As lawyers, you constantly assess the risks of your clients, whether in their business practices, court cases, personal relationships, or a multitude of other things. So, managing risk for your clients is what you do, but when was the last time you took a hard look at your own liabilities? Jared welcomes Mark Bassingthwaighte of ALPS Insurance to chat about common risks in modern legal practice. Mark’s approachable take on insurance could help just about anybody understand what they need for their law firm, and he and Jared also talk through current ethics considerations around AI and cybersecurity.
Then, in the Rump Roast, Jared tests Mark’s expertise on authentic blunders in a game called “Historic Mistakes.” Did the Titanic sink because of a sleepy watchman? Was Archduke Franz Ferdinand’s assassination the result of a forgotten fancy hat? Listen in to find out.
And, lastly, everybody’s rolling out their AI tools/extras/whatever, and pricing for these things is truly all over the place. Jared ponders this issue—as a lawyer, you need to be able to keep up with the other guy, but how much should all this cost you?
Mark Bassingthwaighte has been a Risk Manager with ALPS, the nation’s largest direct writer of lawyers’ malpractice insurance, since 1998.
Since we talked about mistakes – those lawyers make + historical ones, have a listen to our playlist featuring songs about fucking up.
Our opening track is Two Cigarettes by Major Label Interest.
Our closing track is Night Whispers by Dr. Delight.
Special thanks to our
sponsors , , , and .
Jared D. Correia: Thank you to Clio, Smokeball and OnTask.
Intro: It’s the Legal Toolkit with Jared Correia. With guest Mark Bassingthwaighte. We play historic mistakes and then spoiler warning. That’s right. Spoilers ahead. What are we spoiling? Well, we’re not going to spoil that. But first, your host, Jared Correa.
Jared D. Correia: That’s right, everybody. It’s howdy duty time. Actually, not really. It’s just a Legal Toolkit podcast, which is still pretty good, right? Right? And yes, it’s still called the Legal Toolkit Podcast, even though I have no idea what a pocket hole jig does. Unless it’s a dance, then I might know it. No. No, I don’t know it. I’m your host, Jared Correa. You’re stuck with me because Alf(ph) was unavailable. He’s working on a reboot of Alf’s Hit Talk Show. I’m the CEO of Red Cave Law Firm Consulting, a business management consulting service for attorneys and bar associations. Find us online @redcavelegal.com. I’m the COO of Gideon Software, an intake platform for law firms. Learn more and schedule a demo @gideonlegal.com.
Now, before we get to our interview today with Mark Bassingthwaighte of ALPS Insurance, let’s dive back into AI. This time with a twist. Everybody only wants to talk about AI anymore, and I guess I’m about to do it again. To quote an obscure musical artist, it’s me. Hi, I’m the problem. It’s me. But I’ve been thinking about AI in sort of a way, and I don’t know that I’ve heard this take elsewhere, so I’m going to roll with it. Every tech company, legal tech companies included, are currently rushing to produce AI products or to add AI features to existing products. Of course, some of that is bullshit. There’s basically no regulation of whether a company can refer to their product as an AI tool. After all, this isn’t a structured regime quite yet, like food, ingredient, labeling, for example. So I know that some of your AI is bullshit. I see you. There are lots of companies adding AI features or calling themselves AI tools that are definitely not AI products. But there are also a bunch of AI tools out there that are really AI.
Right now, a lot of those are integrations with ChatGPT, or other generative AI tools, or their companies rolling out their own generative AI offerings, which I’m guessing are almost all some kind of mix of proprietary technology and some white label shit. But that’s okay. The technology will improve. It’s supposed to. I mean, the central thesis of AI that separates it from any technology that came before it is that it can learn over time and make actual intellectual gains in much the same way that humans do. And there is massive future potential for AI in the legal field, I admit it. And that would include applications for automation, data analytics, drafting and more. But AI is not only very unique in its potential and application, it’s also been a different kind of rollout for technology providers, including in the legal space.
