Law Firm Confidentiality Can’t Be Left To The Honor System

Episode Notes

Transcript

Joe Patrice:

Welcome to another edition of Thinking Like A Lawyer. I’m Joe Patrice.

Kathryn Rubino:

Hi, Joe Patrice. I’m Kathryn Rubino.

Chris Williams:

Still Chris.

Kathryn Rubino:

Yeah, and we are some of your editors at Above, the Law. We do this show every week to talk about some of the big stories in the legal industry from the week that was, and it was a very busy week. Obviously the biggest issue before we go to small talk, the biggest issue, of course was more and more bonuses, which

Chris Williams:

I guess that’s

Joe Patrice:

Important, which, yes. Which I don’t know that there’s anything more we have to say about it based from last week.

Kathryn Rubino:

Yeah, I mean, there’s not a ton out there really. Super briefly, I can just recap that the majority of AML 50 firms seem to be readily meeting. Maybe there’s a hours requirement to get the bonus, which might be a wrinkle that not every firm is doing it. Certainly Millbank who initiated the scale, did not have any hours requirement for special. They don’t have ’em for their regular bonuses either. But that was kind of a wrinkle. But the majority of the matches have in fact come from that top tier or from sort of boutiques. Boutiques. Right. I think there was one firm that was in the top 100 head wallet matched recently. So I think that’s really going to be the big story is how many firms outside of the top 50 wind up matching. And also sort of the related is how many of those firms outside currently outside of the top 50, wind up in the top 50 or making big increases to their ranking overall based on revenue. I think it’s a good indicator anyway.

Chris Williams:

I mean including that, but besides that wasn’t last week Also when we decided that it’s the Milbank scale now.

Kathryn Rubino:

Yeah, for sure. The Milbank scale. Yeah, Milbank started it. I, that’s

Chris Williams:

Right. Which is a much easier firm for novices to say, so thank you, Milbank. Unless it’s Milbank, in which case, damnit

Joe Patrice:

No. So good on Millbank. They finally got over that hump of having Cravath tried to steal some of their credit. Okay. So that’s why we aren’t having that as one of our big stories of the week, even though it actually was the biggest story of last week. But

Kathryn Rubino:

People are interested

Joe Patrice:

For sure. Yes, absolutely. But there’s not a lot more to say that we didn’t already say last week, so, well, let’s take a moment now to have a little bit of small talk.

Chris Williams:

So Kendrick dropped.

Joe Patrice:

Oh yeah.

Chris Williams:

Kendrick did drop.

Kathryn Rubino:

Have you listened? What are your deep thoughts, Chris?

Chris Williams:

My deep thought that is,

Joe Patrice:

Oh

Kathryn Rubino:

No,

Joe Patrice:

What

Chris Williams:

A professional speaking, Joe. My deep thought that is at least tangentially legal related, but still small talk is if only somebody had access to a popping legal social media account and just wrote out mail instead of mustard, just to make it see, it would’ve had more stain to it, if not for Joe’s interruption, but it’s all good.

Kathryn Rubino:

I will say that I am officially done decorating for Christmas, so I really, in my mind had Thanksgiving as a hard cutoff because I need to get all of the glitter and various berries and tinsel, et cetera, cleaned up from my house before. I have people in it for Thanksgiving. I’m having guess it’s not a terribly large crowd. I’m having 10 people for Thanksgiving, and I’m pretty jazzed about it generally. But I did want to have all my trees up so that everyone can appreciate my merriment.

Chris Williams:

What is the most quintessential Thanksgiving dish that does not involve Turkey?

Kathryn Rubino:

Oh, that’s a great question. I think stuffing.

Joe Patrice:

Yeah, but doesn’t that technically involve Turkey that people think I would count them as similar? I think then it becomes mashed potatoes.

Kathryn Rubino:

Mashed potatoes. Yeah. I mean, that’s a non-negotiable in my family, for sure.

Chris Williams:

Sweet potatoes in my mind, it’s like in my mind, it’s specifically canned cranberry sauce.

Joe Patrice:

Okay.

