Biglaw Firms Learning The Hard Way That Some Billables Just Aren’t Worth It

Episode Notes

Transcript

[Music]

Kathryn Rubio: Hello.

Joe Patrice:  Hello. Welcome to another edition in “Thinking Like a Lawyer”.  I was 

I was trying to fake you out there, but it doesn’t seem like it work.  

Kathryn Rubio:  Well, you’re not great at subterfuge.  So —

Joe Patrice:  That’s fine.  

Chris Williams:  Today, you’re coming in hot.  

Kathryn Rubio:  You got to start hot. Guess who’s back?

Joe Patrice: Great. I’m Joe Patrice from Above the Laws.  You heard Kathryn Rubio who is back from her illness and has decided to choose violence.  We also heard from Chris Williams in there.  How are you?

Kathryn Rubio:  I am doing significantly better.  As you mentioned, I was ill last week.  It was not COVID, that’s what multiple COVID test tell me, but it turns out that while the vaccine does in fact protect you against COVID, masks help with everything else. So now that the largely maskless world has taken over cold sore thing again.

Joe Patrice:  Yeah.

Kathryn Rubio:  Colds and you know.  Not my favorite thing, but you know, it was — it was like 2019 or something crazy.

Joe Patrice:  And again, it was not your favorite thing.  I do know what your favorite thing is, which is the beginning of small talk.  

Kathryn Rubio:  You want it — so this is why I choose violence.  If you were curious, folks, this is why, because that’s the crap I have to deal with.  

Joe Patrice:  Well, your life is hard.  You have to listen to one sound effect.

Kathryn Rubio: First of all, we all know regular listeners are well aware it’s going to be more than one, there is.  And let’s be clear, the sound effects are merely a symptom.  The problem is that you enjoy annoying people.

Joe Patrice:  I find that to be untrue.  

Kathryn Rubio:  Okay, let us go to the third-base coach.  Chris, what say you?

Chris Williams:  That is the biggest bullshit I’ve seen chat since my time in Texas, right?  That was peak bullshit, right.  I’m actually impressed.  I’ve seen a liar too.  That was a lie.  And I’m honored actually to be in the same virtual room and take part of such dishonesty, you know.

Joe Patrice:  We have a birthday.  

Kathryn Rubio:  That’s right.  Happy birthday, Chris.  See, violence.  

Chris Williams:  That was terrifying.  Never again.  No.  You don’t have to ever give me a gift again, Joe.  

Joe Patrice:  Yeah.  All right.

Kathryn Rubio:  Do you have any big birthday plans?

Chris Williams:  I’m saying this for the benefit of the listeners, I don’t know in their cars, wherever you listen to podcast.  Anyway —

Kathryn Rubio:  Some people do probably.  Some people are probably listening in their car, maybe on a treadmill perhaps.

Chris Williams:  Maybe, maybe.  Shout out On Peloton.  But yeah, so my mom is getting my hair re-twisted, just relax.  And after that, I have a long day-planned of probably fighting some judge who decided to soft slur somebody in a housing case or something, you know other job goes and then maybe some sleep.  Tomorrow I’m leaving to go to St. Louis, I’ll be there for a week.  The Black Lawsuit and Associations having a banquet, and it’s hard to pass up an opportunity to look spiffy and see friends.  So yeah, that’s going to be fun.  

Kathryn Rubio:  Nice.  

Joe Patrice:  Excellent.  

Kathryn Rubio:  How was your past weekend, Joe?

Joe Patrice:  It was good.  I went to Las Vegas for the opening weekend of the tournament.

Kathryn Rubio:  Basketball, we’re talking here?

Joe Patrice:  Indeed.  It was interesting.  I’ve never done that before.  I’ll tell you, it was — not to cast aspersions on a whole location, but it lost a lot of its luster now that you can —

Kathryn Rubio:  Words are hard —

Joe Patrice:  Now that you can gamble anywhere.

Kathryn Rubio:   On your telephone.  