In many cases, legal tech companies have just added significant features as part of their existing platforms without raising prices. Remember that. For example, as law practice management software providers rolled out extensive feature upgrades, they largely did it at no additional cost. Take e-signature features, for example, which are often included at least up to a certain volume in law practice management software tiers. The same has been true as these software companies have rolled out proprietary e-payment tools. Yeah, you have to pay the processing fees, but the monthly fees for the products have largely gone away. Those get wrapped up in the platform cost.
But again, AI is different. The AI features that are launching in legal tech now are coming in at an additional cost, so you’re paying separately for them. And that’s not just true in legal tech, that’s true everywhere. Sometimes that’s an added cost to your existing subscription, sometimes it’s a uses charge, and sometimes the cost is pretty significant. In some cases, even a single use of an AI feature may cost you more than your entire subscription for a platform that features AI. Which begs the question, will lawyers be willing to pay separately for AI tools and AI features? And then follow up question, how much will they be willing to pay?
So yeah, I think obviously lawyers will pay for AI tools. That’s going to be a thing they kind of have to, right? In order to keep up with their competition and probably to meet client demands. I’d be a fool to suggest otherwise and Mama didn’t raise no fool. I think the rate of adoption though is really the question, because if you’re very online, which could be one way to describe me, I suppose. It seems like all everybody wants to talk about is AI. They’re trying it out, looking at innovative solutions. Everybody is a technology badass. But is the average lawyer all that interested in AI applications? I would say hell no. So this is going to take some time and education to get a majority of attorneys on board, just like it did with the cloud. And it may take a crisis to push them over the edge. Hopefully not another fucking pandemic.
The open part of this question then will be, how much are lawyers going to pay for AI and how soon? Now, I’m not suggesting that I have an answer right now to either of those questions. I don’t. But then again, I don’t need to. The market’s going to bear this out. So are tech companies pricing AI solutions correctly? Or, will there be a market correction? Are bleeding edge users just willing to pay more than laggards? I guess we’ll see. To paraphrase red from The Shawshank Redemption, AI adoption by lawyers is a study of pressure and time. That’s all it takes, really. Pressure and time. That and a big goddamn poster.
Let’s find out more about what our sponsors can do for your busy law practice before we talk about legal malpractice in the modern world with Mark Bassingthwaighte of ALPS Insurance. Then stay tuned as we discuss truly historic mistakes in the rump roast, where we never fuck anything up. Because I have all the answers.
Male 1: DocuSign’s customer service and creeping prices can be pretty frustrating. Let OnTask help you sign. OnTask can take care of your contracts, quotes, e-signatures, and automate workflows for nearly half the price. OnTask is always innovating. Their new AI document generation helps you draft ready to sign docs in minutes. Half the price and twice the service, try OnTask today. Book a demo at get.ontask.IO/law.
Partner with the rankings.io, the marketing agency for law firms that want results, not excuses. With flat rates for Google Ads, a track record ranking attorneys for the most competitive terms on Google, and a team always easy to reach by phone, even during off hours. Rankings.IO is the agency of choice for firms that want the rankings, traffic, and cases other law firm marketing agencies just can’t deliver. Visit rankings.IO for a free consultation and start seeing your firm grow.
Jared D. Correia: Okay, everybody, let’s get to the meat in the middle of this legal podcasting sandwich. Today’s meat is bison. I actually have nothing bad to say about bison. It’s really lean and tasty, and it has entirely replaced ground beef in my house going on almost a decade. All right, that’s probably enough about my grocery shopping habits. It’s time to interview our guest we have today, in what I believe is his first and far too long delayed appearance on the Legal Toolkit podcast. It’s Mark Bassingthwaighte, the national risk manager at ALPS Insurance. Say that three times fast. Mark, how you doing? Welcome to the show.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: I’m doing good. Thanks for having me, Jared. Good to be here.
Jared D. Correia: Excellent. It’s great to have you on the show. I can’t believe we haven’t had you on yet. It’s great. So let’s dive into some questions.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Okay.