Kathryn Rubino:

See, that’s interesting. I wind up making cranberry sauce and I always do it, and nobody, which is the worst option.

Chris Williams:

It is the worst option. This is one of the few times where it has to be cold, strangely, purple bee colored and have those little ridges. That’s the sign of quality, not none of this. Oh, this is organic cranberry. Fuck it.

Joe Patrice:

I kind of agree with that too.

Kathryn Rubino:

I’ve never actually eaten cans cranberry sauce,

Chris Williams:

By the way. Oh, you’ve never lived.

Kathryn Rubino:

Apparently. Did you know…

Chris Williams:

I’m sorry. It’s right there in the document, the right to Life, Liberty, happiness and Canned Cranberry.

Kathryn Rubino:

Did you know the canned cranberry sauce was invented by a lawyer? Pretty much every Thanksgiving I do that as our trivia question of the day, but it’s true.

Chris Williams:

Earning that bonus. Nice. And to our listeners, you’re now listening to eating like a lawyer.

Kathryn Rubino:

No, I don’t really eat cranberry sauce generally, but I was actually thinking, I saw a recipe this year, I think it’s a Bobby Flay one where they kind of combined cranberry sauce with pinot noir and figs and stew that I was like, now there might be a version of cranberry sauce. I think I should like cranberry sauce. It seems like the thing I would like. I just don’t, I mean, I think that it should work, and here’s the thing. I’m not opposed to cranberry sauce if it’s on a sandwich the day after, or I think that that’s maybe my best usage scenario for cranberry sauce, because it adds a nice little tang and alleviation of some of the heaviness that you’re trying to put on your, you’re warmed over Parker roll or whatever, but the day of cranberry sauce just doesn’t make it onto the plate. But I’m hopeful that this new fig wine cranberry do something good for my table. All right.

Joe Patrice:

Well, cool. I guess,

Kathryn Rubino:

Well, do you have anything to say? What’s new in your life, Joe?

Joe Patrice:

My thing is not, it’s quasi work related, but not really. It’s that I just want to do a shout out to the headline writers who managed to create some of the most hilarious but not hilarious moments of irony that I enjoy as somebody who covers the news. I mean, I think we all know the famous headless Body founded Topless Bar headline, but along the same lines, I want to give a shout out to one of the ALM Publications Daily Business Review with Chicago, mid-size firm will combine with Miami boutique to form antitrust powerhouse That’s just merging to form an antitrust powerhouse. That’s just chef’s kiss of irony. But anyway, so congratulations to the irony there.

Kathryn Rubino:

Well, irony’s not quite dead maybe.

Joe Patrice:

Yeah. Okay. Well, so with that, let’s put a stop to this segment. Move on to talking about email,

Kathryn Rubino:

What’s in her emails, things that really matter.

No, this is certainly an email story, but not sort of solely related to the email part of it. It was a story from Norton Rolls Fulbright, several of their South African offices had a bit of a snooping problem. It turned out that several partners had saved confidential internal emails. Nothing client related, nothing client facing was breached in any way, but they saved some internal client internal emails and other sort of documents that were very much confidential and only meant for a partnership level on their internal document management platform, and did not put a password or a lock on them at all. And so enterprising associates found them. They found that they existed, that they were able to access them, and they read them. The push and pull that’s happened at the firm. Is the partnership very angry that things clearly marked confidential, not for your eyes have been looked at by associates. They actually had a meeting where they tried to guilt everybody to confessing of if they were one of the people who had seen the emails promising leniency if they did. But also said, but we have the list of people who have accessed it. So I’m not sure how both of those things work together, but whatever. And also the associates themselves are kind of pissed because it’s on you. Their internal document management protocol says it’s on you to make sure your documents are properly secured on this system. Right.

Joe Patrice:

Well, and that’s the thing, as I understand this story, it arises up as a tech issue. So they are moving from hummingbird to iManage, I believe, or

Kathryn Rubino:

Vice versa. They did that a while ago. But on that iManage system, you have to, I think, affirmatively click on that. It’s

Joe Patrice:

Which you do, and you should do that and have an obligation to do that. I wonder if to the extent that it was a new system. That’s part of the reason.

