Three stories seem to be of note:
- A Public Defender points to a law firm that appears to trash PDs (I dissent on hermeneutic grounds and quibble over what it means to wiggle).
- A couple of weeks ago Robert Ambrogi pointed to a case in which a “lawyer rating” service was sued by a lawyer that didn’t like the way he was rated. There are interesting comments from people with titles like "Vice President, Corporate Counsel Services, LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell"
- I noticed some chatter on message boards where some thought it would be nice to download motions from PACER and critique them. I disagree with most of the posters. First of all, there is currently no service that even comes close to providing objective critiques of an attorneys’ performance. Most of them rely on angry clients. And, let’s face it, is anyone going to write on the internet, “My lawyer was the greatest, he plead down my ‘Molesting a Dead Hose’ and ‘Sailormongering’ charge to misdemeanor assault. I recommend him to similarly-situated Delaware corporations with a large number of furries on the board.” Second of all, even if we could conduct some surveillance of legal filings, there is still no way to know the context in which they emerged. At best, we would only see what the judge sees, and judges (contrary to what they say when the speak at Bar Associations) are but only one player in game of law and there might be a darn good reason why they leave out some authority.
Comments