What do litigators and soldiers have in common?

[Roguish Lawyer]

You have politicians/civilians controlling your actions, and we have clients.

While we both have control over operations/activities while they are underway for the most part, we both seem to be constrained by the fact that we can make recommendations and outline risks and benefits of various courses of action, but ultimately don't make the final decision. This is incredibly frustrating, because I sometimes think my clients are unwise, but this is just how it works. I'm just a tool, and my effectiveness depends on how I am used (including how much freedom I am given to operate).

I have to call witnesses or not call witnesses, file motions or not file motions, or take positions or not take positions, when clients make decisions against my best judgment. Sometimes, when there is a bad result after doing something I did not want to do (or not doing something I wanted to do), the client blames me anyway. And the attorney-client privilege, like a soldier's confidentiality obligations, often prevents me from explaining to third-party observers what really happened and why. So I too can get "hung out to dry," although obviously not with the same consequences.

Anyway, not sure why I was thinking about this stuff, but there you have it.

[Sacamuelas]

I'm just a tool...
Couldn't have said it better myself, you really are. :D

[Roguish Lawyer]

Couldn't have said it better myself, you really are. :D

I knew that was coming . . . :boohoo

[lksteve]

Anyway, not sure why I was thinking about this stuff, but there you have it.why is not the question...who are you billing for this, that's the question.... :D
me, this is going as calculations for my favorite client... :cool:

[Roguish Lawyer]

why is not the question...who are you billing for this, that's the question.... :D

Well since you read it, I think I'll bill you. :D

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

I think we have a few more variables that impact on how we do business. Things like weather, the enemy, terrain over which we have no influence. Other things such as the troops we have available and their ability to do the job, the time and space in which we have to operate compounded by constraints called rules of engagement which may vary from situation to situation and the ever present fog of war that muddles everything. While your constraints are codified in legal precedents and are often black and white we operate in grey areas where there are no breaks, side bars, and, if we are very lucky, only mission type orders where we can use intelligent initiative where it is often more important to act first and ask for forgiveness later. Where your outcome is geared to helping your client our outcome is geared to taking care of our troops while accomplishing the mission where the written word is often nothing more than a guide and the consequences of failure is death and may have consequences with implications that affect nations. While we share many of the same frustrations when dealing with the imperfections of human nature ours are compounded by fear, fatique, and expectations that require efforts both mental and physical that defy understanding. While I truly respect what you do and the mental accumen it takes for you to do it, not to mention that I am sure you are also a fine dresser, I see little that our professions have in common save the fact that we both do what we do because it is what we are best suited to do and would do no other.

Jack Moroney-just a gut reaction, nothing personal, and a very short summation of some of the points most easily explained

[lksteve]

Well since you read it, I think I'll bill you. bill the company...we can pass it off to another one of my favorite clients...

[Sacamuelas]

Hey RL... I am beginning to think Colonel Jack doesn't like college boys.
We may have to get him a Harvard sweatshirt like NDD's. :D LOL

Well said, Sir. Although I highly doubt RL was going for a direct job comparison. He isn't that naive. Me on the other hand, well I know I deal with the same job difficulties. ;) haha

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

Hey RL... I am beginning to think Colonel Jack doesn't like college boys.
We may have to get him a Harvard sweatshirt like NDD's. :D LOL

Well said, Sir. Although I highly doubt RL was going for a direct job comparison. He isn't that naive. Me on the other hand, well I know I deal with the same job difficulties. ;) haha

I figured he wasn't but my wife is into some new brand of coffee that I was sipping on while I hit the key board. :D Got nothing against college boys just professional academicians, which does not apply to anyone on this site.

Jack Moroney

[Roguish Lawyer]

LOL -- Saca is right. Just pointing out ONE similarity that struck me -- I've been reading about Afghanistan and the difficulty some 5th Group ODAs were having getting air support early in the conflict, apparently because of political concerns about allowing the Northern Alliance to take Kabul. That's how it came up in my mind.