Joe Patrice:  Yeah.  And the apps that they have there for gambling are not nearly as robust as the ones here in New York.  So, I was a little disappointed in that, but —

Kathryn Rubio:  So, you went to Vegas to gamble less?

Joe Patrice:  That is what it turned out.  But hey, the under keeps hitting, so.

Kathryn Rubio:  The under, has it not been bad in the opening weekend of the NCWA basketball tournament, but everything else has been a disaster, at least for my bracket, I don’t know.

Joe Patrice:  Yeah.  You put too much faith in the SECURITY, I think is your problem.

Kathryn Rubio:  That is a problem.  

Joe Patrice:  Yeah.  That is certainly a problem.  Yeah, I have a family bracket pull, you know, and I’m apparently the commissioner because I’m the only one who understands the sporting, and I am not in first, my mother, who literally picked things based on.  Well, I know — your cousin, didn’t your cousin go there?  That’s how she picked her teams and is in first.  I think partially because my uncle went to Saint Peter’s.

(00:05:03)

Joe Patrice:  Yeah, that would help.

Kathryn Rubio:  I think that helps.  But just goes to show the more you know about sports, the worse your bracket usually is.  

Joe Patrice:  All right.  Well, I feel like that’s a good transition for us to transition out of.  

Kathryn Rubio:  But see, you’re going to —

Joe Patrice:  Small talk.

Kathryn Rubio:  I mean —

Joe Patrice:  Yeah?

Kathryn Rubio:  I deserve that.

Joe Patrice:  You did.

Kathryn Rubio:  I walked right into it like a damn buzz saw. 

Chris Williams:  That was so good.

Kathryn Rubio:  Was it?  Was it?  Or was it awful?

Chris Williams:  Nothing says Monday like Tue and Fri, whatever the word is, and like just to see — yeah.  It was that.  I felt it. I felt your pain and it was lovely.

Joe Patrice:  Yeah.  But it’s a good transition.  I guess —

Kathryn Rubio:  Is it?

Joe Patrice:  Well, because we were talking about the bracket, so I think we can talk.  One thing, we will hype up for people who haven’t already participated is the annual Above The Law bracket challenge is going on right now where we take some stories from the previous year and —

Kathryn Rubio:  Or legal concepts.  I think one of the —

Joe Patrice:  Legal concepts, yeah.

Kathryn Rubio:  Yeah, we did.  I think Best True Crime bracket a couple years ago.  We’ve done Best Fictional Lawyer, we’ve done Worse Law School, you know, we do those kind of fun stuff.

Joe Patrice:  Yeah, but it but it’s a good opportunity for us to revisit some of our old stories, generally speaking in a betting format.  So our bracket is up.  We are already through the first round.  We are down to the what we’re calling, I guess, “The Silly 16” because the NCAA soothes people, use the word “sweet 16”.  So we’re —

Kathryn Rubio:  I’m with the stupid 16.

Joe Patrice:  Yeah, that could be true too, yeah.  I like that.

Kathryn Rubio:  So, how’d you come up with the concept for this year’s bracket, Joe?

Joe Patrice:  I did not.  Our colleague, Stacy rescued in.  

Chris Williams:  Woot-woot Stacy.  

Joe Patrice:  But she pitched the idea that we had, almost frightening number of stories of really bad lawyering out of the Trump Administration and the Trump affiliated lawyers over the last couple years.  And she said we could put together a bracket of which of them did the most to destroy their reputation.  And so, we’ve got that going.  There are some —

Kathryn Rubio:  So who’s your — who’s the overall number one though?

Joe Patrice:  I mean Rudy was the overall number one.

Kathryn Rubio:  It’s got to be — it’s got to be.

Joe Patrice:  And this is a person who had at one point been considered a frontrunner to be president.  Now, he does cameos to Keith Magness(ph).

Kathryn Rubio:  To pay some legal bills/

Joe Patrice:  So, he’s number one.  But yeah, we have some good matchups this round and some really serious ones looming.  I mean Alan Dershowitz is still out there, Sidney Powell is still out there.  We got some real —

Kathryn Rubio:  There’s a query about the Dershowitz, because I think that’s the other one whose reputation has just fallen tremendously.  Were there other things besides involvement in Trump plan that caused his reputation to take a tank?