Jared D. Correia: You are the national risk manager at ALPS, which honestly sounds like a dream job for a lot of lawyers, who are some of the most risk averse people I know. So what is that gig like in real life?
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Well, actually, it’s evolved over the years. It started out doing a lot of consulting, and I would spend roughly two weeks out of every month on the road going into law firms of every shape and size and conducting what we would call a risk visit. And just interview lawyers, you interview staff, just depends on the size of the firm, but just a lot of teaching, a lot of education.
Jared D. Correia: So you would actually go in and do, like, on site audits?
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Uh-hmm. I’ve done over 1200.
Jared D. Correia: Oh, my gosh, that sounds like a lot.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Yeah, from solos. And I have some crazy stories —
Jared D. Correia: Well, you made the mistake of going into a law firm so I’m not surprised.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Well, yeah. I’ve had a few, I should say really positive experiences, and I’ve had a few just like, “who the heck do you think you are? I just want my discount. Get out of here.” But now it’s more of, I would say the initial time it was about, it was viewed as risk reduction, really trying to see if we could impact the claim frequency and severity numbers. And the reality is it didn’t play that way. You have this problem of the lawyers that want to learn and get better in terms of risk management practices are already your best risk. It was very difficult to get in. Now, I did get into some problem firms that, boy, that would be a whole another episode. But now it’s a marketing thing. I do a lot of content creation, a lot of CLE. I typically average maybe 50 CLE events a year.
Jared D. Correia: That’s a lot.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: It is a lot, yeah. But it’s fun. I really enjoy it. If there’s a takeaway from all this, it truly is. There are a lot of great lawyers out there just trying to do the right thing. And I have been really impressed and feel very privileged to meet all the people that I’ve worked with.
Jared D. Correia: I think that’s a very great, positive spin on that. I love that. So it’s kind of interesting because it seems like it’s more aligned with the way that people learn and educate themselves now that they would want online access whenever they wanted it, versus having you show up at their office. So that makes a ton of sense to me. All right, so you and ALPS work with attorneys all over the United States. Are you guys global as well, or just U.S. based?
Mark Bassingthwaighte: No, we are sort of the tagline of the company is we’re the nation’s largest direct writer of legal malpractice insurance in the U.S. We really are the solo small firm space, and we’re quickly moving into, I would say, it’s almost a GEICO model in the sense of you give us 20 minutes or whatever and apply online and we can get quotes out. It was not like that 25 years ago.
Jared D. Correia: Oh, for sure. And you don’t have a lizard, but I think you have a llama. Is that right?
Mark Bassingthwaighte: We do have a llama, yes, Vera. Absolutely.
Jared D. Correia: Yes. I’ve seen some commercials. Yeah. So in terms of how that works across the United States, do you find that legal issues differ from state to state or jurisdiction to jurisdiction? Or, is it like all the same stuff? Because I do consulting and I hear people are like, oh, but my law firm is in Missouri and I’m like, same stuff. Do you feel the same way?
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Yeah, I would say it’s the same stuff.
Jared D. Correia: Okay.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: I mean, what we see is there are going to be certain pockets that are more litigious. You could guess pretty quickly some places where that might be. Los Angeles as an example, New York City.
Jared D. Correia: Yeah, I can guess.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: It’s going to be more litigious.
Jared D. Correia: Big metropolitan areas, right? Where there’s just more–
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Exactly, yeah. So beyond that, it’s similar throughout.
Jared D. Correia: Let’s talk about practice areas.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Okay.
Jared D. Correia: Because I think it is true, and you can correct me if I’m wrong, that there are some practice areas that are more litigious, to use a turn of phrase that you just used for attorneys than others. That’s like a (00:13:29).
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Higher risk. Higher risk.
Jared D. Correia: Higher risk. Okay. So what are some of the practice areas you should be avoiding? Or maybe that’s the wrong way to put it. I don’t know.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: It’s an interesting question because I will answer that, but there’s obviously a lot of lawyers that are practicing in these areas. But to say, what should you be avoiding, if this isn’t your bailiwick, don’t dabble in these practice areas because it’s high risk. Your personal injury plaintiff has been number one most of the time during my coming up on 26 years. Real estate jumped into number one right after 2008, and it hung in there as number (00:14:17) about three years.
