Objectively intelligent.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Two cases I'll never take again:

1. Boundary or mineral rights disputes (it is impossible to settle cases involving dirt);
2. Fee split cases.

But if you are the first plaintiff attorney on a case, there is no way to prevent your client from changing counsel. And, now you have a fee split case.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

But if you are the first plaintiff attorney on a case, there is no way to prevent your client from changing counsel. And, now you have a fee split case.

Not hard to not be a plaintiff attorney

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

But if you are the first plaintiff attorney on a case, there is no way to prevent your client from changing counsel. And, now you have a fee split case.

I was speaking about representing another lawyer or firm on a fee split dispute. I agree, in the hypo you offered, there is no avoiding it. Unless, of course, you want to pay another lawyer to litigate it for you.

My entire department left one firm I worked for a long time ago. That was a huge shitshow. All sorts of sword brandishing back and forth. Consistent with everything else in my life, I refused to work for the new place or the old place and left to work at a totally different firm in a totally different practice area.

Did I mention how much I hate working with other lawyers?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

Not hard to not be a plaintiff attorney

Referral fees are nice. You forget about them and then you go to the mailbox one day and, Surprise! Free money!

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I was speaking about representing another lawyer or firm on a fee split dispute. I agree, in the hypo you offered, there is no avoiding it. Unless, of course, you want to pay another lawyer to litigate it for you.

This "hypo" is what caused the actual interpleader I filed. And there were allegations of ethical misconduct, as you mentioned earlier.

[LessinSF]

Adder says yes? https://au.sports.yahoo.com/chess-ce...012917664.html

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Adder says yes? https://au.sports.yahoo.com/chess-ce...012917664.html

FWIW I don’t think going first is an advantage.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

FWIW I don’t think going first is an advantage.

Chess exposes the difference between binary and shorter term thinkers versus less rule-oriented and longer term thinkers more than any other game. It favors limited thinkers.

A person anticipating possible changes to rules or being able to subvert rules runs into difficulties. The risks in chess also assume largely rational responses.

Eddie Fisher was never going to run anything.

This is why, while I love Tyler Cowen, he often comes off like a silly robot.

It also explains why the person critiquing chess is, like most of these “reaching” pieces, a moron.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

This "hypo" is what caused the actual interpleader I filed. And there were allegations of ethical misconduct, as you mentioned earlier.

Congrats on having worked with quality people.

When I dealt with money launderers, I worked with a far smarter and ethical crowd than I ever encountered with insurers and PI folks.

What’s the line from Apocalypse Now? “You’re in the asshole of the universe, Captain”?

The only filthier shithole is patents.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Chess exposes the difference between binary and shorter term thinkers versus less rule-oriented and longer term thinkers more than any other game. It favors limited thinkers.

A person anticipating possible changes to rules or being able to subvert rules runs into difficulties. The risks in chess also assume largely rational responses.

Eddie Fisher was never going to run anything.

This is why, while I love Tyler Cowen, he often comes off like a silly robot.

It also explains why the person critiquing chess is, like most of these “reaching” pieces, a moron.

Huh? I’m dumb and I admit it. Chess is for dumb people? What are you saying?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

The only filthier shithole is patents.

the boy is right. Stay away. WTTW

[Adder]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Adder says yes? https://au.sports.yahoo.com/chess-ce...012917664.html

Ah, yes, very old game super likely to just be a coincidence...

(No, this doesn’t matter)

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

Ah, yes, very old game super likely to just be a coincidence...

(No, this doesn’t matter)

My set is gold and silver.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Congrats on having worked with quality people.

Some yes, some no. In this case, it was simply convincing them not to pick a side, and get the company sued. It was the path of least risk, which the VP who made the decision was familiar with.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Adder

Ah, yes, very old game super likely to just be a coincidence...

(No, this doesn’t matter)

The origins of the game are disputed. Who is least white - asians, persians or arabs? Edited to add that white moving first was not a thing until the late 1800s.


P.S. - stolen from someone on Facebook, there are no whites in the Bible.