Joe Patrice:  I don’t understand what you can possibly be talking about.  But yeah, so they’re — obviously, there’s a few overlapping issues.  That is not the only person who has some unfortunate involvement with the Epstein story.  Oh actually, it is now because Ken Starr got upset in the first round.

Kathryn Rubio:  Who took out Ken Starr?

Joe Patrice:  Paul Davis.  No, wait.  No, not Paul Davis, who did?  Oh, Lindsey Graham, I think.

Kathryn Rubio:  Well, you know all things.  These are all things.

Joe Patrice:  Paul Davis is now in a matchup, straight up with Sidney Powell.  That is a dangerous one right there.  That said, Sidney is the — she’s currently the strongest contender in the entire thing.  She won her opening round matchup by over 99%.  

Kathryn Rubio:  Who she against?

Joe Patrice:  Who was the most minor of the Kraken people, I can’t remember; Jane and Raskin or someone like that, yeah.

Kathryn Rubio:  So, what he said make some sense why she won by such a strong margin, because it was apples to apples as a comparison, right?  So, it’s like the person who popularized Kraken as a legal concept versus somebody else on the team, so sure.

Joe Patrice:  Right.  But I will say, she got more votes than voted in some of the other matchups. 

Kathryn Rubio:  Oh, really?

Joe Patrice:  People like showed up just to vote for her, and then disappear.

Kathryn Rubio:  Like who’s the worse, Sidney Powell.

Joe Patrice:  Yeah.  So, it’s fun thing we do every year.  It’s a good opportunity to read through, see some old stories, remind yourself that somebody actually thought we should turn the government over to the Hobbits, you know these sorts of things.  That is a real thing to happen and it is —

Kathryn Rubio:  It is very, very real.

Joe Patrice:   And it was Paul Davis.  So, we’ll see if that was enough to overcome Sidney.

Kathryn Rubio:  Also told the fictional character matchup, right?  It’s the Kraken versus the Hobbit law.  So, I think that’s a little spin on that part of the bracket.

Joe Patrice:  I like that.  I like that.  I’m still writing that one up.  So now, maybe, I’ll use that.

Kathryn Rubio:  You could have my permission to use it as much as you would like.

Joe Patrice:  Okay.  Well, cool.  

Kathryn Rubio:  Because I did it to choose violence today.

Joe Patrice:  Fair enough.  So voting on this round is going to run until Thursday night.  Then on Friday we’ll unveil the next group, have that vote over the weekend, and just keep going until we get a true champion.  So, that’s exciting.  Anyway, —

(00:10:03)

Chris Williams:  Wait, it would be —

Joe Patrice:  Oh-oh.  You know, I want to finish that thought.

Kathryn Rubio:  Hold the phone.

Joe Patrice:  Shouldn’t we have somebody answer that for us, so that we can keep on the business that need to do and concentrating on what we need to do while somebody else handles that.

Chris Williams: Well, I can’t.

Joe Patrice:  So, let’s hear from Posh.

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 where live virtual receptionists who answer and transfer your calls so you never missed 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 of your current service provider’s rates.  Start your free trial today @posh.com.

Joe Patrice:  All right.  So before I cut you off with the phone ringing, I did not know you were going to add something there, Chris.  So what was it? 

Chris Williams:  I was going to make some dumb joke about asking if they were going to be the champion or the biggest loser.  

Joe Patrice:  So, that is basically what this is going to be.

Kathryn Rubio:  It’s the biggest loser without, you know, the eating disorders.  

Joe Patrice:  Yeah.

Chris Williams: Good.  

Joe Patrice:  As far as we know.

Chris Williams:  Yeah.

Kathryn Rubio:  Without the glorifying eating disorders, which is what in fact, the biggest loser does.  

Chris Williams:  I’d be honest; I’ve never seen that show or like read about it.  I just know that was like — That’s a catchy ass name, you know, fat phobia side, it’s really good.  It’s one of the good name lately.

