I just finished reading Bad Blood: Secrets and Lies in a Silicon Valley Startup (affiliate link), the book by Wall Street Journal reporter John Carreyrou. I couldn’t put it down. Yes, I read it in dinosaur version (e.g., hardcover, rather than digital), but you know I’m a dinosaur. It was a page-turner for me, reminding me of Kurt Eichenwald’s book Conspiracy of Fools (affiliate link) published more than a decade ago about the Enron scandal. And, if you’re too young to have much memory of that, get thee to the internet. Enron executives fancied themselves the smartest guys in the room, and they were — until they weren’t.

The same could be said for the story of Bad Blood, which reminded me of Enron in some ways but set in the Silicon Valley and about a different kind of business, Theranos. You can read all about the book and its subject in any number of places. I’m not writing a book review here, but rather wondering about what these smart people were thinking.

So, what better segue to yet another installment of lawyers and judges and “what were they thinking?” In general, we are smart people, at least we think we are (a sentiment not necessarily shared by many non-lawyers and opposing counsel and clients). However, the antics of lawyers and judges who should know better, and who should do better — but don’t — continue to astonish.

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the case of the judge who went ballistic when his dry cleaners purportedly lost a pair of his trousers.  This judge sued the cleaners for more than $50 million dollars, I guess, figuring that he could take the cleaners to the cleaners.

The cleaners found them, but the judge lost far more: his job, his reputation, and now, at long last, he’s being disciplined. No wonder the average person has lost respect for the legal system, especially for shenanigans such as this and how long it takes to impose discipline. Maybe public humiliation, such as the stocks, might be something to consider bringing back.  We could call it the “Laughing Stock.” Sorry, I couldn’t resist.

Making this judge look like a piker for suing only for $54 million is this ex-lawyer who was involved in a scam 10 times greater. (I wonder how many pairs of trousers that would equal?) Pleading guilty in a disability bribery scheme, this lawyer won’t get the stocks, but something better: 27 years in prison. I will definitely be taking a dirt nap by the time of his probable release, but since he’s already 58, he may well be too.

We lawyers think that because we are intelligent, that suffices. But, as one researcher has pointed out, intelligence is not the same as critical thinking (in other words, “What were they thinking?” — or “not thinking” as the case may be).  Law school is “supposed” to teach us how to think critically, but in some cases, it hasn’t adequately taught that (e.g., recent bar exam passage rates) or discussed the “risk v. reward” theory. Perhaps some people just like to gamble with their careers and their reputations.

A former Fisher & Phillips partners, who has been sentenced to life in prison for killing his wife, did several stupid things. One was killing his wife, for which he was convicted, and the second was not expressing any remorse at sentencing, which the trial court found telling. Memo to all lawyers who may find themselves at the mercy of the court: show some remorse; it couldn’t hurt.

In these days especially, it shouldn’t be necessary to tell people, including lawyers and judges, to watch their language, but apparently old ways of saying things die hard. Exhibit A: Judge Stephen Millan in Miami-Dade Circuit Court. His explanations for certain inappropriate remarks included the following: he used the particular term while growing up; and he used the term “thugs” which people in his courtroom thought were directed at them, while the judge claimed the words were directed to people in other courtrooms (unless people in the other courtrooms had the Harry Potter extendable ears, how would they hear and know that the comment was intended for them?). Did the judge make that excuse with a straight face? He also engaged in ex parte conduct with the defense lawyer, whose clients had been the topic of the “thugs” comment.

The Florida Supreme Court, in its order, acknowledged that Judge Millan has taken steps to address his misconduct. He has read articles about racial bias and taken classes on racial equality in the court system. Pardon my skepticism about his purported behavioral conversion. ATL Executive Editor Elie Mystal shares my skepticism.

If law schools teach students to “do as we say, not as we do,” then hopefully the University of Denver Sturm School of Law will take its own advice and pay women professors comparably to men. What does it signal if a law school doesn’t follow the law and has to be chastised monetarily by the EEOC as well as having an oversight monitor for its failure to do so?

Given the still-depressing statistics of how women fare in the profession over the long haul, you would have thought that law schools would be leading the charge for equality, instead of being rebuked. Hopefully, whoever made the decision of pay non-parity wasn’t teaching Con Law. Remember, law schools, you’re not exempt from #Me Too and #TimesUp as Berkeley Law discovered several years ago.

And last, but certainly not least, did you notice that I did not discuss any of the government lawyers engaged in the various activities that seem to consume more and more time and media attention these days? My parents taught me that if I couldn’t say anything nice, to not say anything at all. (Another reason for not hanging out on social media.) Res ipsa loquitur.

Jill Switzer has been an active member of the State Bar of California for more than 40 years. She remembers practicing law in a kinder, gentler time. She’s had a diverse legal career, including stints as a deputy district attorney, a solo practice, and several senior in-house gigs. She now mediates full-time, which gives her the opportunity to see dinosaurs, millennials, and those in-between interact — it’s not always civil. You can reach her by email at oldladylawyer@gmail.com.