[Ed. Note: The following piece was authored by "The Legal Tease" of Sweet Hot Justice fame. You can check out all of Legal Tease's other evocative musings from Sweet Hot Justice here.]
You know this guy, you do. Every Big Firm has at least one. You started hearing the lore about him your first week at the firm and you admit that you were part intrigued, part terrified. You’ve seen him in passing in the halls, usually after most of the firm has emptied out after dark. Perhaps you’ve even tried to speak to him, only to be met with a distinct lack of eye contact and a half-snort as he scuttled away. He’s more socially awkward than any mental patient, not fit for human–no less client–interaction. But, word on the street–and that word’s always mentioned in hushed, reverential tones–is that he’s brilllliant. Like, crazy genius smart. That’s why the firm keeps him around. The brilliance. He’s the resident Big Firm Savant. And I’m here to tell you first-hand, the whole “genius” thing is a complete and total fraud.
How do I know this? Because I’ve spent the last two weeks holed up on an idiot fire drill deal that’s never going to materialize with not one, but two of my firm’s rumored Big Firm Savants.
One, of course, is our old friend, Glenn, who has the twin distinctions of having billed more hours than any other associate four years running and not having made eye contact since 1993. The other is Russ. Russ, a corporate equity partner whose book of business is rivaled in magnitude only by his lack of a personality. Or emotional range. Or ability to speak in a voice that doesn’t sound like he was recently plugged back into the Matrix.
Still, when I found out I’d be working with Russ, I figured it wasn’t necessarily all bad. Sure, I’d have to spend part of the holidays working on a dead-end deal led by a robot with lip chap the size of glaciers and a leadership style that rivals Ted Kaczynski’s. But on the upside, I’d finally get an inside look at how true legal genius works. I’d be working side-by-side two infamous Big Firm Savants. I’d experience the brilliance.
And most intriguing of all, I’d witness firsthand the rumored way that Russ supposedly “comes alive” in front of clients–because that’s part of the legend of Russ, of all Big Firm Savants: They’re corporate mole people around the office, but stick ‘em in front of a client and bam, they “come alive.” They shed their awkwardness and stun anyone within billing distance with artfully delivered soliloquies of razor-sharp legal analysis worthy of the whitest shoe. They shine. They must, right?
Wrong.
Read more about Big Russ and Glen after the jump.
When I came into Russ’s office for the first all-hands conference call for the deal, a call with about 600 people on it, Russ didn’t even look up, just kept staring at his dual computer monitors. Glenn, on the not-other hand, had managed to meld into a wall and stare at his fingers so effectively that I didn’t even notice him until his BlackBerry started vibrating. OK, so maybe genius operates…quietly.
The call started off uneventfully enough, but within only ten minutes, the lead counsel for the other side, a woman who introduces herself as “Helene-but-spelled-like-’Helen’-it’s-Greek-OK?”, threw down a particularly insulting insinuation about our client–one that begged an obvious response from Russ. Glenn appeared to be focusing on his cuticles at this point, and Russ just adjusted slightly in his seat, not saying a word, staring even more intensely at his monitors. The tension was palpable. Another junior associate on the deal moved forward in his chair and gave me a smirking look–a knowing look, a look that said “Here it is, baby. This is what all the hype is about. He’s gonna tear it up!!”
And then…nothing happened. I looked over at Glenn. Cuticles. I looked over at the junior associate, whose smirk was fading. And then I looked over at Russ. And that’s when I noticed it.
Need more? Don’t worry, we won’t tell. But you can read the rest of this story here.
LAST!!!
Vagina dentata to 190
Thrilling
So the author didn’t understand what was going on, and used it as an indictment of other lawyers who have had enough long term success to bill out at $1200 per hour. Brilliant.
Fifth!!! Yipee! i got nothing better to do than to post on ATL regarding which position I comment. All your base are belong to us.
sounds about par for the course. :P
6 = Fail
Do you lawyer as bad as you comment?
#2 = new killing it
So has ATL now officially outsourced the Hope Winters junk out to Sweet Hot Justice? I don’t get it. More layoff news please.
This chic’s blog is 90% (at least) bullshit. Not commenting on writing style or creativity, they’re both fine. But the level of detail she(?), um, ‘creates’, would out her in a minute to any firm she worked at.
I liked it. It was well -written enough to keep me reading to the end. Haters on this site will criticize anything they can, but this was worth the read.
#4: Right on. The author obviously has no clue. Also, calling a partner an asshole to another partner? BRILLIANT.
