The Justices Are One Big, Happy Family, Says Justice No One Likes

Episode Notes

Transcript

[Music]

Joe Patrice: Hey, everybody!

Kathryn Rubino: Hey!

Joe Patrice: Welcome to Thinking Like a Lawyer.  I’m Joe Patrice.

Kathryn Rubino: Welcome!  I’m Kathryn Rubino.

Joe Patrice: Oh, okay.

Kathryn Rubino: That’s my name.

Joe Patrice: It is.

Kathryn Rubino: You go figure out.

Joe Patrice: I don’t think there’s any risk to that.  So, welcome to this edition.  We are both editors here at Above The Law and we’re doing the show as we do every week to go over some of the big stories of the past of the week that was.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah.

Joe Patrice: And —

Kathryn Rubino: You try to give a little bit of a recap vibe.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, you know.

Kathryn Rubino: Nothing too crazy.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, you know and we begin as per usual with a little bit of a —

Kathryn Rubino: Done, da-da.

Joe Patrice: Right.

Kathryn Rubino: Okay.  I fully turned on it.  I like it.

Joe Patrice: Oh, yeah?

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah, it’s fun.

Joe Patrice: You think this is reverse psychology, don’t you?

Kathryn Rubino: Maybe.  No, I earnestly think it adds a bit of whimsy to our day.

Joe Patrice: Whimsy.

Kathryn Rubino: Whimsy.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.

Kathryn Rubino: How was your weekend, Joe Patrice?

Joe Patrice: Good.  I took a travel to a debate tournament, did that, came on back.  I saw the end of the various football games which were interesting.

Kathryn Rubino: Well, one of them was interesting.

Joe Patrice: That’s a good point.  The other one was the opposite of interesting.

Kathryn Rubino: You have to feel though for the 49ers.  Their inability to keep a quarterback healthy is truly astonishing.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, yeah, no, that is fair.

Kathryn Rubino: Their fourth stringer went down.

Joe Patrice: Yes.

Kathryn Rubino: And then, they brought back the third stringer who couldn’t throw the ball.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.

Kathryn Rubino: So, rough times, rough times for San Fran.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, no, that’s a string of fairly rough losses but whatever.  So yeah, so did all that.  What about you?  What’s up?  Anything up?  Not necessarily weekend just like whatever?

Kathryn Rubino: Nothing too, too crazy going on here.  I feel like there’s been a recent influx of very interesting TV shows and I feel like I need to prioritize which one’s I’m actually going to invest my time in, —

Joe Patrice: Okay.

Kathryn Rubino: — which is a very low stakes thing to have to worry about.

Joe Patrice: Yes.

Kathryn Rubino: But here we are recently watched Kaleidoscope on Netflix, —

Joe Patrice: Okay.

Kathryn Rubino: — which is that TV show.  It’s like a heist movie but broken up into TV show form.  And then, you can watch it in any order except that there is like a last episode.  But other than that, you can kind of watch it in whatever order.

Joe Patrice: Okay.

Kathryn Rubino: What is interesting I think the concept is more intriguing than necessarily the plot, but I enjoyed myself watching it.  But now, I’m trying to find like other people I know who have watched it in a different order.

Joe Patrice: Right.  So, you can have that conversation.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah, have you watched it?

Joe Patrice: Would you have like a sense?  I have not.

Kathryn Rubino: Really?

Joe Patrice: So, I can’t help you.

Kathryn Rubino: Shame, shameful.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.  I feel as though this is like some sort of attempt to guilt me into doing that but, you know, —

Kathryn Rubino: Yes.

Joe Patrice: I’m steadfast.

Kathryn Rubino: You are clever.  Look at that.  You are observant.

Joe Patrice: I will not be bullied by other —

Kathryn Rubino: I don’t think it’s bullying.

Joe Patrice: You know.

Kathryn Rubino: It’s just subtle pressure.

Joe Patrice: You and the mob trying to make that I don’t even know.

Kathryn Rubino: No.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.  I’ve been doing a lot of stories about people who feel as though that’s a complaint that they can make.  So yeah, so –

Kathryn Rubino: Wild.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, anyway.

Kathryn Rubino: Other than that, I’m kind of in a good mood this morning because I went to Sonic and got a Diet Coke with their delicious crunchy ice.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.

Kathryn Rubino: And, you know, it’s a little things that really make a day.

Joe Patrice: I actually investigated a while ago whether or not, like there was a way to make that kind of ice at home and they do sell ice makers that can make —

Kathryn Rubino: It was like I certainly seen TikToks about it.

