The Truth's Profile
Comments
Really Elie !?!
You write a blog devoted to covering BigLaw and thought it was a good idea to imply that “what precisely lawyers did” on Wall Street should be investigated?
Really !?!
You figured we’d appreciate your support of some trumped up witch hunt?
Really !?!
You spent last night downing cocktails on the roof of the Empire Hotel, paid for by a corporation whose revenues are derived from the very people who you now suggest may be worthy of judicial scrutiny, and you wonder why the anger is directed at you?
Who pays your bills (and bar tab) son?
Really?
Really, what the hell is that?
I did my job, I'd do it again.
Now, you’re going to say that maybe I should be charged with a crime?
Me - charged with a crime?
That is funny, that's what that is!
You f-cking people have no idea how to defend an industry.
All you did was weaken an industry Elie!
You put associates’ jobs in danger.
Sweet dreams, son.
63 - see 64 - its the ratings agencies and their lazy incompetent negligent worker bees that should all be summarily court-martialed and hung form the tallest tree. Why this hadn't happend yet is a shame, and/or a testament to the lobbying power of theit government sanctioned oligopoly.
If you think we are the ones charged with the responsibility of examining the details of the uinderlying mortgages, then you've obviously never served in a forward area.
Please go back to the academy and leave the fighting to the grown-ups.
And 61 - you're a good soldier, and I applaud the accurate use of the term douchenozzle, but I'll fight my own battles.
Wow...a litigator makes an inflammatory, declaratory and unsubstantiated allegation without knowledge, insight or context.
Knock me over with a pro se draft of an initial pleading...
63/67 - Please go back to drafting motions to delay, and rather than waitng for the day when tort reform legislation is drafted to exterminate you, please consider drawing your own line and pursuing a more productive career path than suing those who can, to provide for those who whine.
7 -you cut and pasted my comment from today's earlier journalistic abomination, "The Mainstream Media Is Aware That Law Firms Exist, Right?"
Why? While there's nothing sexier than being plagiarized by an inferior commenter, beware.
Like Moliere, I recover my property wherever I find it...
I'm all for codes, but who would ever want to be a rebel?
If anyone reading this is an actual signatory to that manifesto, you are either one of two things:
1. You are a true believer and really are a cowboy, in which case, you're everyone's problem. That's because every time you go up in the air, you're unsafe. I don't like you because you're dangerous; or
2. You are in desperate need of some serious deep-dicking
My money's on 2.
Let's see if Morgan Lewis reduces their billing rates by a similar proportion...
If so, this can be spun as a sensible repsonse to a new economic reality, by a firm that understands the pressures facing its clients...
If not, then its nothing more than a cash grab by greeedy partners.
Odds that billing rates are reduced?
98 - that was probably the douchiest thing I have ever seen. Calling you a pathetic snot-nosed little punk would be an insult to pathetic snot-nosed little punks.
My only hope is that you come to my firm and work under me, because there's nothing real lawyers enjoy more than watching some arrogant prick who's never accomplished a thing in his life get schooled repeatedly by those of us who've been takin' shrapnel in the trenches since you were crappin' in your hands and rubbing it in your face.
The fact is, this blog was a helluva lot more entertaining before it became overrun by law students like you who don't have the slightest clue about how the real world works.
It's past your bedtime. Run along back to school and back to autoadmit and learn some respect for your fellow man.
Let's see if King & Spalding reduces their billing rates by a similar proportion...
If so, this can be spun as a sensible repsonse to a new economic reality, by a firm that understands the pressures facing its clients...
If not, then its nothing more than a cash grab by greedy partners.
Odds that billing rates are reduced?
How sad to see such a display of enthusiasm for a chance to crawl one's way to the middle of a bureacratic beast.
The only reason liberal applicants are welcome is that they are likley already well-versed in impotence and ineffectiveness.
If the SEC's recent failures have shown us anything, its that govenrment run legal operations are giant machineries, operated by pygmies, where the possible becomes the impossible.
Don't sell out your dreams kids...don't aspire to exist in a world where procedure is everything and outcome is nothing.
Suggested response for my friends at CGSH:
Listen up Cuomo, you populist chicken-little.
We live in a corporate world of laws and regulations. And those laws and regulations have to be interpreted by erudite people with the ability to astutely analyze complex relationships and synthesize reams of information – but even more elementally basic and incredulous to you– effectively represent the intersts of their clients, not self-promote thier own political careers.