Colonel, there is no question that we are engaged in different occupations, and I will never claim that what I do is more difficult, honorable or rewarding than what you guys do. I think my admiration for the SF community has been made clear. I am tempted, however, to respond to your post, because you actually are raising additional similarities about which you may not be aware. But I am not so sure there is interest in this topic, and at a minimum I want that coffee to wear off first.

:)

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

I want that coffee to wear off first.

:)

Too late, she has now started on something called Harvard Blend which seems a little stronger than yesterday's Nantucket Blend. I think I am either going to have to find some prozac or hide her coffee grinder :D

But, back to your comment about similarities and other observations. I think that the biggest similiarity is that we both are professionals and take pride in what we do/did. I do think that probably the biggest difference between most other professions and SF, at least from my personal standpoint, is that who you are and what you do is more than likely two different folks. Whereas who I am and what I do are not that easily separated. You see, who I am drives what I do and at the end of the day I am still that person that emboddied and committed myself to all those qualities that made me choose SF as a profession. I think that I can best describe this persona thing from the standpoint of my nieces and nephews who refer to me, behind my back of course, as the Great Santini. It goes a lot deeper than that, but I think you can sort of get the idea.

Jack Moroney

[Roguish Lawyer]

Too late, she has now started on something called Harvard Blend which seems a little stronger than yesterday's Nantucket Blend.

Well that was an easy diagnosis! LOL

I really wasn't attempting to compare the professions so much as point out one similarity that struck me recently. If we really want to get into this more, though, I think we are both engaged in forms of involuntary conflict resolution. My version is domestic and infinitely less serious, but there is a parallel. I do not choose the party with which my client has a dispute, let alone their counsel, and there are many different characteristics in our opponents and the manner in which our clients instruct us to deal with them. While we litigate indoors, there are huge differences between a case decided on the "terrain" of a Manhattan or Chicago federal court, on the one hand, and a case decided in Madison County, Illinois or Hidalgo County, Texas. We fight over jurisdiction and venue for this reason. Believe me, there is tremendous uncertainty and risk in dealing with different judges and juries too. And it is not correct to assume that there are no constraints on lawyers when it comes to the quantity and quality of bodies available for particular assignments.

I wish I could say that I am so dedicated to my profession that I would never do anything else, but I can't. I enjoy it and I have had a degree of success, but I can divorce myself from my job, and I may one day do something else. Do you think I hang around here so much because I think what you guys do is boring? ;)

[Sacamuelas]

LOL

Jack- you need me to fedex some good ol' chickory flavored New Orleans coffee to you? It appears you may need it if RL persists.

RL-
You want me to fed ex you a bigger shovel so you can hurry up and get yourself killed quickly verses a slow painful drawn out process. ;) LOL

Jack- the qualities of who I am and what I do are very close to the same thing. I am not kidding... Of course, RL can't quite get there with his profession as they haven't figured out the whole gill slits thing yet, but I am sure the Navy guys are working on it. There is hope for the lawyers/sharks.

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

I do not choose the party with which my client has a dispute, let alone their counsel, and there are many different characteristics in our opponents and the manner in which our clients instruct us to deal with them. While we litigate indoors, there are huge differences between a case decided on the "terrain" of a Manhattan or Chicago federal court, on the one hand, and a case decided in Madison County, Illinois or Hidalgo County, Texas. We fight over jurisdiction and venue for this reason. Believe me, there is tremendous uncertainty and risk in dealing with different judges and juries too. And it is not correct to assume that there are no constraints on lawyers when it comes to the quantity and quality of bodies available for particular assignments.