Kathryn Rubino:

Well, they actually moved over in the early two thousands. Yeah.

Joe Patrice:

Oh, that’s therefore a very odd thing to have as a detail in this story. I didn’t even pay attention to the time. Once I read the part about how they had transitioned. I was like, oh, well, that makes some sense.

Kathryn Rubino:

Yeah. So I don’t know if it was just sort of habit that had developed with partners who’ve been around since before then, or there’s a difference in the setting or whatnot, but it was certainly, I guess, relevant to the people there.

Joe Patrice:

It’s utterly ridiculous to suggest just having the word confidential on something means that it is not readily accessible unless there’s some real gating going on. Because so much of what you write in the legal context is in fact marked confidential. So there’s no good way that you could prevent people from looking at that.

Chris Williams:

I’m curious about what the actual confidential wording of it was, because as I understand it, it’s usually confidential to people that are outside of the firm, what have you. But if you’re in the firm,

Joe Patrice:

No. These are going to be situations where somebody wrote up someone’s employee review and stuff like

Kathryn Rubino:

That. Yeah, it’s going to be from partner X to

Joe Patrice:

Partner Y. Hey, let’s slash their salaries, or let’s

Kathryn Rubino:

Fire this person, or don’t give work to blah, blah, blah. Associates, they’re terrible at their job, are going to address it at their, I don’t know. We don’t know all the

Chris Williams:

Details. I’m assuming the thing that was confidential was because these are emails, you notice that boilerplate at the bottom of an email. This is a confidential communication. If you’ve received this accidentally, please notify the senator, blah, blah, blah. I’m assuming it’s that the same shit they said on every email, not that they had a specific confidential email header for talking to the partners.

Joe Patrice:

Which makes some sense too, because since it’s on so many things, it’s hard to think that that would be a viable way of

Kathryn Rubino:

Permitting. Sure. But listen, I think I probably come out defending the associates more than,

But at the same time, they knew it wasn’t addressed to them. It was an email. They knew that they were accessing something that wasn’t meant for their eyes. For sure. I think that part is also true, but I can absolutely imagine how this gets to be a story, right? Somebody notices that they click on it, they tell their office mate who tells so-and-so, oh, I didn’t actually click on it, but I was standing behind. So-and-So at their desk, when they read the email, I mean, it’s incredibly relatable and human that these things get shared and talked about, and even if you didn’t see it, you might still know what was in some of the emails. Everybody is talking about it.

Joe Patrice:

Yeah. It’s your obligation to keep confidential things confidential. It’s on the partners. They screwed this up. This is, of course, a good reason to invest in various technology solutions that exist to automatically detect these things and keep them gated and keep permissions on them such that they don’t fall into the wrong hands. A lesson that the firm has now learned,

Kathryn Rubino:

And listen, the firm says it’s now resolved. Maybe that also includes changing their tech protocols, but it may have also involved

Chris Williams:

The partners. Switching back to the old method before the technology, which was just string and solo ps.

Kathryn Rubino:

Yes. Or printing out the emails like a certain judge we talked about extensively last week. But the other thing I just want to say is there’s a lot of bad feelings that come when these sorts of issues arise, and I think a little bit is you’re reading emails you’re not supposed to read, whatever. But I think that the way that management handles it also plays a part. Having a meeting where they’re trying to guilt you into saying, this is who I know access these emails. This is how I heard about it. They say they have a list of the, and I’m sure it’s true, that they technology solution actually logs who accesses the document. That’s pretty basic sort of metadata information without, there are ways to do it without trying to create a witch hunt in the middle of the office and recognizing if the partnership, I think, recognized that it’s also on them as opposed to just pointing fingers. I think that the tenor of the interactions could have been a lot different.

Joe Patrice:

Yeah. No, the whole idea that you have a list of people, but you’re asking them to come forward to confess for leniency. It feels

Kathryn Rubino:

Very finger pointy, and we want to know who is the person who figured it out, who’s doing the guy. It feels very like that.

Joe Patrice:

It’s really amateur hour.