Joe Patrice:   So I guess — What do we want to talk about next?  Do we want to talk about criminal law here?  So, there was a big case recently where — was it Georgia? found out that you — the Georgia law enforcement found out, you can to actually stretch things to the breaking limit.  

Chris Williams: Yeah.  This happened recently in Georgia Police Department, so basically probably like taxpayers, or force to payout like $90,000 to about 64 young adults who were all charged with one single bag of weed back in 2017 at a combo New Year’s Eve birthday party, which it sucks to get busted like that at a birthday party — it sucks to get busted like that at a New Year’s Eve party, but to really go for the combo, it shows it shows their commitment to protecting and serving the community.  I mean there had to be like — somebody had to know that there was a — they had a calendar access, somebody leaked the calendar.  But yeah, I think the numbers fall out to being like each person gets around 15,000 after you factor in fees and whatnot.  But it was ridiculous.

Joe Patrice:  So the crux of it — and so, there were 64 people that was how much?  It was like an ounce or something along those lines.  

Chris Williams:  An ounce of weed which was probably mid, like — if — you know, how mad I’ll be if one, if I got hit with a charge for having an ounce of weed that wasn’t mine with two if it was wedgie.  Like if it looked like it was mostly just like thyme and like a smidgen of oregano, like out of been so pissed off, I would be mad.  I hope it was some quality stuff, but it probably wasn’t.  It was 2017.  

Joe Patrice:  The problem here, of course, is that if you’re going to claim that you have some sort of probable cause that someone’s you know, dealing drugs or something like that, it’s hard to do that when — It’s hard to use that as the hook you’re hanging your hat on when you’re saying that 64 people are all equally responsible for dealing an ounce.  It becomes a little difficult when you’re talking about microscopic levels of sales to make an actual probable cause.  

Chris Williams:  That’s homeopathic drug dealing, that’s what it is.  

Joe Patrice:  It’s micro dosing, but really micro dosing, it’s nano dosing.

Chris Williams:  That selling weed in the same, we had LaCroix fruit flavored, you know?  And my thing is like, some dude is like, “Yeah, you know we’re protecting the community.  Fucking teenagers.  Who do they think they are?”  Like people got — I hope nobody got record off of this, but like the fact that probably some grown ass men, and a group of grown ass men did this to teenagers and like went home that night, and were like, “Yeah, I’m just protecting the community,” like the gull it takes to do that is — because it’s easy to get bogged down in the legality of it.  We’re like, “Oh well, there’s actually other cases where people are charged like say an entire car of people when a smidgen of marijuana,” but like really, this was a bunch of kids at a birthday party, like that’s what you did with your time.  That blows my mind.

Joe Patrice:  The unfortunate part about this is if the — if law enforcement have been even remotely smarter, we may never have heard of this story.  If they could have — they could have potentially rolled in and said, “These three people are responsible and it may not have ever reached this point.”  It was the sheer ridiculousness of trying to tag 64 people with an ounce that brought it to the fore.  And so, I think that’s always the reminder that people should take away from this is, that while this is an extreme instance.  

(00:15:06)

This sort of really pushing the limits of the constitutionality of these sorts of arrests is happening for every one of these that you hear, there’s a lot more where there unfortunately craftier.  

Kathryn Rubio:  Yeah, it’s not great.  

Joe Patrice:  No.  

Kathryn Rubio:  When we’re going to legalize marijuana again?

Joe Patrice:  Right.

Chris Williams:  I mean if anything this is the reason to smoke, like knowing that people decided to do this, and thought it was a good idea.  

Joe Patrice:  See, my concern is again like —

Chris Williams:  And then it’s like it went to Trial.  It didn’t look like that this was a straight up settlement.  Like people actually use that, “Yeah, let’s get some —

Kathryn Rubio:  Puts a lot of time and effort, yeah.

Chris Williams:  Yeah.  There are people like, “Yeah, I know the police were justified and charging 64 teenagers with this ounce.”  Like, “Really?”

