Litigation lawyer: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
This is a theoretical but not actual function, because no-one in their right mind would ask a litigation lawyer to bless any course of action more contentious than sitting cross-legged in an air-conditioned padded cubicle having first signed a lengthy [[disclaimer]]. Signing off hypothetical risk scenarios is just not how [[litigation lawyer]]s roll. | This is a theoretical but not actual function, because no-one in their right mind would ask a litigation lawyer to bless any course of action more contentious than sitting cross-legged in an air-conditioned padded cubicle having first signed a lengthy [[disclaimer]]. Signing off hypothetical risk scenarios is just not how [[litigation lawyer]]s roll. | ||
In part this is because they are are short the same option as is any [[risk controller]]: There is no upside from signing off any [[risk]] that has not been fully diffused in a [[circle of escalation]], underwritten in blood by someone else (ideally a [[Sullivan and Cromwell]] partner) and socialised to the [[General Counsel]]. But it is not just that: there's a personality element too. [[Litigation lawyer]]s are preternaturally risk averse — [[fear]]ful — by personal disposition. Loose cannon types rarely sign up to be litigation lawyers, and don’t last long if they do. | In part this is because they are are short the same option as is any [[risk controller]]: There is no upside from signing off any [[risk]] that has not been fully diffused in a [[circle of escalation]], underwritten in blood by someone else (ideally a [[Sullivan and Cromwell]] partner) and [[socialise|socialised]] to the [[General Counsel]]. But it is not just that: there's a personality element too. [[Litigation lawyer]]s are preternaturally risk averse — [[fear]]ful — by personal disposition. Loose cannon types rarely sign up to be litigation lawyers, and don’t last long if they do. | ||
Thus, an in-house [[litigation]] team is basically the [[complaints department|complaints division]] of the firm. Be wary when these people wield inordinate influence. In recent times, like its equivalent in the ''Sirius Cybernetics Corporation'', litigation teams have gone from half a junior lawyer, on flexi-time, between spells of maternity leave, to fully weaponised Death Stars of fusty, naturally censorious [[Mediocre lawyer|solicitors]] with no appetite to make any call or take any risk, however remote. | Thus, an in-house [[litigation]] team is basically the [[complaints department|complaints division]] of the firm. Be wary when these people wield inordinate influence. In recent times, like its equivalent in the ''Sirius Cybernetics Corporation'', litigation teams have gone from half a junior lawyer, on flexi-time, between spells of maternity leave, to fully weaponised Death Stars of fusty, naturally censorious [[Mediocre lawyer|solicitors]] with no appetite to make any call or take any risk, however remote. | ||
Revision as of 14:35, 2 April 2019
One of the sainted risk controllers of a financial services firm. An inhabitant of the litigation department. Litigators deal with ongoing customer complaints and, where clients have not come up to expectation, prosecute claims on the firm’s behalf. The litigation team would also claim have an advisory function, and encourage their colleagues to consult them ahead of time to avoid future angst.
This is a theoretical but not actual function, because no-one in their right mind would ask a litigation lawyer to bless any course of action more contentious than sitting cross-legged in an air-conditioned padded cubicle having first signed a lengthy disclaimer. Signing off hypothetical risk scenarios is just not how litigation lawyers roll.
In part this is because they are are short the same option as is any risk controller: There is no upside from signing off any risk that has not been fully diffused in a circle of escalation, underwritten in blood by someone else (ideally a Sullivan and Cromwell partner) and socialised to the General Counsel. But it is not just that: there's a personality element too. Litigation lawyers are preternaturally risk averse — fearful — by personal disposition. Loose cannon types rarely sign up to be litigation lawyers, and don’t last long if they do.
Thus, an in-house litigation team is basically the complaints division of the firm. Be wary when these people wield inordinate influence. In recent times, like its equivalent in the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation, litigation teams have gone from half a junior lawyer, on flexi-time, between spells of maternity leave, to fully weaponised Death Stars of fusty, naturally censorious solicitors with no appetite to make any call or take any risk, however remote.
And that’s assuming litigation lawyers really are glorified customer complaint reps. The alternative is worse.
See also
Dramatis personae: CEO | CFO | Client | Employees: Divers · Excuse pre-loaders · Survivors · Contractors · The Muppet Show | Middle management: COO · Consultant · MBA | Controllers: Financial reporting | Risk | Credit | Operations | IT | Legal: GC · Inhouse counsel · Docs unit · Litigator · Tax lawyer · US attorney Lawyer | Front office: Trading | Structuring | Sales |