I hate to say I told you so, but I did. Lit support people should provide support, not office-wide disruptions.

pwned

I bet that support guy made more than me, without even going to law school. He should have kept his mouth shut and appreciated the opportunity.

LOLZ....PWN3D!!!!1

FIRST!

FINALLY FIRST!!

Did I mention FIRST!!!

I said it before and I'll say it again, there are WAY more examples of feckless retarded do-nothing support staff in law firms than there are of associates who treat support staff like crap. Most reasonable associates know that there is a good chance that pissing off a given support staff person will likely make its way around the office and get your future work f*ed.

No I in teamocil

Sometimes, late at night, when I am alone working on a document production cluster-fuck I will slip in a few photocopied images of my enormous penis...

is the zoo closed yet?

Anyone know what information was posted on the Legal Wedding couple thread that caused Lat to close it down?

I suppose the lesson for associates is not to be d-bags. If you have a reputation for not being a d-bag, then when this sort of e-mail makes the rounds, people will assume that there's no substance to it.

The lesson for everyone is not to cc the entire firm on these sorts of things. It turns a potentially legitimate complaint into a tantrum. The average partner who reads this isn't going to think "what did the associate do?" He'll think "why am I receiving this?" And then he'll press the button that activates the trap door under your desk.

There are definitely those support staff who you feel like you have to handle with kid gloves.

As an associate, if a partner says "Get this done ASAP," I don't take it personally if he fails to say please or "Do you think you could get this done soon?" or some other such nonsense.

But I feel if I told my secretary "Get this done ASAP" she'd act hurt. I can totally see this being the case at Quinn. Good riddance to that guy. Grow a pair.

How many times must one fail in life in order to wind up doing Lit Support?

lulz pwn3d

emailed at 9:15. gone by 5:30. the internet really is interactive!

@L2L - It is "made more than I" - NOT "made more than me."

Associates are treated like "dogs" all the time. Very rarely does this compel the associate to publish via email to an entire office what transpired. The reason for this is that attorneys are professionals, and understand the value of keeping one's traps shut.

Sometimes associates who are treated like "dogs" file lawsuits against their employers. Wassup Aaron Charney?

5:52,

I'm guessing it is the bashing about their looks. Seems like it might have been getting out of hand.

Look, you don't have to tell me twice that a lot of lawyers can be assholes, but it cuts both ways.

At a Biglaw NYC firm I once worked at, there were a couple unpleasant "lit support lifers" -- sassy guys in their 40s who seemed to think they owned the place because they'd been around a few years, and who either resented young associates or simply derived pleasure for humiliating them.

I saw MANY a snotty e-mail be sent to, for example, an entire case's group address -- a bunch of partners and associates -- that arguably crossed the line in "explaining" something to an associate.

YOU DID NOT USE A BLUE BLOOK SIGNAL!!!

Nice to see Quinn had the brains to can the lit support guy ASAP.

Can you imagine the message it would send to associates if the support guy was NOT fired?

The associate would have been humiliated, associates as a group would be outraged by the disrespect, and odds are that the associate would have quit.

The associate would have been humiliated, associates as a group would be outraged by the disrespect, and odds are that the associate would have quit.

Who would quit a job with a minimum salary of 160K on the basis of an email sent by staff- you are out of your fucking mind- get back to proofreading form documents bitch

"Who would quit a job with a minimum salary of 160K on the basis of an email sent by staff"

I would, not on the basis of the email, but if the person who sent it wasn't fired immediately.

Why would you stay at a firm like that? I'd quit and work elsewhere.

Yeah, what's up with closing the comments on the LEWW? Those people were asking for public ridicule when they decided to announce their wedding in the New York Times. Seems like anything is fair game. And the photo of what they did to that dog shows how truly terrible those people are.

Question: Once Lat starts editing comments, doesn't he become liable for the content of those comments? Doesn't the decision not to remove a particular comment carry some liability with it? I thought that was why the autoadmit guy refused to edit comments; as long as he made no editorial decisions he couldn't be liable. I haven't followed the suit against him, so not sure what courts have said about the issue.

Litigation support guy is a hissy little tard. better update that monster profile, dude.

If someone treats you like a dog, go through channels. A well-placed word in the right person's ear will rub shit in the offender's hair far more effectively than some firm wide e-mail.

Btw, litigation support guy, here's a clue:

As a rule of thumb, there's no reason to send practice group/firm wide e-mails unless you're announcing a party, looking for a book, etc.

while I can only attest for my office of biglaw I can tell you that being rude to anyone (staff, lawyers) will get you off partnership track just as quickly as playing grab ass with a partner's spouse. Even if under incredible pressure, act like a fucking professional...

Of course, I'm not at the NYC office of Sully Cromwell or Skadden.

oh snap... oh no he di'int.

There are at least as many whiny big law paralegals as there are whiny big law associates. Probably more.

Paralegals typically fall into two camps: those just killing time until they go to law school, or lifers who know that no matter how personality deficient they are, they'll always be able to find a job.

Having said that, if an associate ever crosses a line, the answer isn't to send an email and go out like a bitch. A put-upon paralegal has three options:

1) Do the responsible thing and take your concerns to his supervisor.

2) Do the passive-aggressive thing and claim you're too busy to do his work, or take forever to get it done.

3) Do the evil thing, and intentionally screw him over at some point.

I've only heard of option 3 happening once, but the attorney in question got absolutely reamed by a partner when some documents he was responsible for went "missing."