VAGINA DENTATA = painful morning walk of shame
so now Mystal eats signs too? Anything he won’t munch on?
Is that little vignette supposed to be interesting/funny/enlightening? Who really gives a shit?
“Russ, a corporate equity partner whose book of business is rivaled in magnitude only by his lack of a personality.”
As a rule I hate the grammar and style comments here, and I am sure this is a perfectly acceptable turn of phrase, but I am a little confused and wondering how others read this. Does this mean he has a big book of business, or a magnitudinously lacking book of business?
a transactional attorney with no social skills? color me shocked!
18 mentioned color and is therefore racist
boring… bring back MysTTTal’s typos.
The good: Writing style, storytelling, and especially topic.
The bad: Lack of topical exploitation. In other words, what #4 said.
I read this because my firm, like all others, has these quiet awkward “genius” partners. My intuition says that the truth is not exceptional one way or the other (1) They are not super-geniuses, but also (2) they are about as smart as any other partner in the firm and they just get the reputation for a “quiet genius” by benefitting from stereotypes. A worthy topic, but I wanted a better example.
One of the worst pieces I’ve read in a long time.
What is a vignette dentata?
Better written and MUCH less annoying than Hope Winters, but in the end not any more interesting. So basically, “I had to work on a deal over the holidays, and the partner seemed distracted on a call with the client.” WOW.
18 is killing it!
I would bet a lot of money that this story is a stab at fiction by someone with a little experience at a law firm trying to get a book deal “Anonymous Lawyer” style. It was just off in a bunch of ways that left the scent of bullshit wafting in my nostrils. This fake big firm lawyer stuff isn’t very compelling and it’s been done to death on the internet at this point.
17 is an idiot and needs to learn how to read good. I bet he even thought “read good” was grammatically correct.
23- google it, it’s a vajayjay with teeth. Ouch.
I’m writing her off as a moron becuase she couldn’t even understand the deal she was working on.
Slow news day.
i think these stories are written by BIGLAW partners to make us feel better about our crappy lives (hey, at least I didn’t spend NYE at the office).
Good writing? Seriously? Granted, this isn’t as bad as Hope Winters, but by that miserable yardstick, Mystal is a wordsmith to rival Shakespeare.
17, it is a horribly awkward turn of phrase. She is basically saying that his lack of personality is enormous. That’s tortured English, because lack of something is pretty much a binary concept – I either have something or I do not. It is of course possibly describe personality in more quantifiable terms, but that is exactly why words like “lack” should not be used.
The main problem with the writing style is that it struggles to come across as light and whimsical, but the author is simply incapable of it. The asides feel forced, the analogies are clunky, and the pace is all off. Fail.
17 is bad grammar and is an racist chum
Everyone look at 31 looks like we got a little Billy Shakespear on our hands here!
Stupid and poorly written anecdote /= the conclusion that the firm savant is a myth.
So [on a SINGLE phone call] they acted disinterested. They gave you a vague assignment. Wait a second – all those rumors about them being client savvy and exceptionally smart *must* be false, right?
what’s a corporate equity partner?
What’s racist chum?
11& 26 Nailed It.
I also call shenanigans. I mean, her blog details a partner request for strap-on sex. And no one she works with would figure out who she is?
Boring. Also, lie. Get this shit out of my ATL.
Wouldn’t this actually confirm the big firm genius myth if the partner was able to close the deal favorably?
37,
I work with her and actually know who she is. She always changes the names, and occasoinally an insignificant detail, but the stories are true.
40 – So why hasn’t she been handed her pictures of her cat and motivational posters in a cardboard box and shown the door by now? I mean, partners must LOVE having an employee detailing their sexual deviancies, social awkwardness, and professional incompetence to the whole world, right?
Anyone who works in a law firm knows this type of person — if you don’t, you’re lying, or newsflash: YOU’RE that person.
Nice addition to the site, Mystal. Funny, sharp.
Elie – is this a concession that you cannot come up with your own material? Weak, weak, weak!
41,
Pwnt. I have no idea who she is, retard. Way to bite.
40
35 – “corporate equity partner” um, I’m guessing that’s maybe a partner who works in the corporate group of a law firm? Gimme a break.
41, 44 – Pwnt. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Making shit up, being called on it, then admitting making shit up =/= OMG ponies. (Though it does make a strong case for Loohoo. Zer.)
There is a saying in that if you can’t spot the sucker in the first 30 minutes, you are the sucker. Did it ever occur to Sweet Hot Retard that she is too stupid to understand my brilliance? Who ended up working on New Year’s? Not Big Russ.