Jared D. Correia: Sounds about right.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Yeah, for obvious reasons. But real estate, personal injury plaintiff, domestic is big estate and trust and then corporate.
Jared D. Correia: Got you.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Those are the top concerns.
Jared D. Correia: I think the point about dabbling makes sense as well. I think that’s true. I’ve seen that a lot. Especially like if somebody’s like, hey, I’m going to mess around and take an immigration case. Not the best idea ever. So how do you counsel firms that are in high risk areas? Like they need to be more diligent, right? But what does that actually mean? Or do they? Are you like, hey, everybody should do best practices.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: My job is really centered on letting them know what we see day in and day out.
I mean, I’m not going to sit here and tell them any substantive kinds of stuff, but we focus on file documentation mistakes. A lot of lawyers really don’t appreciate how to properly document a file. If I’m looking at personal injury plaintiff, I’m going to talk about what calendaring really looks like. Because a lot of lawyers get confused. We tend to focus or prioritize redundant systems, and they really need to be independent systems. So I’ll teach process. And there are good firms that listen and make all kinds of changes, and there are some others that just not interested.
Jared D. Correia: Don’t, yes. Audit trail, which is funny to me because lawyers are good at creating audit trails for their clients in many cases, but not so good when it comes to managing their own practice, so I hear you there.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Yeah.
Jared D. Correia: Okay, let’s talk a little bit about cyber insurance. Everybody’s talking about cyber insurance. You’re laughing already. Everyone’s talking about cyber insurance. Lawyers come to me, they’re like, that’s kind of expensive. I had a lawyer tell me the other day, it’s almost more as expensive than my regular malpractice insurance. Like, is it worth it? Why do I get it? So can you talk a little bit about that? Because if we’re talking about education, I still think there’s a little bit of gap there.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: I would absolutely agree with you. I have several different CLE programs that I do on cyber risk and cybersecurity. And every time we give one of these programs, calls start coming in. I want a policy now.
Jared D. Correia: Yeah, right.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: (00:16:36) of everybody. I truly believe that the risk, particularly in the solo and small firm space of a cyber loss of some sort, cyber problem is higher than a malpractice problem.
Jared D. Correia: Oh, interesting. Yeah.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: And part of that is because the solo and small firm space really tend to say, this will never happen to us. We’re not on anybody’s radar. And that couldn’t be further from the truth. The activity in going after small businesses is very active. So I would always recommend getting a cyber policy. Yes, it can be expensive, but one of the coverage mistakes that you will see some small firms make is depending, and it varies by carrier, obviously. But some carriers out there will add, if you will, sort of a cyber endorsement, and it’s sort of wrapped in, and that can be fairly affordable.
Jared D. Correia: Okay, so can you tell me what that means? Like, what’s an endorsement versus separate policy? I’m not an insurance guy.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: There’s a difference between standalone coverage, just a cybersecurity policy, a cyber liability policy, and having an endorsement that takes certain characteristics or key components of a standalone policy and wraps it into the malpractice policy. So there’ll be some provisions in that. It often can be fairly affordable, but what lawyers aren’t understanding is there’s no underwriting going on. First off, it just comes if you want it or not. Sometimes it’s opt in, some opt out. There are different models here. But the coverage is nowhere near as broad as a standalone policy. So I would really encourage lawyers, do a little shopping, look for standalone coverage and decide upfront really what your concern is. If you’re wanting to insure for wire fraud, as an example, which is just killing lawyers, that’s a very specific path you need to go. A traditional cyber policy isn’t going to provide much coverage for that. So you just have to figure out.
Jared D. Correia: Cool. That’s really helpful. Okay, so Evan tases me if we don’t talk about AI at least once a so.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Okay.
Jared D. Correia: Let’s talk a little bit about AI. So first in general, like, how do you feel about these technologies from a risk manager standpoint? Are you, like, up at night being like, oh, my God, what kind of trouble are these lawyers going to get into with AI?
