Re: Structure vs Substance?

Subject: Re: Structure vs Substance?
From: "Jason A. Czekalski" <topsidefarm -at- mva -dot- net>
To: TECHWR-L digest <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:51:49 -0700

Andrew Plato <intrepid_es -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote

<< Lawyers become lawyers because they have a vast knowledge of the
law and not because they adopt some time-honored procedure. >>

WRONG!!!!!!

Andrew, along with all of my other experiences, I am a school trained
paralegal. And I can tell you first hand that lawyers DO NOT have a vast
knowledge of the law, at least not when they first start out. Do you
honestly believe that every Bar certified attorney knows all (or even a
majority) of their state's criminal code, civil and tort code, case law,
civil rights law, labor law, UCC, probate,...... I think everyone gets
the picture. No, what they have is extensive training in a process. It's
called research, and legal research in a painstakingly detailed
procedure. Even legal specialists only know the most important concepts
by rote. They fill in the details with research. Yes, Andrew, procedure
rules the day in the legal profession.

Jason





Previous by Author: Re: Client from Hell redux
Next by Author: RE:Structure vs. Substance (long)
Previous by Thread: Re: Structure vs Substance?
Next by Thread: Re: Structure vs Substance?


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads