I was going to post this over there, but it makes more sense over here:
The ambulance just came and took one of my associates to the hospital, after my meeting with her got a little out of hand. I didn't mean to actually hit her with the California Reporter, but my aim was off. I thought I'd just clip the side of her head, make her feel the breeze as it flew by her and hit the wall, but I missed by a couple of inches and got her right in the eye. Still, I don't regret it. She handed in a memo this morning that's riddled with mistakes. I called her in to talk about it.
"You claimed that there were sixty-two cases with similar facts that had all been decided in favor of our client's position. I can't find any evidence that any of these cases even exist."
"I may have embellished the facts of cases, but I stand behind the essential truth of them."
"The cases don't exist. There are no cases."
"I thought I remembered some cases. There was one case I read about. I don't have the citation. But the meaning behind the cases is what's important, and I stand behind my interpretation of that meaning."
"There are no cases. We have nothing to argue in front of the court."
"In a technical sense, there are no cases. But the spirit of the memo still holds true. I wrote this memo inspired by actual fact. We have a justice system. I was in a courtroom once. These cases could have existed, but, more important, the message of these cases is a message that I think most readers of my memo will be touched by."
"But there are no cases."
"That's merely a detail. I admit I embellished some of the details. But the essential truth---"
"I know. The essential truth. On page 43, you cite a case involving a train, a conductor, and a carton of shelf-stable lactose-free milk. Was there a train?"
"In the technical sense, no."
"Was there a conductor?"
"I believed at the time I wrote the memo that there had been a conductor. Since writing the memo, I have been informed that it would have been impossible for there to be a conductor. Nevertheless, I stand behind the existence of the conductor, whether or not he actually existed."
"Okay. Was there any milk?"
"Not in the strictest sense. The story of the milk may have been vastly accelerated in my memo."
"Vastly accelerated? I don't understand that. What does that mean?"
"It means there was no milk. But I stand behind the message of the case."
"There was no case."
"That's not important."
And then I threw the California Reporter at her head. Oops.
(Apologies for today's obsession with James Frey. It'll pass.)
I think I had an extern who wrote a memo like that once. Many chuckles. Thanks.
Posted by: Norm | January 27, 2006 at 04:13 PM
You're so funny! I found your old weblog on Google because I was searching for lead poisoning and came across an entry about a leprechaun mascot that 'fights for kids with brain damage'. That was so funny!! Just thought I'd say hello ...
Posted by: Kenzie | January 27, 2006 at 05:32 PM
You're a wonderful writer, but, um, that's so not the same situation. I work at a law firm and if that were to ever happen, it would recieve far more drama. This would not have got that much attention if Oprah wasn't involved.
Posted by: Sanya | January 27, 2006 at 05:51 PM
Mhhh... another A+ Anonymous Lawyer entry ;) You should continue Anonymous Lawyer, though - provided your book doesn't take up all your time.
Posted by: Chris Csefalvay | January 27, 2006 at 06:55 PM
Hi. I really love your blogs. I stumbled across your first blog a few days ago, and have been reading the archived version from the first post. Its really wonderful. You are a superb writer. I wish I had known about your blog earlier. But, at least now, I have a new bible on my hands. Keep it up!!!
Posted by: Kaschief | January 27, 2006 at 08:02 PM
Hi. I really love your blogs. I stumbled across your first blog a few days ago, and have been reading the archived version from the first post. It's really wonderful. You are a superb writer. I wish I had known about your blog earlier. But, at least now, I have a new bible on my hands. Keep it up!!!
Posted by: Kaschief | January 27, 2006 at 08:02 PM
Aw, c'mon, Jeremy. We know in five months, we're going to see at our local Barnes and Noble:
"Anonymous Lawyer, the utterly true story of Jeremy Blachman, the 47-year-old partner at Barnes, Barnes, Yankovic and Hruska, who valiantly fought off an addiction to pain-killers and killing people. Oprah Winfrey called it beautiful. You will too."
--JRM
Posted by: JRM | January 30, 2006 at 12:44 AM
Dies ist ein großer Ort. Ich möchte hier noch einmal.
Posted by: fahrrad | March 06, 2009 at 06:39 PM