Kathryn Rubino:

Yeah. I mean, this is a ginormous law firm. Get it together, and not just the tech part which do that, but also just from a organizational management, people managing, managing people’s such a giant part of big law life. There’s a way to do it.

Joe Patrice:

Yeah. Okay. So we did talk a little bit about Matt Gaetz last week, and we said, Hey, it’s okay. We didn’t cover it all in that much depth because this is a story that’s going to continue. It’s not, that story did not continue. Matt Gaetz, as the Onion put it, informs girlfriend. He can go to a quinceanera after all. Oh,

Kathryn Rubino:

Yeah.

Joe Patrice:

No, brutal. Brutal. For the onion. Sure. But yeah. So Matt Gaetz is out. He is now,

Chris Williams:

But he’s also on Cameo.

Joe Patrice:

Yeah, I was going to say. He has now started his cameo, which is where the last refuge of the scoundrel and preparing to run for governor. So that’s what’s up with him. Yeah.

Chris Williams:

Is cameo marketing itself as the only fans for disgraced public officials, because it’s not, you need to get on that. Yeah, that’s fair.

Kathryn Rubino:

Also, wash up reality TV stars, which is how I’ve used the service.

Chris Williams:

No, no, no, no. I said public officials.

Joe Patrice:

Have you seen

Kathryn Rubino:

The, it’s true. Sean Duffy wasn’t.

Joe Patrice:

You mean the Secretary of Transportation? Is that

Kathryn Rubino:

Real world Boston? Yeah. No, I definitely watched that season.

Joe Patrice:

Oh yeah, that was like at the show’s Prime. Really?

Kathryn Rubino:

Yeah. That was season six, I believe. Yeah, early on. But I mean, he also very famously was on early seasons of the Real World Road Rules Challenge. That’s where he met his wife, Rachel Camp Post. Yeah. So it’s a whole thing.

Joe Patrice:

Anyway, so rather than go with a reality TV star to replace Matt Gaetz, they chose a different option to be the next attorney general nominee. They’ve chosen Pam Bondi, who was previously the Attorney General of Florida.

Kathryn Rubino:

So that’s like an improvement. It’s somebody who’s done jobs related to this job.

Joe Patrice:

Right.

Chris Williams:

Unlike also quick interruption, Joe’s take age very well. I think last week I was like, what’s these picks? And I was like, oh, this is commitment checking. And Joe was like, no, actually, I think this is just picking the bad guy so that all the other stuff will gone to the radar and then blah,

Joe Patrice:

Blah, blah. I was the opposite. I said that that was not a good take. It’s one that a lot of other people had. I said, that wasn’t a great take because it struck me as though silly, you don’t have a political capital problem when you control the Senate. Anyway,

Chris Williams:

Begrudgingly correct is correct regardless, congratulations.

Joe Patrice:

But yes, no, unlike Gaetz who only had a year and a half of ever being an actual lawyer, Pam Bondi has been a prosecutor and done the job at the state level, which as far as paper qualifications are qualifications. Now, are there other issues that probably should matter for choosing an attorney general? Like never having been caught taking a massive amount of money from somebody you are investigating and then dropping the case because of that sort of thing.

Kathryn Rubino:

You would think you wouldn’t want that, but maybe it actually a qualification

Joe Patrice:

Seems like that would be, yeah, it seems like that would be an issue, but whatever. But the story that we wrote, obviously a lot of people are talking about her dropping the Trump University investigation, which the state was very far along on when somebody decided to give her a bunch of money or her work on the first impeachment where she stuttered a lot and didn’t really just kind of lost her place and kind of rambled. But what we wrote, so many people are talking about that. We focused on another thing, which is the time that she spent 16 months fighting an elderly couple for their dog.

Kathryn Rubino:

It worked for the Wicked Witch of the West.

Joe Patrice:

What is with these people and dogs, they say people are eating them. Kristi Noem is shooting them. What is it with dogs?

Kathryn Rubino:

Well, at least in this case, she’s trying to keep the dog.

Joe Patrice:

Yeah, she was trying to keep the dog,

Kathryn Rubino:

Unless was trying to use it for some spell or something. It seems, at least on the up and up.

Joe Patrice:

So this happened before, she was Attorney General. She was a rank and file prosecutor, I gather at this point in Tampa. So after Hurricane Katrina, obviously a lot of animals are kind of the unsung victims of these sorts of natural disasters. A lot of ’em get displaced as people are evacuating and so on, sometimes heartbreaking and difficult to find them. Obviously, sometimes their owners are lost In this instance, obviously you can’t put them in animal shelters in the place where the disaster was because they’re overburdened and disaster potentially underwater. In this instance, a number of animals from the path of Katrina were moved to a shelter in Tampa. At that shelter, Pam Bondi adopted one to foster the shelter. Said, well, we don’t know if their owners are alive or anything like that, so we aren’t going to formalize this yet. We’ll give a few weeks. At the end of those few weeks, they let her adopt the dog formally, at which point the displaced couple and their two grandkids found where their dogs were across state lines after extensive searching, while they were still trying to dig themselves out of a disaster and said, oh, no. Here we are. We didn’t abandon our dogs. We literally had a horrible bureaucratic time finding them, but

We’re ready to take them back. And we had

Kathryn Rubino:

A couple of dogs sad maybe for Pam Bondi, but the whole tragedy was sad and terrible. So this seems like a thing that happens.

Joe Patrice:

So there were a couple of dogs that they had that different people had taken. They got one of them back quickly, and Bondi decided to engage in litigation for 16 months over it to try and prevent them from getting the dog back. This case settled ultimately before trial. The formal settlement was that she would agree to provide medicine and food for the dog, pay for that for the rest of its life in exchange. There were some visitation and pictures and stuff like that exchanged. So that theoretically is all, well, that ends well after 16 months of torturing somebody, but don’t worry, we can fast forward. So three years later, she was preparing to run for Attorney General article at the Tampa Bay newspaper, decided, Hey, remember that story? We should dig that up again, and found the couple and learned that she’s just kind of bailed on that settlement agreement.

Kathryn Rubino:

Well, that’s not great for somebody who enforces the law. Generally, it seems like

Joe Patrice:

Respecting voluntary settlement agreements, it would be one of those things, part of the jobs

Kathryn Rubino:

For sure. But I mean,

Joe Patrice:

She didn’t have a significant enough dog in the fight. I mean, it was a St. Bernard. It was a pretty significant dog.

Kathryn Rubino:

Amazing. The thing that, I don’t know, I don’t own a dog, but it seems to me that no matter how bonded you think you’ve gotten to this dog over the course of a couple of weeks where you have fostered and then adopted the dog, something terrible happened. There’s a human tragedy, and you are prolonging the pain of people whose houses are probably gone, who’ve gone through probably the worst natural disaster that they’ll ever, well, probably not at this point with global warming, but a terrible natural disaster, and you’re just making it worse. The shits and gigs.

Chris Williams:

There you go with that woke empathy stuff. They’re trying to get it out the schools. This is what happens. You start caring about people you’d never met. Come on now.

Joe Patrice:

Yeah. So at the time, Bondi, when asked about it, said she didn’t think it was a big deal and wouldn’t come up. She claimed that everybody thinks she’s right. It doesn’t really matter. It seems like it didn’t cause any troubles for her before. It, unfortunately probably will be low on the list of things people ask her about in this one, but it is really, I think it

Kathryn Rubino:

Shows you who she is, right? This is the kind of thing that people write into an anonymous, dear prudence or some sort of anonymous advice column to get their take and then there, or am I they asshole and are promptly told, no, you’re the asshole. And maybe this is actually a low key great side of the internet is people can anonymously ask, is it me? Am I the

Joe Patrice:

Problem?

Kathryn Rubino:

And when the internet universally says, yes, it’s you. You are the problem. They’re like, oh, my B. And they stop it before it gets worse. Maybe that was the problem that the internet just hadn’t reached its pinnacle back in 2004.

Joe Patrice:

I still,

Chris Williams:

You reached like a eliminate Snicket villain background stories.

Joe Patrice:

Yes. Yeah.

Kathryn Rubino:

Yes.

