Of Parsimony and Ockham’s Razor

January 31, 2012

The Ockraz Logo

“I offer no apology; I am the victim here, not a miscreant.”~ Joseph Rakofsky

Occam’s razor, also known as Ockham’s razor, or in Latin referred to as lex parsimoniae (the law of parsimony, economy or succinctness), is the principle that among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest new assumptions usually offers the correct one, and that the simplest explanation will be the most plausible until evidence is presented to prove it false.

My co-defendant and local counsel in the Rakofsky v. The Internet lawsuit, Eric Turkewitz has  posted a new update #4 which includes a new court filing by the plaintiff, Joseph Rakofsky:

Update #4, 1/31/12 – Rakofsky’s Reply to other defense opposition to the motion in the Appellate Division to lift the stay for him only. No response to our papers (which were served 1/26/12, one day before they were due to be served): RakofskyReply. The opposing papers to which he refers are here: Teschner  (Yampolsky) Opp and Weissman (Reuters) Opp

Some may describe Rakofsky’s Reply Affidavit and legal writing in uncharitable terms:

bewildering

Delphic

cryptic

enigmatic

fathomless

impenetrable

incognizable

inconceivable

inscrutable

mystifying

perplexing

puzzling

sibylline

unfathomable

ungraspable

unimaginable

unintelligible

unknowable

Not I. I merely report the facts in evidence. Yet, the correct adjective escapes me…Ah, yes, “incomprehensible”, or as in Rakofsky’s own words:

The subtleties of Rakofsky’s formidable legal argument and rhetorical flourishes are exemplified in the following precatory phrasing:

As Ken @ Popehat remarked on Twitter:

par·si·mo·ni·ous (pär s -m n – s). adj. Excessively sparing or frugal. par si·mo ni·ous·ly adv. par si·mo ni·ous·ness n.

Whatever one may think of Mr. Rakofsky or his lawsuit, one cannot call him parsimonious in his prose.

As Edmund Burke once said:

Mere parsimony is not economy. Expense, and great expense, may be an essential part in true economy.

Or, in the immortal words of Titus Livius:

There is nothing worse than being ashamed of parsimony or poverty.

The day of judicial reckoning fast approaches….

Previous Related Posts:


Justice Scalia’s Inferno

January 19, 2012
Dante finds himself lost in a gloomy wood
Canto 1 of the Divine Comedy:Inferno illustrated by Paul Gustave Doré (1832-1883). The caption reads ‘In the midway of this our mortal life, I found me in a gloomy wood, astray’ Canto 1 lines 1,2.

 ”Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch’intrate” (“Abandon all hope, ye who enter here”) Dante Alighieri’s The Divine Comedy: Inferno, Canto III, The Gate of Hell

I share only two things in common with Justice Antonin “Nino” Scalia: a first name and a nickname. Everything else about Justice Scalia is anathema to my understanding of the legal system, professional ethics or the human condition.

Anyone who has read Justice Scalia’s dissent (with whom Justice Clarence Thomas predictably concurs) in the recently released U.S. Supreme Court decision in Maples v. Thomas, Commissioner, Alabama Department of Corrections  565 U. S. ____ (2012), will hopefully share my utter sense of bewilderment and melancholy. Unless, of course, you are inclined to believe that no sense of procedural justice exists and that rules of procedure—criminal, civil or administrative—are mere window-dressing like your grandmother’s saggy drapes. Read the rest of this entry »


Email Backlinking Offer from Sara Connor: Terminated

January 13, 2012
Sarah Connor (Terminator)

Image via Wikipedia

I received the following email today (backlinks removed):

Hello,

I’m Sara, and I own personalinjuryattorney.org. I see you’ve accepted guest posts on thetrialwarrior.com in the past–would you allow me to also write a guest post for you?

I’m happy to research and compose an original article specifically written for your site, on any topic of your choosing. I hope you’d let me put a discreet link to my own website,personalinjuryattorney.org, at the end of my post.

All that would be required of you is to review/approve my completed article to make sure that it coincides with the theme of your site.

Please let me know if you would like to see samples of my work before accepting my offer.

Thank you for your time,

Sara Connor
Blogger | Owner
Personal Injury Attorney

Here is my reply [insert your best Arnold Schwarzenegger accent here]:

Dear Sara Connor:

Thank you for your email.

You are correct in stating that I allow guest posts on my blawg. However, it is by my invitation only and extended solely to those whom I respect as blawgers.

Regrettably, I do not accept solicitations for cross-linking or back-linking purposes. The Trial Warrior Blog is a personal endeavour. It is not a for-profit marketing vehicle. I do not accept advertisements, Google Adwords, SEO or any other form of direct or indirect marketing ploys. Perhaps you have not benefited from reading any of my posts previously, since you would know how I feel about ghostblawging, which is essentially the intent of your offer. You wish for me to allow you to ghost-write a post for the sole purpose of directing my readers to your website. Unacceptable.

Furthermore, on what basis or rationale do you actually believe that you are able to write a post remotely relevant or of sufficient quality to meet my readers’ standards to fit within my blawg theme or subject-matter?

I do not practice personal injury law anymore (in fact, the last time I did so was in the late 90s).

Moreover, are you aware that I am a Canadian lawyer? I sure hope so, since you should not be writing about Canadian law if you are not licensed to practice in any Canadian province or territory.

According to your website:

While many personal injury lawyers and other legal organizations choose to link to Personal Injury Attorney in order to educate their readers and clients about the personal injury lawsuit process, we do not accept advertisements nor specifically recommend any attorney or personal injury law firm.

Frankly, given your email offer, I find this to be misleading advertising. While you may not specifically recommend any attorney or personal injury law firm, the fact that you are soliciting lawyers to allow backlinking to your site implies some form of tacit approval or affiliation.