Screw with support staff at your peril.

Just as I suspected, this lit "support" douchebag is basically sorry for the choices that he's made in life that lead him to such a crap position, and is now taking it out on an associate for merely pointing out an error. Go back to writing that failed great american novel, a-hole, see ya later.

@ 10:16 pm, you are a fucking dick. Those are not the only two types of paralegals. What about the fantastic paralegals who bust their ass, know the case inside and out and have a fantastic attitude (and if your firm doesn't have any that fit the description, it must be piddling, hack firm)? You are slime. Slime with a JD, probably, but slime. You should be ashamed. Don't you have anyone in your family who doesn't pull in three figures? Or do you hate them, too?

I think the Anonymous Lawyer hit on this topic pretty well with his tip #10 for summer associates:

"10. Act like you love it here, but don't go overboard. You're fortunate to be here. You know that and we know that. Act like it, but don't be an idiot. Smile, do everything you're told, act appropriately deferential, but you don't have to act like a paralegal. You're not the slaves, they are. You'll do some busy-work, but you don't have to clean up trash and no one should ask you to. And if they do, just find a paralegal or a secretary, act like you own them, speak in a stern voice, and they'll obey, just like they've been trained to do. You're higher on the food chain than they are. In the event of an earthquake that wipes out all food supplies, they will be eaten before you will be. Remember that. Take the hierarchy seriously. Deferential to those above you, but don't take it to an extreme. You're still more important than the recruiting coordinators."

Posted 5/8/06

I think firing the legal assistant is a bit much. Regardless, I have a question. Say the post had never appeared on this site, would the kid have been fired, or would the partners done the right thing here and tell the kid NEVER to do that again?

By the way....L2L to 17.50 an hour!

I work at biglaw in dc and my firm would not have fired the kid. Although I do not think that makes my firm more humane than QE, I think the bigwigs understand that sometimes lousy circumstances produce dumb decisions.

That said, if I were on the receiving end of the email, I would expect the managing partner to send around (for the thousandth time) the standard communication about email etiquette.

@ 10:39

He signed his post "Paralegal Lad". Someone should fire YOU.

@10:39: Try learning how to read, tard. I am a paralegal. I'll have my JD in a few years, but for now, I'm not earning anywhere near six figures. And I work at a top twenty firm, so not so much a hack place.

Yes, there are obviously dedicated paralegals. I was being tongue-in-cheek when I said there were only two types. But my point stands: if you're an associate, you're playing with fire by being an asshole to support staff.

I wish I had a job that paid three figures.

FIRST!

THAT SAID THAT SAID THAT SAID

I move that Lat modify all posts with "That said" to "However."

Loyola 2L: SHUT IT

SECOND!

I realize that most of you folks only have BigLaw to go by, but, he would have been fired in any corporate setting. Be professional, go to his/her boss and let them know. Otherwise, HR will work just as well. Throwing emails out like that is just asking for termination.

Hey Lawjunkie, decided on going to law school yet? I will be 40+ when I graduate, and I'm still going. No Biglaw, I have an in-house position.

Is it really in dispute that he should have been fired?

If an associate is openly disrespected by a lit support person IN FRONT OF THE WHOLE FIRM, nothing less than firing the guy will cure the situation.

Otherwise, it looks as if the firm thinks the ASSOCIATE was in the wrong and doesn't care if the whole firm knows it.

There are two types of associates: 1) those who are nice to the support staff; and 2) those who are elitist, snobby dicks and no doubt brag about their paychecks to the other douches on the UES while paying $400 for a bottle of Absolut and are obviously trying to make up for a horrendous lack of personality or character.

The guy shouldn't have sent the email to the whole firm. I call bullshit on the fact that the associate was "baffled" by the whole thing, but the lit support guy showed a lack of good judgment and should have been disciplined. But going on and on about how support people are pathetic really just shows how pathetic some attorneys are.

The firing offense was cc'ing a bunch of people, not the email itself. Sure, it overreacted a bit and he should have gone through channels.

Of course, when I was working at one of the 10 biggest law firms in the country, the partner I worked for would routinely and deliberately cc other partners when berating his associates for mistakes. He made lots of money for the firm and wasn't going anywhere. I left for another AmLaw 100 firm and am much happier.

Lawjunkie:

The word from people inside Quinn is that the lit support guy was going to be fired *before* the e-mail because the lit support hierarchy knew about the incident before the e-mail. Also, the lit support guy was a temp who had only been at Quinn for 3-4 weeks, and was not going to be asked to stay on permanently anyhow. The incident just accelerated the process, and then the e-mail super-accelerated it.

Paralegal Lad,

You will make a terrible lawyer if you write what you don't mean to say. Who cares that I didn't notice your signature in this silly forum -- the point stands -- you have a negative attitude and you seem like a dick. If you ever do become a lawyer, try a little more precision with your language. And in any event, who gives a fuck if you are a paralegal or a crystal meth-addicted male escort. In either case, you blow.

Have a nice day.

-- @10:39

To the extent that tipster's 9:35am comment is true, that changes the whole equation. This guy should have been flogged on the way out the door.

As to this from "Old Guy"....

"Hey Lawjunkie, decided on going to law school yet? I will be 40+ when I graduate, and I'm still going. No Biglaw, I have an in-house position."

I've been out of law school for a while.

Oh, soz bro, didn't realize...Maybe the eyesight really is going...

"Who cares that I didn't notice your signature in this silly forum"

Apology accepted.

You are pathetic.