Joe Patrice:

Yeah. As far as the moral stuff goes, though I am being cold and calculating perhaps here, and I’m just like, you signed a settlement grievance and you didn’t honor it. That seems so disqualifying for somebody who wants to head the Department of Justice. That really seems like a problem that is going to be underplayed because the stakes are not as big as some of the other problems that are going to come up here.

Kathryn Rubino:

But still, I mean, we’re about to do away with vaccines. So whatevs,

Joe Patrice:

We’re back. We have another animal story. This one comes from Kevin Underhill is great. Lowering the bar website, had a whole thing on it. If you’ve never checked that out, it’s fun. He doesn’t write like every day or anything, but he always has some fun stories over there. This most recent one is out of la. There was a series of bear attacks, which is very, very scary.

Kathryn Rubino:

You don’t expect a bear attack in la.

Joe Patrice:

What’s weird is there’s a lot of nature on the outskirts of la, a lot of coyotes and bears. Well,

Kathryn Rubino:

Listen, a recent 865, why I’m a New York East Coast girly, but come on, you don’t expect that.

Joe Patrice:

So bear with me here. The animal decided to attack a series of luxury cars, rolls Royce, a couple of Mercedes to a discerning bear, very discerning bear. This is that meme with Winnie the Pooh. This is the tuxedo wearing one. Went after those cars and got inside and tore up the upholstery to the tune of a insurance companies. Multiple insurance companies were involved. A settlement of 150 grand or something like that.

Kathryn Rubino:

Wow. I mean, was there food? Was there honey on the seats?

Joe Patrice:

Well, it’s a Rolls-Royce, so I assume there was great pong. That’s a really old reference at this point. But

Kathryn Rubino:

Anyway, I hate you. Yeah,

Joe Patrice:

So let’s hit pause on this for a second.

Kathryn Rubino:

Oh, like Paw, like their hands Pause.

Joe Patrice:

Yeah.

Kathryn Rubino:

PAW.

Joe Patrice:

Yeah, that was what I was doing. Si. Okay. While all the insurance companies did pay out this 150 grand, they did have some suspicions.

Kathryn Rubino:

They’re like, this is

Joe Patrice:

Weird. It is weird. There was security cam footage of the bear getting into these cars and attacking them, but they forwarded that onto the,

Kathryn Rubino:

So how do they know it was a bear?

Joe Patrice:

Well, I mean, it looks, you watch, it

Kathryn Rubino:

Looks well, the security footage is the

Joe Patrice:

Right, right, right, right. So they passed it along. There were some questions about the nature of the upholstery damage. It was a little too symmetrical they thought. So they passed it along to the California Department of Insurance. Those folks reached out to the California Wildlife people, showed them the video. The California Wildlife people said, you know what’s weird is that move right there? A bear doesn’t have a joint there. They couldn’t really do that. Done, done. I actually have that sound effect somewhere, but whatever. So on the strength of this, they get a warrant to search the people who have made these claims apparently. And as Underhill writes, if you expect that somebody had fraudulently done this, they would’ve gotten rid of their bear costume beforehand as soon as the crime was completed. You must be new here. They did in fact find a bear costume along with a series of meat claws to use cooking utensil claws that they were used for To shred, to shred for, and stuff like that used in it. And so that’s the roundabout. But I wrote this kind of as a half tech half in-house council story, because imagine being an in-house council and somebody come in your office going, Hey Chief, we got a question here.

Kathryn Rubino:

Do you think it’s weird that bears are only attacking luxury cars?

Joe Patrice:

Yeah, but also a tech story. I mean, obviously

Chris Williams:

Surveillance. Well, the bear fell for the

Joe Patrice:

Honeypot. Well, that’s the thing. They got a search warrant because they thought, as I wrote in my article, that setting up a honeypot stakeout was probably too much. Yeah. So Oh, bother. Amazing.

Kathryn Rubino:

Oh, oh, bother.

Joe Patrice:

Yeah,

Kathryn Rubino:

I like that reference. I am a poo

Joe Patrice:

Loyalist. There you go.