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Do I lose any sleep over what kind of trouble they’re going to get into? No, you’ve read some of the cases. I’ve read some of the cases, and I sit here and just shake my head. In all honesty, I’m all in on AI. I would like to see it evolve and adopted in a widespread way. But competency obviously comes into play here. So if law firms are willing to spend the time and money understanding these tools, how to incorporate them, I am all in. I see it as a risk reduction tool. I really do.
Jared D. Correia: Oh, that’s fascinating. Okay. Because yeah, I would have assumed you would have gone the other way on that.
But I like how open-minded you are. I mean, I’m the same way you are. I feel like all these cases you read about just like, oversee the tool you’re using, like, this is (00:20:11). Like, hey, AI, are these cases right? Because AI is not going to be like, you know what, Ted, I thought I could fool you, but I clearly can’t.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Yeah. I don’t see any different between using AI as a research tool and having an associate or a staff person do some research for you. You still have to review it because you’re going to put your signature on the paper. You’re going to accept accountability for this work product. AI just takes the human being out of it, but the process should be the same. You’re still supervising. You still need to review it.
Jared D. Correia: All right, that’s great. I want to put a pin in that for a second because I have what I think is an interesting thing. I want to ask you about that, too. But in terms of AI right now and insurance, no special things you need to be doing, at least at the present time, in terms of your use of AI and malpractice insurance, and do you see that changing at some point?
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Okay, there is an interesting issue here. The best way that I know how to answer this right now, if I use AI as a research tool and invest, I’m using this, a tool to help me practice law, to deliver the product or service that I’m delivering. I don’t have any real coverage concerns. The issue is, as lawyers begin to, if you will, set AI free, so let’s think about a very sophisticated chatbot that’s DIY model, but the question would be, does a malpractice policy respond and cover that ancillary business? I don’t think so. And the reason is (00:21:49).
Jared D. Correia: That’s a great point because lawyers are looking to do that.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Yeah, correct. So it’s a long way to get to, you really have to say, is how we are using AI part of the practice of law. And if it’s a tool that furthers that, I think coverage, at least right now, shouldn’t be an issue. But if what you do with it is not the practice of law, you got a problem. So I don’t want any assumptions in play. And that’s what I’m seeing right now. I’m getting calls about these business models. Well, will our policy cover this? And they’ll say, I don’t think so, because this isn’t the practice of law.
Jared D. Correia: Right. And I think that’s the answer. I feel the same way about that.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Yeah.
Jared D. Correia: All right, one more question for you in terms of AI, because I think this is really interesting. So right now, the way that a lot of law firms are using AI is it’s just another technology, especially generative AI. And with technology, like you’re vetting that based on state rules and legal ethics rules about how you want to interact with technology in a competent way as an attorney. But what’s going to be really interesting to me is you start feeding this technology into, like, a robot who works at your law firm. Like, what if he had a robot paralegal? That changes the nature of how you treat that from an ethic standpoint, in my opinion. Because now it’s more like you’re overseeing a person than technology product. So do you have any thoughts on this at this point, or do you think it’s, like, too early to even bother addressing this?
Mark Bassingthwaighte: I think it’s a bit early. I was having a conversation with another colleague here earlier today sort of on this whole topic of ethics and AI. And right now, I think it’s not as hot a topic as people think it is or want it to be.
Jared D. Correia: Yeah.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: For me, AI, it’s competency, it’s confidentiality, and it’s supervision.
Jared D. Correia: Okay, that’s great.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: It’s not the tool. It’s the lawyers using it. And the ethical issues don’t hit AI, they hit the lawyer. So we have to understand how to deploy this tool in a competent, ethical manner.
Jared D. Correia: Now, when there’s AI robots that are replacing me as a podcast host and you as a guest, they’ll probably have different conversations.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: I’m sure that they will.
Jared D. Correia: But here we are right now. Mark, that was great. Seriously. Thank you.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: You’re welcome.