Joe Patrice: They can make Sonic style ice and those things are like 500 bucks each to get a thing that just makes that ice and I was like, ah, I can’t.

Kathryn Rubino: That feels worth it to me.  I don’t think I’m appreciably more wealthy than you, but I do think that ice would increase my personal — that kind of ice in particular would increase my personal value to life.

Joe Patrice: Wow! Your life is in a weird place if that’s a life-enhancing moment.

Kathryn Rubino: Maybe, I can maybe take the time —

Joe Patrice: Or maybe, you’re in the great place.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah.  I can just take the time to appreciate the small things —

Joe Patrice: Okay.

Kathryn Rubino: — that really improve the overall texture and fabric of my day-to-day.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, because that could go two different ways.  It can either be that you’re so —

Kathryn Rubino: Let’s take in the good one.

Joe Patrice: You’re either so good that you care about these little things or it’s so bad that the infinite increase that is just getting ice —

Kathryn Rubino: Crunchy ice.

Joe Patrice: — pulled you out of your dreary.

Kathryn Rubino: You can like chew the ice.  It’s really good.  It’s like nugget ice.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.

Kathryn Rubino: It’s the little things, Joe.  Make life worth living.  What’s your like tiny pleasure that you get some true enjoyment from?

(00:05:00)

Joe Patrice: Enjoyment.  I kind of remember what that is —

Kathryn Rubino: Are you sure you haven’t right now?

Joe Patrice:  — since law school.

Kathryn Rubino: It’s been steadily down ever since you graduated law school?

Joe Patrice: What’s the line from the movie, the great movie ‘Office Space’ on every day you see me, that’s the worst day of my life.  No, yeah, I guess.

Kathryn Rubino: You don’t work in big law anymore.

Joe Patrice: That’s true.  I guess, if there’s anything that brings my life joy, it’s writing about law professors.

Kathryn Rubino: Oh, my gosh.  Here we go.  You’re talking about work.

Joe Patrice: I mean, I have to because unfortunately our time is up for small talk.  So, I have to segue shift.

Kathryn Rubino: There’s no timer.

Joe Patrice:  See, that’s —

Kathryn Rubino: This is just you not wanting to divulge what actually brings you joy because I refuse to believe you have no joy.

Joe Patrice: See.  But again, you don’t know how much fun it is to talk about law professors.  So, let’s get into that.

Kathryn Rubino: Oh, man.

Joe Patrice: What are the big stories that we had last week?  Is that a law professor who works at several of the New York area law schools in various capacities?  But in this instance was up at Columbia teaching evidence.  Professor, it was lecture being filmed, had a microphone, a student came up and asked if it was possible to slow down a little on some concepts because of the number of international students in the class who were struggling to keep up with the speed of the lectures and he said no.

Kathryn Rubino: Well, is it because there’s a lot of concepts to get through?  You really do, have to get through all of the hearsay exceptions.

Joe Patrice: I agree.  And that I got to be honest.  So, we got a deluge of tips about this particular story with people sending us clips of the video because what he says is not just know.  He says it’s an assumption of risk that they can’t keep up and that he’s been doing this for these same lectures for years and he’s not changing them.  And then when she walked away, he just like muttered under his breath, “Fuck you.”

Kathryn Rubino: Well, that’s less great.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.  When they caught on video that is less great.

Kathryn Rubino: That makes it worse.

Joe Patrice: No, but you do hit on a good point.  A lot of the students who sent us this tip and he has since apologized for this which is the correct move at all.

Kathryn Rubino: Of course.

Joe Patrice: Yes.

Kathryn Rubino: You shouldn’t curse at your students particularly not when you know it’s being taped.

Joe Patrice: Yeah. One thing though in my coverage of it, a lot of the students were very like this is so awful which there is that, but I tried to bend over a little bit backwards to, look, it is like you said.  You can’t like skip hearsay exception, right?  And the professors have a finite amount of time that they can cover the material and if you’re slowing down to get more in-depth on something means trading off with talking about something else.  And so, that request made to course is actually very difficult and bordering on unreasonable.  So, I’ve thrown that out there.

Kathryn Rubino: I think that perhaps that particular accommodation is not one that’s likely for the reasons you have outlined but perhaps there are other things.  There are office hours.  You said that there was a video, right?

