. I think —

Joe Patrice: We should have a Jones Day Marathon where we just watch Jones Day people intensely run.

Kathryn Rubino: Love it.

Joe Patrice: No, but it’s a bad set. I have not finished ‘Servants of the Damned’ but I do have a copy of it. I don’t know as though it’s actually out yet but I have an advanced copy so it may be out. I have been reading it here and there, there’s a lot of interesting insights and just check that out.

Kathryn Rubino: I’m sure there’s plenty that you can use for fodder and the pages of Above the Law.

Joe Patrice: Exactly, exactly. Anyway, So I think that brings us to the end of everything we had scheduled to talk about, must something else has happened while we’ve been recording.

Kathryn Rubino: I’m not going to check because–

Chris Williams: Neither will I.

Kathryn Rubino: I don’t want to know the latest brain fart from Judge Cannon right now.

Chris Williams: I haven’t had breakfast today and I don’t know if I could stomach some new revelations.

Joe Patrice: Speaking of clerks, I actually want to have someday an oral history of her clerks. How did they work on this? Did they open up West law or Lexis and then get told, “Nah, nah, we’re not going to need that today.” Don’t go messing this up with any of your highfalutin west law searches. Red flags mean awesome.

Chris Williams: Maybe it could be class at UCLA. There’s a professor that’s teaching a course on Elon Musk’s as corporate law suits. It’s just a long run of his failure, I mean cases, you know.

Joe Patrice: Yeah. No, but we talked before about how the value of a federal clerkship in hiring used to be.

(00:30:00)

If you’ve that, that’s a person you want to grab immediately and how some of these judges are making it harder and harder to justify hiring a clerk. Any clerk involved in this opinion I’m not sure I would automatically pull the trigger on.

Kathryn Rubino: Nope. Measure Jones Day.

Joe Patrice: I would need to have a talk. See, how that —

Kathryn Rubino: I begged her not to do any of these things.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, right. I’d want to hear that before I decided to allow this person to practice.

Kathryn Rubino: Throw that judge under the bus because I’m pretty sure the Appellate Court is about to do that.

Joe Patrice: Anyway, so with that, that closes up for the day. Thanks for listening. You should be reading Above the Law to read these and other stories before we chat about them here. You should be listening to this show as you are every week. Best way to do that is to subscribe so you get the episodes when they drop. You should give reviews, stars, write something. Always very valuable to spreading the love of the show.

Kathryn Rubino: Spread the good word of Thinking Like a Lawyer.

Joe Patrice: Yeah. You can also listen to The Jabot, Kathryn’s other podcast. I’m a guest on the Legal Tech Week Journalists Roundtable. There are also many Legal Tech– I said legal tech there because these words all tone together. I do mean Legal Talk.

Kathryn Rubino: You mean Legal Talk Network. Yeah, LT, you know.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, the LTs, yeah. Anyway, there’s a bunch of Legal Talk Network shows that we aren’t on but you should check those out as well. Follow social media, the Above the Law Tweeter account is @ATLBlog. I am @JosephPatrice, she is @Kathryn1 which is that number 1 at the end. Chris is @WritesForRent, and what else?

Kathryn Rubino: That’s it. Peace.

Joe Patrice: And I think that is it. Yeah, okay. Talk to everyone later.

Chris Williams: Have a good one.

[Music]

Joe Patrice: And thank you as always to Posh and GoDaddy Domain Broker Service for sponsoring the show.

Kathryn Rubino: Thanks.

Continue Reading