Jared D. Correia: Will you stick around for the last segment?
Mark Bassingthwaighte: I would be happy to.
Jared D. Correia: Excellent. We’ll take one final sponsor break so you can hear more about our sponsor companies and their latest service offerings. Then stay tuned for the rump roast. It’s even more supple than the roast beast.
Male 1: Find out how TimeSolv fits your firm. With six different ways to track time, surely one will fit even on the go, or quickly estimate flat fee projects. Batch payments for hundreds of invoices at once. With TimeSolvPay, getting paid quickly is definitely a great fit and TimeSolv fits with the other tools you use; QuickBooks, LawPay, NetDocuments, Law Ruler, Microsoft and more they all just plug-in. Try TimeSolv for free and get a $100 Amazon gift card when you sign up at timesolve.com.
Jared D. Correia: Welcome back, everybody. That’s right. As usual, we’re here at the rear end of the legal toolkit. It’s the rump roast. It’s a grab bag of short form topics all of my choosing. Why do I get to pick? You may be asking yourself. Well, because I’m the host. Mark, welcome back.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Well, thank you.
Jared D. Correia: Thank you for returning.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: I wouldn’t miss it.
Jared D. Correia: As the risk manager, the risk manager for a national lawyer malpractice insurance brand, I would expect that you would be an expert in mistakes. So we wanted to test that theory.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Okay. Let’s go for it.
Jared D. Correia: I’ve developed a new game just for you, for you only. I’ll never do this again. It’s called historic mistakes. So we’re going to quiz you about classic mistakes, and I’ll even give you multiple choice if you need them. So I’m going to describe a situation, and then you’re going to pick the answer. And as I said, I’m happy to offer multiple choice if you need it. You may not because I’m a kind hearted man. So let’s get started. First two can be really easy. Then we’re going to ramp things up a little bit. Okay. Number one, the purchase of Alaska was viewed as a historic mistake when the United States pulled the trigger on the acquisition in 1867 for 7.2 million. What was the popular nickname for that transaction?
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Oh, good Lord.
Jared D. Correia: I’ll give you multiple choice if you want.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Let’s do it.
Jared D. Correia: All right, here we go. Stanton’s mistake, Seward’s Folly, or Salmon’s screw up.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: I got to go with Seward’s Folly.
Jared D. Correia: Yes. Correct. All right, we’re one for one.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: There we go.
Jared D. Correia: Pretty easy, right? Seward, William Seward, Secretary of State, bought Alaska for 70.2 million. I mean, they’ve probably made a million times more than that.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Oh, I know. It’s unbelievable.
Jared D. Correia: On the resources in Alaska.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: That’s a screaming buy.
Jared D. Correia: Right. I got another one for you. You’re off to a good start. The Bay of Pigs invasion failed in part because Kennedy sent B26 aircraft support too late because he was hanging out with Marilyn Monroe, he was fishing his brother Ted out of the water, or he screwed up a time zone change between Nicaragua and Cuba. Marilyn, Ted, or time zone changes?
Mark Bassingthwaighte: It’s so tempting to say one, but I’m going to go with the time zone.
Jared D. Correia: That’s all right. Good choice. Good choice. So the air support on the Bay of Pigs invasion was an hour late because they couldn’t figure out the time zone between Nicaragua and Cuba. Amazing.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Well, they didn’t have Google at the time.
Jared D. Correia: Right. What were they supposed to do? No AI, how can we figure out time zones? All right, this is fun. I got number three coming your way. Archduke Franz Ferdinand’s assassination effectively kicked off World War I, but the assassination itself occurred because 1) his motorcade took a wrong turn; 2) his car broke down; or 3) he forgot his fancy military helmet at home and had to turn around and go grab it. Wrong turn, broken down car, or he forgot his hat. This was a little bit tougher.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: This is a little tougher.
Jared D. Correia: It is.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: I kind of like the forgot his hat kind of thing, but I’m going to guess it was a wrong turn.