Who's gonna do it? The Cowboy Bankers? Their asleep-at-the-switch Risk Managers? You - some benificiary of nepotism looking to out-Spitzer Spitzer without achieving any actual redress for the people you pretend to serve?
I have neither the time, nor the inclination, to spend any fraction of an unbillable hour explaining legal ethics to a politician whose campaign coffers ebb and flow as a result of the risk management advice that we provide and then questions the garrulous manner in which we provide it and/or tries to invalidate the State of New York's legal ethics when he's not handed a smoking gun on a silver platter.
Personally, if you inist on emulating your predecssor, I'd rather you just stuck to barebacking call girls and went on your way.
Otherwise, I suggest you get off your spoiled ass and collect your own damn evidence.
Either way, I don't give a damn what priviliged communicaitons you think you're entitled to!
You know why don't mess with Texas don't you?
...'cause it not fair to pick on retards...
I'm glad Limon took my advice...Look's like Cuomo fucked with the wrong Marine!
What'd Cuomo think...he could have some TTT assistant draft a letter, flash a badge and that'd make CGSH nervous?
Limon did his job, and he'd do it again...maybe next time Cuomo will learn to extend CGSH some fucking courtesy.
Really though - from a governance perspective, this is tragic...all Cuomo's done is weaken the office of the NY AG - and given the fact the last guy in there raw-dogged a butterfaced whore, that takes some doin'!
I'm starting to think there may be a few too many law schools in the US...and professors...
Everyone's a loser at Quinn Emanuel.
First - the associate was wrong - we're not saving the fucking manatees here guys. You want to take 12 hours off from checking your blackberry - go teach third grade at a public school.
But - the associate's error was one of inexperience - easily correctable if the mentorship that had served as the backbone of our profession for generations hadn't been obliterated by the unmitigated greed and selfishness of douchebags like Urquhart - one of a horde of self-entitled baby boomers who took advantage of the professionalism of their mentors and now give absolutely nothing back to the next generation.
Here's the thing Billy - the next generation isn't as soft as you'd like to imagine. And you can't just send out a blast email and make us nervous.
We can deal with the all-nighters, and the complex legal analyses, and the demands of client service. We don't want money, and we don't want prestige. What we do want is for you to sit there in your faggoty old leather arm chair and with your Fordham mouth extend us some fucking courtesy. You gotta treat us nicely.
Treat us with the same level of respect you received from the professionals you learned under (and could never hope to be). See how far we will go for you. We'll even spell-check our missives before they go firm-wide.
No? You'd rather whine and gossip like the manager of a Denny's? Then revel in your new-found notoriety - biggest douche in BigLaw!
Enter your email address and start enjoying
Above The Law today!
Listen up Elie.
We live in a corporate world of laws and regulations. And those laws and regulations have to be interpreted by erudite people with the ability to astutely analyze complex relationships and synthesize reams of information – but even more elementally basic and incredulous to you– effectively read and write.
Who's gonna do it? The Cowboy Bankers? Their asleep-at-the-switch Risk Managers and Credit Officers? Some blogger whose never done more than elementary diligence before bolting for less challenging pastures?
Corporate lawyers have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. Bankers weep for the points shaved off their precious profit margins and they curse the lawyers. They have that luxury. They have the luxury of not knowing what we know: that our fees, while exorbitant, and the loquacious product of our intellect, while impenetrable to them (and the MSM), create certainty and diminish risks.
Furthermore, our existence and due diligence, our inability to expedite their transactions without interminable delays, while grotesque and incomprehensible to them, are all that indemnifies the Cowboy Bankers and all of their buddies on The Street from being jointly and severally bankrupted, sued, fined and/or incarcerated for the cornucopia of obscene risks they recklessly generate every day...
BofA didn’t want to know about the bonuses. Because deep down, in places i-bankers don't talk about at their bacchanalian “capital introduction” events, they want us on their calls…They need us on their calls!
We use words like “heretofore,” “whereas,” and “for the avoidance of doubt,”...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent obfuscating something.
They use 'em as a punch line.
I have neither the time, nor the inclination, to spend any fraction of an unbillable hour explaining the intricacies of corporate law to the bankers who rise and sleep under the blanket of the very freedom from liability that we provide, then question the garrulous manner in which we provide it and/or dime us out to the judge! Personally, I'd rather they just said thank you and went on their way.
Otherwise, I suggest they have you, Elie, pick up a treatise and draft a Material Adverse Change clause.
Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!