Joe Patrice:  I mean the problem is, you get prosecutors who feel they’re in too deep because they can’t let this go, because as soon as they let this go, somebody’s going to push when they tried to tag seven people with one whether it’s drugs or a gun or whatever.  So they need to fight every battle to keep the system rolling.

Kathryn Rubio:  Well, that did not work out well for them in this instance.

Joe Patrice:  And mercifully in this instance it did not, but yeah, it’s worth keeping in mind at all times that this is the sort of thing that’s going on at all levels.  And yeah, you wish there would be a prosecutor who had the good sense to say, “This is a waste of all of our time and energy,” but —

Kathryn Rubio:  We don’t do this.

Joe Patrice:  But they get too far deep and they —

Kathryn Rubio:  Pot committed.  Keep on tracing it.

Joe Patrice:  That’s the right term, pot committed.  Literally, 

Kathryn Rubio:  Got to chase the river, right?  I remember when —

Joe Patrice:  Is nobody — Is nobody — Are you not talking about this on the double entendre level, which is way funnier that their pot committed to a weed case.  That’s the — yeah.

Kathryn Rubio:  I was going —

Joe Patrice:  But you’re just talking about poker.  

Kathryn Rubio:  I was saying, I remember the Texas Hold’em craze when it swept our country.  

Chris Williams: I’m sorry.  I was green when it came to your weed lingo.  I had nothing — nah.  

Joe Patrice:  All right.

Chris Williams:  That was dope, Joe.  

Joe Patrice:  Oh there we go.  There we go.  

Kathryn Rubio:  There you go.  There you go.

Joe Patrice:  The first one was not.  That one was.  Good job.  All right

Chris Williams:  Different strains.  

Joe Patrice:  Yeah — no, no, nice.  Okay.  All right, how we’re doing on this?  So, are we good on this topic?

Kathryn Rubio:  I don’t know.  Do you have any more puns?  That’s the question.  Do you have any more puns?

Chris Williams:  I’m okay with passing this.

Joe Patrice:  Okay, bud.

Kathryn Rubio:  Two of the left hand-side.

Joe Patrice:  Did anybody catch my “Okay, bud.”  See, I was doing the same — oh well.  

Chris Williams:  Boo.

Joe Patrice:  Bye.

Chris Williams:  This is why she didn’t reply.  This is the only reason that it shouldn’t be legalized, because there will be more of this.

Kathryn Rubio:  But for like a minute, and then people will be over it, because it wouldn’t be funny anymore.

Joe Patrice:  Sure.  From that topic to talking about Biglaw..  Kathryn you had a story this week about a major law firm and a decision.

Kathryn Rubio:  Yeah.  People make choices in this life and we are here to hold them accountable for said decisions.  But the One America News Network and their parent company Herring Networks sued AT&T, the chairman, William Kennard and DirecTV because they — DirecTV made the decision not to renew the carriage contract over a OAN, because you know it’s OAN.  They filed a lawsuit saying that it was a breach of contract, breach of fair dealing, there were disparagement clauses in the contracts, a bunch of arguments largely because there’s a separate agreement that’s in effect.  They said, “Well because there’s a separate agreement that is in effect.”  They said, “Well because there’s a separate agreement that we assumed that the original carriage contract would be renewed and they are alleging over, I think a billion dollars in damages because at present OAN has limited alternative carriage options.  Oh, and the disparagement one was also a pretty interesting theory because apparently in the carriage agreement there’s a disparagement clause, and they are making the allegation that any AT&T owned outlet is bound by the non-disparagement agreement, which includes all the on-air talent.  So, the fact that HBO’s John Oliver has said lots of things about how awful OAN is when CNN host Jake Tapper said something about OAN as a source lies, masquerading as fact when Brian Stelter said, also CNN also said something about OAN, “This is all — they’re alleging violations of — not defamation mind you, because truth and all that, but of the non-disparagement clause of the contract.  But the interesting thing —

Joe Patrice:  I’m going to go ahead.  I’m assuming Brian Stelter said that.  