Sincerely,
Big Russ.
If you knew who this person was, and you knew the stories were true, would you really want to fire her?
45,
In the zoology of corporate law, there is no such creature as a “corporate equity” lawyer and on its face, the title makes absolutely no sense. To the initiated, it smacks of the the sort of misuse of jargon that would be attempted by an outsider to convince other outsiders that the user is part of the culture. It is impossible to believe that anyone with any decent level of experience working as a transactional lawyer would say something like that — it is akin to folks who work outside of finance referring to people who work in finance collectively as “brokers”. Given this, it is likely that the author is making this story up but pawning it off as a true story in order to make it somehow seem more compelling (see, Frey, James et al.). Fail.
49 nailed it. This entire piece is bullshit. This author likely knows enough about being a lawyer to make a layperson think they are a lawyer. We know the difference.
Still, it’s entertaining…We all know these people.
49:
Agree that “corporate equity” partners don’t exist, but corporate “equity partners” do.
49 = epic fail.
And even if the guy was not a corporate “equity partner”, he can still be a “corporate equity” partner. You know, someone who works mostly on corporate equity offerings, as opposed to those partners who work on corporate debt (corporate debt partners), or those who work on private equity (private equity partners)?
“So, there it is, friends. I started the New Year holed up in my office drafting documents for a deal I didn’t even remotely understand, while the two Big Firm Savants spent it somewhere far away from here, probably with champagne, or at least cheap wine, focusing on anything but work.”
This is exactly what makes them brilliant.
While this isn’t a terribly written piece, I don’t really understand the point. We don’t need an “expose” of the resident firm genius written by someone with “first-hand” experience. Just about every firm lawyer who reads this site has experience with the resident firm genius and has just as much information as the writer as to whether the moniker is justified.
In my ten years of experience, it usually is. Guess this writer either found an aberration or mistook total mastery of the issues for ignorance. (They can look similar.)
the legal tease rocks. well-written and funny as hell. haters need to relax. the purpose of the blog is entertainment, not stunning legal commentary.
Weak.
The writing style is good.
The ending is boring, and 4 has it about right…
52,
There is no such person as a capital market partner who works only on equity offerings such that they would be referred to as a corporate equity partner: the world is not chopped up that way and anyone with even the slightest modicum of experience gained through practice under the Securities Act would know that. The very idea that someone would call a securities lawyer a corporate equity partner is silly and would no doubt be taken as an insult by that partner. If you believe there is a partner working in the world who would answer to the characterization of corporate equity partner, I challenge you to name such person.
Ah, “corporate equity”. I recall it fondly. Makes me want to break out my 401K statement from 2007.
How………uninteresting. FAIL,
31 YOU are a douche!
this is awesome. excellent writing. calls out the big law fakers for what they really are. losers with no friends. the guys no one hung out with or picked for softball.
Finally, yes, thank you. If there was more writing this this on ATL, I’d be here more often. It’s entertaining. Keep it coming, Lat.
i cannot tolerate these atl jerks with no life who are overly critical of everything that appears in front of them. firstly, i’m willing to bet that 40% cannot write as well as the author. please. a simple “good job” would be sufficient.
YOU are all douches. I hope someone will spread your butt cheeks and glasscock the juicy insides.
BRING BACK HOPE WINTERS!!!
God, this reminds me of that whole “Pants Down” fiasco. Which is not a good thing. It’s crap like this that drives readers AWAY from ATL.
63,
“Firstly” should only be used when followed by an enumerated “secondly.”
-atl jerk with no life
46,
I don’t know why you think I “keep” using the word pwnt. To my knowledge, the time I used it in my earlier posts is the only time I have ever used it.
And it certainly means what I think it means, douchebag.
Yours most sincerely,
40/44
Can we just stop saying “fail,” please? We’re not 17-year old 4chan idiots here. Use sentences.
I thought it was pretty damn funny. Sometimes when you work exclusively among the robots for long enough, you forget there are other humans out there among the robots as well. Thanks for posting.
“firstly” and “secondly” are both wrong. first, second, last.
I worked with one of these savant mole types, and to my shock he really did “come alive” when dealing with clients or a jury. That only made his regular behavior more intolerable.
Let her be.
I think she’s entertaining.
It’s enough to be that.
Guys, by equity partner, she means a real shareholder. These big-city big law firms have people “make partner” who are not really a partner. It is a kind of glorified associate status that does not get you a share in the profits. Equity partner means a real partner. And I actually do know who this girl is. She is not from NY like she tries to make everyone believe she is from Cali.