Joe Patrice: Yeah.  So, one thing is this is videotaped, right?  I think that’s a fairly important fact here.  Yes.  He’s not slowed down, but you can go back over the videos and watch those which I didn’t have videos of all my courses.  So, this is actually an accommodation that’s already pretty reasonable.  Yes, it is different to see the lecture called later than it is to understand it in the moment and be able to ask questions about it there, but theoretically, the right response here would be for him to say, “I’m sorry that’s why we have the videos, but I’m happy to have extra office hours” or “I’m happy to have a study session where we do slow down,” like one more — these are the sorts of responses that you need to be able to do.  Now, I understand that there’s kind of in the moment frustration whenever you get told, you change something real fast.

Kathryn Rubino: Do you change the way you’ve done something for 15 years? Yeah.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, but it’s like I pointed out, you still can’t go the direction of cursing out the students which —

Kathryn Rubino: It’s probably not a good look.  Yeah.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, which of course, he didn’t think he was doing to their face, but you know, —

Kathryn Rubino: Sure.  And so, what happened?

Joe Patrice: It’s a hot mic, you know.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah, and I know there’s plenty of outrage for a law professor cursing a student even though questionable, but then that the student heard in the moment.  Although, I mean, there must have been enough that was heard because, I mean, yeah, you can go back on the video and look at it, but somebody heard it in real time to even know to look at the video I suppose, but I don’t know.  The legal profession is not known as the most courteous profession to one another.

(00:10:00)

Joe Patrice: That’s fair.

Kathryn Rubino: So, you know, I hear a lot of complaints from folks when there are certain accommodations or certain complaints about things that are happening in the legal Academia and they say, “Well, how are they ever going to learn how to be real lawyers?”  And so, I was like, “Well, you don’t have to be actually exposed to the N word from your law professor in order to understand what is happening in those cases.”

Joe Patrice: Yeah.

Kathryn Rubino: And I think that that is true, but I also think that maybe hearing ‘fuck you’ from a law professor probably isn’t the worst bit of rudeness that you will hear in the course of your legal profession.

Joe Patrice: Yeah, I felt that this story that it was very much — like I felt very conflicted throughout the story because I was like, yes, this is unacceptable and he needs to apologize which of course he did.  He needs to do something to accommodate students because it is something of an exclusion that’s happening.  I think solely long national origin lines and that’s not a great thing either.

Kathryn Rubino: That is a category.

Joe Patrice: But I also thought it’s an understandable response to being told to change up things midway through.  And so, I wanted to highlight that, too.  So, it’s one of those stories that you write where you’re trying to make clear that it’s a multi-faceted problem.

Kathryn Rubino: It’s nuance here and certainly from the reader response, I think that that has been understood but that maybe is it —

Joe Patrice: You do?  I didn’t think that further either.

Kathryn Rubino: Oh, yeah.  What was your take?

Joe Patrice: I mean, the reader response I’ve been getting has been nothing but people claiming that I’m some sort of destroying the legal profession by daring to question a law professor who the law professors should be more cruel to students.  What’s wrong with all the sophistication of the bubble?  Like, that’s all I’ve got.

Kathryn Rubino: Wow!

Joe Patrice:  No, yeah.  Have you not been seeing these?  They usually come to the general tips line maybe.

Kathryn Rubino: I mean, I haven’t looked perhaps as closely, but I just saw a couple that just seemed like a normal like, oh, that, you know.  Listen, should he have done what he did?  No.  Do we understand it?  Yes.  Did he apologize?  Should he make accommodations in the future?  Also, yes.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.  I think that’s true.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah.

Joe Patrice: And I hope.  The one thing I kind of hope about the story is that everyone’s taking something away from it which I’m not sure based on the reader response has happened, but everybody should be taking something away both the professor side that you should be more accommodating where you can and the student side that sometimes these requests are going to frustrate the professor and that’s going to be okay and, definitely, the problem here was the lack of accommodations or the lack of in the moment generosity toward accommodation and absolutely not, oh, no, someone used a bad word at me which, I mean, we can talk and should talk about making the legal profession in more humane place and try to use whatever influence we have to make people be more civil to each other.

Kathryn Rubino: That is great.

Joe Patrice: But it’s not going to change completely.  No matter what we do, there are going to be horrible clients.  We can’t control them.

Kathryn Rubino: I mean, listen, there’s an active stereotype in big law of the screamer partner that doesn’t know another volume besides full and will happily use a number of curse words at you, directed at you, directed at your family members if you don’t organize their binder correctly.