Kathryn Rubio:  Oh sorry.  Yeah, it’s not the big band.

Joe Patrice:  I was going to say.  

Kathryn Rubio:  There.

Joe Patrice:  Brian Stelter is a different story.

Kathryn Rubio:  Yes.  

Joe Patrice:  Okay, go.

Kathryn Rubio:  Sorry, you’re correct, friend.  But one of the interesting parts of this case, at least as you know — listen, lots of folks have covered this lawsuit.  It is kind of interesting, we’ll see.  But for an ATL perspective figuring our sort of the folks behind it, is kind of the knot there, and it’s none other than Biglaw firm because of whatever, it’s Vedder Price.

(00:20:14)

Joe Patrice:  There we go.  We got to a point.

Kathryn Rubio:  Wow.  Okay.  Sorry, I was trying to give a little bit of texture to —

 

Joe Patrice:  Background texture, I understand.

Kathryn Rubio:  You know, listen its Vedder Price.  My point is that, the choice is that Biglaw firms make to — or of who their clients are have repercussions.  Obviously, a subject that we’ve talked about before because there are lots of protests and boycotts when Biglaw firms, have controversial clients.  Also from a recruitment aspect, there are law schools and law student groups that organized boycotts because they don’t want to be working at law firms that make these sorts of controversial representations.  This is not like — no one has to — OAN doesn’t need legal representation, right?  It’s a choice, there are big pockets here.  And you know, we should be aware of who’s making these calls unless you want to be working on these sort of cases, I suppose.  In which case, you probably already want to work for Jones Day, so.

Joe Patrice:  It seems as though it’s not a particularly great case.  AT&T is a private company, I can choose to renew its contract with whoever it wants to as far as Herring.  

Kathryn Rubio:  It’s literally up for renewal.  It’s not like they broke the agreement or something like that.  

Joe Patrice:  Right.  The only winkle is, this non-disparagement thing, which is admittedly weird and it gets extra weird when a carrier also happens to own some of the companies that are on the air, and that’s a wrinkle.  But this is not one of those cases that you would think a firm in — especially a Biglaw firm would want to inject themselves into.  I understand billables are fun to get, but it does have problems for you as a brand going forward that you’re willing to do this and make enemies of AT&T in the process doesn’t seem all that bright.  

Kathryn Rubio:  Well, it’s not also the first time that Vedder Price has represented OAN.  They’re also doing some of the work in the $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit that Dominion Voting Services has filed against OAN.  That case, that separate case also plays a role in the instant case saying that the reason why AT&T file — or you know, decided not to pick it up is because this is a way to deplete the war chest of OAN in their lawsuit against Dominion and therefore would not be able to further argue in the defamation case, which is certainly a theory.  I’m not sure that that case needs a lot of an assist.  But, yeah, it’s interesting it’s the same set of lawyers that are doing the work on behalf of OAN and both of these cases.

Joe Patrice:  Building your book on the back of OAN, doesn’t seem like —

Kathryn Rubio:  It’s like a short term solution.

Joe Patrice:  Yeah, that would not be my — If I were giving professional development coaching, I would not probably say that that’s your right move, but hey.

Kathryn Rubio:  Listen, I’m sure for those of us who have worked for Biglaw, there are always clients were like, “Oh, I guess this is the side we’re on,” because those are the folks that tend to have more money.  But I think in particular when these clients that are so vocal, and particularly in this current political moment, one that seems to be pulling the country in a very particular conspiracy theory laid in kind of direction.  Maybe we’ll give it a little more thought, you know.  And listen, I got tons of heat now over this because that’s what happens.

Joe Patrice:  Oh really?

Kathryn Rubio:  Oh yeah.

Joe Patrice:  I dint know that.

Kathryn Rubio:  Because I’m a communist obviously.

Joe Patrice:  I mean, but you know it’s fair but —

Kathryn Rubio:  That’s what people apparently think, and how dare I argue that someone should not have the lawyer that they want.

Joe Patrice:  When did the stupide, everyone gets the lawyer, the one thing really take off.  I never understood this.  Because yeah, — you have some rights.