Our terrain situation is similar only in that you are talking about a location on which you do battle. Terrain to us means not only the "final objective location" but all aspects of cover, concealment, avenues of approach, key terrain as well as the objective. We select the approach to the objective area based on the variables that will provide us with the best chance of placing ourselves into a position to maximize our strengths in and around the objective area. In many cases we can do other things to influence the outcome by using selective forms of firepower, etc. When left to our own devices we can also do a lot to prepare the battlefield/battlespace that will give us a distinct advantage-however I believe you would probably be disbarred for attempting similar actions. We also deal with uncertainties and it is not just the enemy forces but the chains of command and various command relationships under which we work. There are also other uncertainties when civilian, NGOs, and the frigging media is involved. In a UW situation or FID where we train, advise, lead indigenous folks the uncertainties are magnified many fold by hidden agendas, cultural issues, and plain simple ignorance from other government agencies and conventional folks that add expodential personality crap to the equation. You see when you deal with your peers, most of the time you are all talking from the same book. Our book is a living document, read and understood by us and modified as needed to make things work. The book under which our supporting headquarters work often times is filled with god-given truths and maxims never to be violated or questioned. Our arbitrator is not a judge but we are judged by each other and the understanding that we always do the right thing rather than doing things right
as codified in a manual.

[vsvo]

Colonel, thank you for your insight and for giving this civilian a peek.

Scott, good stuff, very motivating, thanks.

[alphamale]

Sir Jack, such excellent posts for guests like me here.

Thanks for starting this thread RL.

I keep seeing this in so many situations - It seems the quickest path to clearest understanding is by articulating how Concept A is different from an already understood Concept B.

Where is the boundary of the envelope of similarity / difference.
(rather than Chapter 1, Chapter 2, ...)

FrontSight

[Sacamuelas]

I keep seeing this in so many situations - It seems the quickest path to clearest understanding is by articulating how Concept A is different from an already understood Concept B.

Where is the boundary of the envelope of similarity / difference.
(rather than Chapter 1, Chapter 2, ...)

FrontSight
Goodness... Here we go with all inductive and deductive reasoning with equations and mathematical formulas. ;) Can't we keep a few good foot in mouth/buttkicking threads from turning into an intelligent and informative discussion? I know, impossible with this crowd. LOL

Here ya' go frontsight. I formulated the variables of this discussion and then applied them to basic geometrical computations to graph and better understand exactly what RL and Jack's positions are on this topic. Hope this helps... :D The outcome is inevitable as you can clearly see.

[alphamale]

Ohmygod Saca, do you know how many of those things I have seen in over-airconditioned labs when trying to get a project done by deadline?

::geek humor alert::
Now we just need to apply a band-pass filter, and I would be the remaining Voice of Reason! :D

We may have to get him a Harvard sweatshirt like NDD's. NDD has a Harvard sweatshirt ??? No effing way!!! Not that POS school! :D

Dang-it, that does it, I am going to get NDD a MIT tee-shirt (for warmer climates).

When someone asks him about it, he can just say it's French, and it means he is WITH.... :)

FrontSight

[Bill Harsey]

Ohmygod Saca, do you know how many of those things I have seen in over-airconditioned labs when trying to get a project done by deadline?

::geek humor alert::
Now we just need to apply a band-pass filter, and I would be the remaining Voice of Reason! :D

NDD has a Harvard sweatshirt ??? No effing way!!! Not that POS school! :D

Dang-it, that does it, I am going to get NDD a MIT tee-shirt (for warmer climates).

When someone asks him about it, he can just say it's French, and it means he is WITH.... :)

FrontSight
MIT?

" Monkeys In Training?"

[lksteve]

Dang-it, that does it, I am going to get NDD a MIT tee-shirt (for warmer climates).

When someone asks him about it, he can just say it's French, and it means he is WITH.... mit=with in German...avec=with in French...

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

mit=with in German...avec=with in French...

If we hadn't saved the frogs butts in WWII, "mit" would have also meant "with" in Phrance :D

[lksteve]

If we hadn't saved the frogs butts in WWII, "mit" would have also meant "with" in Phrance good point...

[Roguish Lawyer]

Here ya' go frontsight. I formulated the variables of this discussion and then applied them to basic geometrical computations to graph and better understand exactly what RL and Jack's positions are on this topic. Hope this helps... :D The outcome is inevitable as you can clearly see.

LOL -- and I thought this thread had died the death it deserved.

If you would pay attention to detail, Saca, the comparison was between litigators and soldiers, not litigators and SF soldiers.

COL Moroney:

Calling you the Great Santini isn't so bad, it could have been COL Kurtz. :D