Joe Patrice: Right.  And while we should be unswerving that that’s not okay, it also is not the end of the world that that sort of stuff is happening.  You know, you can believe both things that the world can be better and that it’s not the worst problem in any given situation.  That’s all I was kind of hoping and that’s why I thought this was kind of a — it was classic Above the Law as a piece in that it’s a fairly provocative situation and headline.  Oh, my God!  This professor says whatever.  And hopefully, the story talks about the nuances involved.  I always like to think the best of Above the Law is when we cook people with a wild and crazy situation and then managed to hopefully get across that there’s some nuance in it as we get further.

Kathryn Rubino: Fair enough.

Christopher T. Anderson: If you’re a lawyer running a solo or small firm and you’re looking for other lawyers to talk through issues you’re currently facing in your practice, join The Un-Billable Hours Community Roundtable, a free virtual event on the third Thursday of every month.  Lawyers from all over the country come together and meet with me lawyer in law firm management consultant, Christopher T. Anderson, to discuss best practices on topics such as marketing, —

(00:15:00)

— client acquisition, hiring and firing and time management.  The conversation is free to join but requires a simple reservation.  The link to RSVP can be found on The Un-Billable Hour page at legaltalknetwork.com.  We’ll see you there.

[Music]

Jared Correia: They say the best things in life are free which either means the Legal Toolkit Podcast is pretty awesome or we’re totally committed to the wrong business model.  You’ll just have to tune in to find out which it is.  I’m Jared Correia and each episode I run the risk of making total ass of myself.  So, you can have a laugh, learn something new and why not?  Maybe even improve your law practice.  Stop believing podcast can’t be both fun and helpful.  Subscribe now to the Legal Toolkit.  Go ahead, I’ll wait.

Joe Patrice: Okay, we’re back.  What else has happened?  Justice Kagan and Bruce time did a little thing.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah, Kavanaugh is back in the news.  He gave a talk at Notre Dame Law School and it was very interesting for the things that he didn’t say, right?  You have to remember that right the week or so, maybe 10 days before he made the appearance or at least before the contents of the appearance became public because it’s the Supreme Court.  There is a delay between the event and when we all heard about it, but there was the movie at Sundance, a surprise documentary called ‘Justice’ by Director Doug Liman that details all of the sexual assault allegations that have been leveled against Brett Kavanaugh as well as the less than thorough FBI investigation into the same.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.

Kathryn Rubino: So, there’s that kind of going on in the background.  If you had Brett Kavanaugh on your Google news alert, you would have seen a ton of stuff from Sundance not just because of the contents of the film but also the producers of the film said that following the premiere, they got a bunch of new tips about new stories, about new things.  One might have hoped at one point that the FBI might have looked into these things, but we’re not holding our breath anymore.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.  No, the FBI doesn’t do that sort of stuff very well, apparently.

Kathryn Rubino: So, it’s against this backdrop.  He comes to Notre Dame and start talking shit on US News.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.  So, in the middle, well, he also talked about how, oh, everybody on the Supreme Court loves each other.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah.  He also definitely which is another interesting thing because of the context of it all.  I think that if you look over the last 10 or so years of these random talks that various justices on both sides of the political spectrum give at law schools, there’s lots of these sorts of quotes as the ones that he was giving that, oh, we’re still collegial.  We have lunch together.  Some of the details even I was like, yes, I’ve heard that before that they have weekly lunches together when courts in session and these kinds of various details, these things come up a lot in kind of general Supreme Court conversations that happened.  But what I think makes it particularly interesting that Brett Kavanaugh brings it up now is that there have been lots of stories and lots of rumors about the Supreme Court no longer getting along.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.  It’s almost like you can track the barometer less by the justices saying they do get along and counting the number of times that they don’t push out this obligatory claptrap.  If a justice speaks at an event and does not go effusively into how everybody’s best friends, that’s a way more telling than hearing that they are.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah.  And again, this is on back of story in the Atlantic detailing some of the information we have of what’s going on and sort of since the court has become more radicalized post Dobbs, there have been a sort of fraying of tensions on the court and they point to a couple of specific examples and sort of when the last big story about the court was they don’t like each other for his main takeaway of his talk.  Like, what are you talking about?  We are best friends.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.

Kathryn Rubino: It’s a stark.

Joe Patrice: All right.  Well, I derailed you there because I thought that was an interesting topic too, but you also wanted to talk about how he has thoughts on US News.

Kathryn Rubino: You don’t like them.  You don’t like their rankings.