As your namesake said in the Terminator: “there’s a storm coming”. I suggest you buy an umbrella.

Hasta la vista, baby.


So Who’s Really Smarter?

January 5, 2012

In a post entitled “Why new lawyers are smarter”, Lee Akazaki gushes on about the current crop of law students, soon to become the Millennial Generation of Future Super Duper Lawyers Way Smarter Than Us Old Codgers:

They asked well-informed questions.  They had read the materials over the holiday break.  They came with an open mind and left ready to tackle the factum-writing portion of the course.  Could I have had the same conversation with senior members of the bar?  Could they have taught some members of our judiciary a thing or two about the tort of interference with economic relations?  (In fact, yes: one of my students noticed – where I hadn’t – that a recent Court of Appeal decision had, in distinguishing a prior precedent, misconstrued a critical fact.*)

Akazaki continues with more fulsome praise of the New Greatest Generation:

The entire mindset that law school is about cramming is outdated, and belongs to a time when legal education was struggling to shake off vestiges of its trade school mentality.  During my time in law school in the 1980′s, the notion of Canadian law as dialogue among stakeholders in our society was still nascent.  The Charter was still being read down as an interloper law.

Over the years, my experience as a moot court course supervisor has always taught me more about the law than I have taught the students.  A great unfair bargain, is teaching.  As presiding judge in the “Moot Court of Flavelle,” I’ve had the unique experience of keeping time and listening to my students and the other judges spar over questions of law.  What we witness, in this process, is a glimpse into the minds of apprentice lawyers of the 21st Century.  They do seem awfully smart, compared to their senior counterparts.  It is not so much they are smarter (they may very well be).  Rather, legal education has advanced into a better hybrid of professional school and academy.  It is still a work in progress.  From an adult education perspective, legal education is better today than it was 25 years ago.  The fact it is different has led to the perception among senior bar members to hold the opposite view.

Ok. I get it. These law students are really, really smart and we can learn from them. They need not learn from senior lawyers, when they have Wikipedia, Google,  Twitter and shiny new iPads.

Sure, they’re smart enough to get into law school, pass the Bar Exams with flying colours and then they’ll be ready to take on the legal world. Excelsior!

But wait a second, says Joe Palazzolo, writing for the WSJ Blog in an article called “ABA President: Law Students, You Should Have Known” quoting -William Robinson, president of the American Bar Association:

It’s inconceivable to me that someone with a college education, or a graduate-level education, would not know before deciding to go to law school that the economy has declined over the last several years and that the job market out there is not as opportune as it might have been five, six, seven, eight years ago.

So what are the prospects for the legal smart-set in Canada? According to Matt LaForge in his Lawyers Weekly article entitled “The lawyer job market for young lawyers in Canada”, not so good:

No, the situation in the U.S. is not good. Those who either are or will soon be job seekers outnumber by tens of thousands the quantity of available jobs. And the firms’ clients, themselves scrambling to reduce costs, are demanding smaller bills. The results: downward pressure on compensation, working conditions, job security, and professional prestige. What about here in Canada? Are economic conditions creating a cohort of contractors and temps, a generation of law school grads who see themselves as having been sold a bill of goods?  It almost goes without saying that the issue is top-of-mind within the profession. Law students, new calls and junior associates have heard the horror stories, and they want to know where they stand. In the July issue of Novus Tellem, the newsletter produced by the Young Lawyers’ Division of the Ontario Bar Association, Stephanie Sales, who last spring completed her articles at Ottawa’s Connolly Obagi LLP, wrote an article about an event held in Ottawa called “Life After Articles,” a by-lawyers-for-lawyers pep talk of the sort that is dotting the cosmos of the profession with increasing density.

LaForge quotes “Sarah, a new call who didn’t want her full name used in this article for fear of professional reprisal” who shares her recent job hunting experiences:

“Juniors are desperate,” Sarah says. “And it’s so sad because they’re willing to bust their asses and work so hard. And, literally, you have great people going to interviews saying, ‘I will do anything, I’ll do whatever you tell me.’

“I guess everyone eventually gets a job but I don’t know if that’s actually true,” she continues. “It seems there are a lot of people, especially right out of law school, who have had a hard time finding a permanent job and they drop off the map for a little while. Probably everyone gets placed eventually, but I don’t know.”

A more sober perspective comes from John Ohnjec, division director at Robert Half Legal’s Ottawa office.

“It’s not unprecedented. These options have always existed for people,” he says, referring to temp and contract work. “If anything, it’s just more pronounced now.”

Ohnjec might be described as an optimistic realist vis-a-vis the job market for new calls. He is willing to acknowledge that the game has either already changed or is about to change, but he sees no reason to panic.

“There needs to be a realization that non-full-time, non-permanent positions are a viable avenue towards employment,” he says.

Smart lawyers are a dime a dozen, but the best advice from a senior lawyer is not telling a law student how smart they are. There is enough self-entitlement in every generation, perhaps more so in the Millennial Generation. The Slackoisie don’t need another cheerleader, Scott Greenfield of Simple Justice often reminds us. Rather, the best advice is to show a law student how the practice of law “smarts” (as in “ouchy, that hurts!”). Tell a law student what it takes to be a competent and ethical lawyer, having survived through two or three recessions and what you did to survive in a down economy. That’s what I call “street smarts” on my side of the street.


The Trial Warrior Blog 2011 in review

December 31, 2011

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2011 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

The concert hall at the Syndey Opera House holds 2,700 people. This blog was viewed about 45,000 times in 2011. If it were a concert at Sydney Opera House, it would take about 17 sold-out performances for that many people to see it.

Click here to see the complete report.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 942 other followers