Inhouse counsel: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{a|people|[[File:Legal eagle.jpg|450px|thumb|center|A [[legal eagle]] yesterday.]]}}A peculiar breed of [[legal eagle|legal wordwright]] whose expertise chiefly resides in knowing enough about the law to frame the right legal question for someone else, but artfully [[Disclaimer|disclaiming]] enough knowledge to actually answer it; and the tactical acumen to throw such a hospital pass to such an unsuspecting third party without anyone twigging that she has done it. You can find detailed criteria — what it takes to excel at the job of steering emails — [[Inhouse legal team of the year|here]]. | ||
The person who proves best at this behaviour over a sustained period of time gets to be [[general counsel]]. | The person who proves best at this behaviour over a sustained period of time gets to be [[general counsel]]. | ||
{{ | {{sa}} | ||
*[[Inhouse legal team of the year]] | |||
*[[Circle of escalation]] | *[[Circle of escalation]] | ||
*[[General counsel]] | *[[General counsel]] | ||
*[[Doctrine of precedent]] | *[[Doctrine of precedent]] | ||
Revision as of 12:08, 3 December 2019
|
People Anatomy™
A spotter’s guide to the men and women of finance.  A legal eagle yesterday.
|
A peculiar breed of legal wordwright whose expertise chiefly resides in knowing enough about the law to frame the right legal question for someone else, but artfully disclaiming enough knowledge to actually answer it; and the tactical acumen to throw such a hospital pass to such an unsuspecting third party without anyone twigging that she has done it. You can find detailed criteria — what it takes to excel at the job of steering emails — here.
The person who proves best at this behaviour over a sustained period of time gets to be general counsel.