Joe Patrice:  Oh, well, so —

Kathryn Rubino: It’s that the reputation score.  So, part of the US News rankings for those who maybe don’t know is they give out surveys to law schools for folks to rank how prestigious they think their peer schools are and he says that that does not reflect the actual quality of legal education that they’re receiving.

Joe Patrice: Interesting.  At this point, I will point out that Brett Kavanaugh’s clerks all went to Yale Harvard or Stanford this term.

(00:20:04)

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah.

Joe Patrice: So, —

Kathryn Rubino: And even if you look historically, there’s not many out of that little cluster.  I think —

Joe Patrice: I do believe that —

Kathryn Rubino: They have a couple in the T14 —

Joe Patrice:  Yeah.

Kathryn Rubino: — kind of outside of just the very tippytoe hop, but there are no state school, well, non-T14 state schools represented on there.  It’s not like he’s changed how he hires clerks compared to all of his peers and all of the allegations of sort of elitism that is very much represented in the reputation score in the US News ranking.

Joe Patrice: Yes.  Look, there are a lot of problems with the US News, but it has become fashionable to bash this ranking service in ways that it almost makes us an Above the Law writer for quite some time.  It feels somewhat bittersweet.  It feels like this is a ranking that we have bashed for years for a number of fairly — we think fairly substantial and important reasons.  And now between elite law schools and Supreme Court Justices, they’re all bashing it, too, for mostly bad reasons.  I find myself having to defend US News an entity that I have been mocking for years because the current criticism of them is so dumb.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah.  Again, nuance is kind of the word of the episode here.

Joe Patrice: Yes, nuance is the word of the episode. At anytime, that means that any time you hear someone use the secret words, you’re no longer allowed. All right, nobody gets that reference amongst others.

Kathryn Rubino: Come on, PV’s playhouse.  People remember that.

Joe Patrice: I mean, I know you do, but I feel as they were audience playtime.

Kathryn Rubino: People remember PV’s playhouse.

Joe Patrice: Anyway, but that is what that is.  Your clients are expecting you to do a lot of things about a lot of things even topics like domain names.

Kathryn Rubino: The names will definitely not cover into 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.

[Music]

Craig Williams: Today’s legal news is rarely a straightforward as the headlines that accompany them.  On Lawyer 2 Lawyer, we provide 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 2 Lawyer on the Legal Talk Network or wherever you subscribe to podcasts.

Joe Patrice: All right.  What’s the last nuanced topic we’ve got?  Oh, see you then.

Kathryn Rubino: I was turned away, Joe.  Yeah.  So, the last story we have to talk about is the big law partner that cost his firm $62 million.

Joe Patrice: That’s a lot of money.

Kathryn Rubino: It’s a lot of money.  It’s a lot of money.  So, it’s a story that the Kansas City Star was on top of and it’s about Husch Blackwell partner, Charles Renner.  There’s a lot of detail here.  I don’t want to go into all of it.  We don’t want to have an hour and a half long episode, but basically, the Kansas City Star was able to get a hold of the arbitration decision between a former Husch Blackwell client, this engineering firm, and the firm as a result of what went on for the Kansas City Airport.  They’re building new buildings and doing a whole bunch of cool stuff there, whatever, and this engineering firm had been a client of the firm, worked with another partner, in fact, had had conflict checks and the complex waivers that they had signed in the years kind of leading up to this and, in fact, Renner had reached out when it became public that this engineering firm was trying to negotiate with the city to kind of get this contract to redo the airport.  He reached out and wanted to represent them and they apparently declined.  And then the next day, he reached out to the city council and tried to represent them.  He eventually, —

Joe Patrice: Ooh.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah, along with Wilmer Hale was made outside counsel on this project.  In a lot of the things he did or is alleged to do in that what the arbitration panel found during the course of his representation of the city on this project was to kind of tip the scales in the opposite favor of this former client and engineering firm.  He actually had another client that put in a competing bid for the contract that client eventually got it in part because he told folks on the city council they really couldn’t vote for his old client’s proposition —

(00:25:00)

— because it was in violation of a municipal bond ordinance, dot, dot, dot, when the winning bid of his new client was accepted.  It was eventually learned that that bid was also not in compliance with the municipal bond ordinance and, in fact, it had to be amended.

Joe Patrice: Yikes.

Kathryn Rubino: So, there’s a lot of back and forth that happened there and the arbitration panel decided that the award would be $62 million which is the profit that the engineering company would have expected had they been awarded the contract.  Conflict checks are no joke.