Kathryn Rubio:  I believe in the founding fathers, right?

Joe Patrice:  No, but not — you ever write to your criminal defense attorney and stuff like that but that doesn’t mean that major corporations have the right to hire whoever they want.

Kathryn Rubio:  Right, but that story of the British holder at getting a founding father to defend them in court. 

Joe Patrice:  Sure.

Kathryn Rubio:  It takes up an undue amount of space in our collective imagination, right?  That’s who folks think we are, and I think there’s a massive difference between criminal defense attorney’s who I do think tried for criminal defense.  Every criminal defendant wrote — you know needs a good attorney.  I do not think it’s the same in civil corp., at all, but I think that —

Joe Patrice:  And God help in transactional work.

Kathryn Rubio:  Certainly a non-transactional work, right?  But I think that that story has taken on an undue important in our collective imagination, I think that people — people also who don’t necessarily think too hard about the different kinds of lawyering that there is, just like lawyers; This is what a lawyer does.  I think that that’s also part of it, kind of a lack of understanding or sort of the nuances and differences between kinds of law.  So, I do like legitimately blame the founding fathers.

(00:25:05)

Joe Patrice:  But it’s not John Adams fault that that case has now taken on this role.  I’m pretty confident — 

Chris Williams:  No, he knew.  He knew.

Joe Patrice:  I’m pretty confident that the first 150 years or so, in which it didn’t have this sort of import — heated and just cooled with.  Yeah, but it has become a thing, I feel like it’s largely done that as bigger firms have tried to create some sort of cover for their more objectionable practices and —

Kathryn Rubio:  Well, it’s also because — we’re a more transparent now, right?  In the in the 90s, you didn’t hear as much about whose clients, who is representing them.  You didn’t hear what any Biglaw firm was doing, unless you are working there, working at the firm or against the firm.  You probably just were unaware, there’s a lot more media now, more niche media — Hey ATL, but I think that’s part of it.  Folks are getting more attention on who their clients are and I think that’s completely fair and justified, but this is the reaction to it.

Joe Patrice:  Yeah.  And yeah, so maybe that’s what it’s —

Kathryn Rubio:  Part of it.  It’s a rich tapestry, lots of ins, lots of ifs, lots of what have you.  

Joe Patrice:  That seems like a wrap on that conversation.  So, with no further ado.  Waiting to see if there were further ado —

Kathryn Rubio:  Well, that to me, that is my starting word over every day, so.

Chris Williams:  I do.

Joe Patrice:  It was not.

Kathryn Rubio:  I do.

Joe Patrice:  Because that’s not five letters long.

Kathryn Rubio:  I do.

Chris Williams:  A-D-I-U.

Joe Patrice:  That is also a word, but I just said further ado, so.

Kathryn Rubio:  Oh like A-D-O.

Chris Williams: There we go.

Joe Patrice:  Yeah, so.  Yeah.

Kathryn Rubio:  Fair.

Joe Patrice:  So anyway —

Kathryn Rubio:  That’s what you’re reminding me of, so whatever.

Joe Patrice:  Well, I’m glad that we got to the bottom of that.  So, I think that we’re done for the time being.  Thanks for listening.  You should be subscribed to the show, so you’ll get episodes when they come out.  You should give reviews, stars, write something, it helps out, it shows that there’s some engagement out there.  You should be reading Above the Law.  So, you’ll hear about these stories and others as they happened.  You should be following us on social media, I’m at Joseph Patrice, she’s at Katheryn1, he’s at Rights for Rent.  You should be listening to our other shows.  Kathryn is on the Jabot, I’m on the Legal Tech Week.

Kathryn Rubio:  Oh, so close.

Joe Patrice:  I’m on the Legal Tech Week, Joe’s round table.  You should be listening to the other offerings of the Legal Talk Network and that I think wraps up everything.  Thanks to Posh for sponsoring and — And yeah.

Chris Williams:  Adiu.

Joe Patrice:  Well done.

[Music]

Continue Reading