Jared D. Correia: Yes, three for three. I made up the whole hat thing. So he had a driver that spoke Czech, and so they spoke different languages. And so when they were trying to figure out where to go, he stopped the car directly in front of the assassin.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Are you kidding?
Jared D. Correia: Yeah. Who was just, like, really shocked and was like, wow, here we go.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Oh, my God.
Jared D. Correia: And that’s why he’s shot.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Wow.
Jared D. Correia: All we try to teach here as well at the Legal Toolkit, and not just about the law. All right, you’re three for three, hot start. I got three more for you.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Okay, let’s do it.
Jared D. Correia: One of the reasons the Titanic sank was because, one of these is true. A loose dog on board needed to be captured, causing officers to miss the iceberg in view. Two, officers did not have the key to a case for binoculars, which would have allowed them to see the iceberg sooner. Three, one of the officers fell asleep during his watch. So one dog, two binoculars, three, a sleepy crew member.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Sleepy crew member.
Jared D. Correia: That’s a good guess. But what happened is the binoculars were locked in a case.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: No kidding.
Jared D. Correia: A crew member who left the ship in, I think, Ireland walked off with the keys so they couldn’t open the box that had the binoculars, which is crazy. Yeah, that was a great guess, though. All right, you’re doing great. You’re doing great. (00:30:30) 750, 75% correct. That’s amazing. So two more.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Okay.
Jared D. Correia: Alexander Fleming discovered penicillin, which led to the creation of antibiotics, because, 1) he accidentally spilled a chemical into a petri dish; 2) he didn’t clean his lab while on vacation with his family; or 3) his assistant disturbed one of his experiments while he was on vacation with his family. So 1) he chemical spill; 2) he didn’t clean his lab; 3) the wayward assistant. What do you like? This is a tough one, too.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: This is a tough one. I’m going to go with two.
Jared D. Correia: Two is correct. Wow, 4/5. This is like a Pantheon Runpro(ph) performance, by the way. You’re killing it. So basically, he went on vacation with his family for, like, a month and didn’t clean anything. And when he came back, there was, like, penicillin growing. So there we go. All right, now, to cap this all off, I only got one more question for you, which will allow you to go five for six, which is seriously like top five performance. Here’s one that’s pretty relevant because the Beatles just released this new single now and then using AI, which you’ve probably seen and heard. So in 1961, late 1961, going into 1962, Decker Records passed on signing the Beatles because, 1) they claimed that guitar groups were on the way out; 2) they thought their haircuts were stupid; 3) they wanted to replace drummer Pete Best. So 1) guitar groups on the way out; 2) bad haircuts; 3) Pete Best was a terrible drummer. I don’t know if that’s true.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: That’s a really hard one.
Jared D. Correia: This one is tough.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: I’m going to go with number one.
Jared D. Correia: Mark, yes, correct again. Five of six, what a monster performance here in the rump row. So, yeah, they went and they played like 15 tracks and they were like, sorry, guitar groups aren’t going to be a thing anymore and then they signed with Parlophone(ph) and the rest is history. Seriously, amazing job.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Well, thank you.
Jared D. Correia: And it turns out you are an expert on mistakes as a national risk manager for ALPS. Thank you for coming on, sir. This was delightful.
Mark Bassingthwaighte: Well, thank you for having me, Jared. I loved it. Loved it. Been a lot of fun.
Jared D. Correia: If you want to find out more about Mark Bassingthwaighte and ALPS legal malpractice insurance, visit alpsinsurance.com. Alps like the mountain insurance like the insurance, I guess, alpsinsurance.com. Now, for those of you listening in accident, Maryland, we’ve got a new Spotify playlist that’s all yours. It’s only songs about mistakes, regrets. I’ve had a few. Now, sadly, I’ve run out of time today to spoil the ending of the Oppenheimer movie, so you’ll just have to wait until next time for that. Don’t Google anything in the meantime, okay? This is Jared Correia reminding you to not fuck with Moose, because Moose have feelings, too. Actually, I don’t even know if that’s true. I just try not to fuck with them because they’re goddamn immense.