old shoes.jpgOur colleagues over at sister site Fashionista aren’t alone. Lawyers also get worked up over shoes.
Some, like former Enron prosecutor Kathryn Ruemmler, show up to court in four-inch pink stiletto spikes. Others hate on commuter shoes and Crocs. Attorneys have strong opinions about attire, and that extends to footwear.
So we can’t say we’re completely surprised by a motion recently filed by plaintiffs’ counsel in the case of Lenkersdorf v. Sorrentino, now pending in Florida state court.
Motion to Compel Defense Counsel to Wear Appropriate Shoes at Trial — we kid you not — after the jump.

The motion appears below. Our reaction to Bill Bone, filer of the motion: what a heel!
This guy is a total Bone-head! Did he not have a sensible colleague who could talk him out of filing such a motion? Perhaps he is a sole practitioner?
P.S. We’re just trying to be punny — heel, sole, Bone. Geddit?
We actually see Bill Bone’s point in filing this motion. And we also see that Bone isn’t a sole practitioner; rather, he’s a partner in Larmoyeux & Bone.
Update: For more about the story behind the motion — it seems, for example, that defense lawyer Michael Robb wears the hole-ridden Cole Haan loafers because they are “lucky” — see the Palm Beach Post.
Lenkersdorf Sorrentino motion to compel appropriate shoes 1.jpg
Lenkersdorf Sorrentino motion to compel appropriate shoes 2.jpg
Does lawyer who bares sole have an ace in the hole? [Palm Beach Post]

comments sponsored by

108 comments (hidden for your protection) Show all comments