Joe Patrice: They are not.  Yeah.  Actually, this is very much changing the topic but to another legal industry conversation that segues well.  Conflicts are no joke which is why the growing — we’ve been reporting a lot about mergers.  We know we’re looking at this Hogan Lovells Sherman Sterling murder that may well be happening.  We’ve also seen a bunch of mid and regional level murders.  And when we say conflict checks are no joke, like historically, those sorts of mergers become an issue because conflicts show up.  You start having, especially when you’re dealing with organizations with hundreds of partners, you start end up having to have the conversation, you’re going to have to forfeit half your book because it conflicts with somebody at this other firm’s book that is in merged.

Kathryn Rubino: That is in merge.  So, it makes sense for the firm, but when partners are being paid on their individual book is a real source of discontentment for that partner or that group.

Joe Patrice: Yes.  So, in most mergers, you think there might be some redundancy issues still on the backend but more or less mergers bring together and create something bigger.  That doesn’t necessarily work that way at the individual level.  You end up with a lot of folks who find the business that they built.  They find themselves in a situation of looking elsewhere or fourth inning a lot of their value to the firm which translates to how much they get paid which is a problem.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah.

Joe Patrice: Yeah.  When we talk conflicts, they really do reverb throughout the whole industry.

Kathryn Rubino: For sure, I think there are allegations in this particular case though that this attorney had actually gone to like a client party at that engineering firm’s place like in the middle of as this is all going on.  It wasn’t like he was really unaware of the engineering firm’s relationship with the law firm.

Joe Patrice: I did mean to suggest it was the same situation.

Kathryn Rubino: No, I know.

Joe Patrice: I said that was a segue.

Kathryn Rubino: Yeah.

Joe Patrice: Are you trying to start a new sound effect?  What is that?

Kathryn Rubino: No, I just forgot to do my small talk.

Joe Patrice: Oh, yeah.

Kathryn Rubino: So, I just wanted to bring it back here.  No, but yeah.  There have been a lot of mergers, I think, in big law this year and it’ll be interesting to see how many — I mean, we’re still in January.  I guess, this episode will come out in the first week of February, but —

Joe Patrice: Yeah, you’ve already screwed it up.  Now, you’ve destroyed the illusion.

Kathryn Rubino: Do you really think everyone thinks we’re live?  You think?  No, everyone’s familiar with how podcasts work.  This isn’t like new tech.  Anyway, the point is we’ve seen a bunch of them for only the first month or so into the new year and I think it’ll be really interesting to see how it ramps up particularly with the kind of specter of lagging collections going on of decrease in profits per partner.  We’re expecting when last year’s financials get reported out.  It’d be interesting.

Joe Patrice: Cool.  All right, I think that’s everything for us today.  Yeah.  So, if you aren’t already subscribed, you should be, that way you get all these new episodes when they come out.  You should be listening to the Jabo, another podcast that Kathryn hosts.  You can also listen to the Legal Tech Week Journalists Roundtable that I’m on.  You can listen to the other shows on the Legal Talk Network.  In the case of all of those shows, you should give reviews and write some things.  That gets more people listening.  You can read Above the Law, of course, —

Kathryn Rubino: Always.

Joe Patrice: So, you see more of these stories before we talk about them.  Maybe, you know, it’s like your homework.  You can try to guess what we’re going to talk about.  You can have your own opinions before you hear us chat.  You should be following us on social media.  For now, it’s still mostly at Twitter until that really does collapse but we’ll see.

Kathryn Rubino: For now, yeah.  The blog is at ATL blog.

Joe Patrice: That is true.

Kathryn Rubino: And then, you are I think at Joseph Patrice.

Joe Patrice: That is true.  And you?

Kathryn Rubino: I’m at Kathryn 1.

Joe Patrice: So, the word — oh, no, not the word.  The numeral one.

Kathryn Rubino: That’s correct.

Joe Patrice: Okay.

Kathryn Rubino: See, you’re smarter than you look.

Joe Patrice: Okay.  So, what else?

[Music]

Is there anything else there?  I can’t even remember.

Kathryn Rubino: I think we’re pretty good.

(00:30:00)

Joe Patrice: I lost track of our usual —

Kathryn Rubino: Listen to other podcasts that are on the —

Joe Patrice: On the Legal Talk Network, yeah, I think I did say that.

Kathryn Rubino: Did you?  I can’t remember.

Joe Patrice: And review those, too. Yeah.

Kathryn Rubino: Okay, great.  Then, let’s get out of here, y’all.

Joe Patrice: Okay.  Then, I think that is it.  We will talk to you next week.

[Music]

Continue Reading