Kathryn Rubino:

They never expect the bears. I don’t understand the why. I mean, I guess they want the insurance money, which, okay, but why a bear

Joe Patrice:

Is, and what does the insurance company do if you’ve destroyed your car?

Chris Williams:

Yeah, I think it goes back to fundamental filmmaking. If you have bear claws in a bear suit, you have to use them,

Kathryn Rubino:

I guess. But they probably bought them for this purpose. Right? I almost don’t understand. If it was a revenge plot, it was their ex’s car. This kind of tracks in my mind. But it was your car, your car. This no longer makes any of the sense to

Joe Patrice:

Me. Yeah. I mean, it’s unclear some of the details, but yeah, it strikes me that would be weird.

Chris Williams:

Wait, wait,

Joe Patrice:

Wait.

Chris Williams:

Are the details unclear or are they fuzzy? Oh,

Joe Patrice:

Good

Kathryn Rubino:

Job. Fuzzy. Fuzzy was affair.

Joe Patrice:

Well, part of how they figured this out is all the cars were at the same location, but they were all insured by different companies and all. We know that a bear

Kathryn Rubino:

Would, but you’re rich enough also to have multiple luxury cars.

Joe Patrice:

Yeah, just sell one if you need the cash.

Kathryn Rubino:

Yeah. Well, why are you, this is a detailed and dumb way to get money.

Joe Patrice:

Well, they knew that it wasn’t a real bear. They were all in the same location, and as we know, bears bounce here and there and everywhere.

Kathryn Rubino:

Gummy bears.

Joe Patrice:

Yeah.

Kathryn Rubino:

That’s my job. I just point out the references.

Joe Patrice:

I thought that’s what

Chris Williams:

TERs did.

Kathryn Rubino:

They’re bouncy, chancy. Fun, fun, fun, fun, fun are takers. But there’s only one, so

Joe Patrice:

There

Kathryn Rubino:

Probably isn’t.

Joe Patrice:

Okay,

Kathryn Rubino:

I’m loving this particular segment.

Joe Patrice:

It’s a good one. I mean, I think Chris might be finding it unbearable.

Kathryn Rubino:

Okay.

Joe Patrice:

Well, the only thing

Chris Williams:

I think we should have mentioned was it should have been suspicious from the Bear had a green hat on. A green hat. There’s a green hat Bear. Trust me.

Kathryn Rubino:

Oh, Yogi. Oh, Yogi.

Chris Williams:

Okay. Picnic basket.

Kathryn Rubino:

You said something, A pick basket. Then I would’ve gotten that one a tie.

Joe Patrice:

It was because on the security cam footage, there was another smaller bear going, I don’t think this is a good idea. Hey boo boo, why are you worried? Where’s the Porsche? You ever see the outtake or not really? Outtake created for horrible reasons. Somebody animated out in the style of the Yogi Bear movie, A horrific ending where booboo kills him. It’s fantastic. It’s on the internet somewhere. It’s real traumatizing. Anyway, with all that said, I think we’re done.

Chris Williams:

Just remember, to all luxury car owners, only you can prevent bear attacks.

Joe Patrice:

There you go. Good job. Alright, so thanks everybody for listening. Lucky. Thanks for everybody for listening. You should skip reviews to the show stars. Write something, subscribe to it at your place of choice so you get new episodes when they come out. You should read Above the Law as you read these and other stories. Before we talk about ’em here, you should listen to the Jabot Kathryn’s other podcast. I’m also a guest on the Legal Tech Week Journalist Roundtable, where we also talked about this bear story this week, but it wasn’t C, so

Kathryn Rubino:

Did you pre

Joe Patrice:

Read different jokes from that

Kathryn Rubino:

One? Did you preread all these references? Is that why you’re

Joe Patrice:

So quick? No, no. I mean, a lot of them were in the article anyway, so you should follow us on social media. We kind of moved over to BlueSky for now. We’re @ATLblog. That might change. There’s some verification issues there, but I’m @JoePatrice. She’s @Kathryn1, and Chris is at @WritesforRent. Yeah, I think that’s everything. I think I got through it all. So talk to you all later. See you next week.

Continue Reading