Litigation lawyer: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{A|people|}}One of the sainted [[risk controller]]s 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 {{t|litigation}} team would also claim have an advisory function, and encourage their colleagues to consult them ahead of time to avoid future angst.  
{{A|people|}}One of the sainted [[risk controller]]s of a financial services firm, [[litigator]]s deal with ongoing customer complaints — where the firm has disappointed expectations — and prosecute the firm’s claims when its clients have. In a well-run firm, you would like to think there was little to a [[litigation department]]. In many, it will resemble the [[military-industrial complex]].


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 recent times, some 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]] lacking the appetite for any call, however safe, or any risk, however remote. But as the world shakes off the malignities of the last decade, as business environs drifts back to the benign, there are signs the pendulum might be on its way back.


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.
So, to keep the team in silk in times of fair fortune, the {{t|litigation}} team also claims an advisory function. They encourage their colleagues to consult them, ahead of time, to avoid future angst.  


Nor are litigation lawyers any better a source of advice about contract drafting than trauma ward surgeons are about motor vehicle safety engineering. For, what better insight can a litigator give than, “for Christ’s sake, don’t wind up in court?” If you ''do'' wind up in court, hasn’t your contractual architecture ''already'' failed you utterly? To be sure, it might be a nice surprise to find the deckchair to which you are clinging floats, but how much nicer would it be were it still sitting on the sun-deck of a vessel still steaming towards the New World?
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. 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 (such as a [[Sullivan and Cromwell]] partner)<ref>Who, thanks to a crafty assumption on page 73 of its [[legal opinion]] ''won’t have underwritten it at all.</ref> and [[socialise|socialised]] to the [[General Counsel]].


Contract design should avoid icebergs. A litigator can only help with sorting out whose fault it is should one have been hit. By then, the damage is done.
Nor are litigation lawyers any better a source of advice about contract drafting than trauma ward surgeons are about motor vehicle safety engineering. For, what better insight can a [[litigator]] give than, “for Christ’s sake, don’t wind up in court?” What commercial draftsperson didn’t know that?


Thus, an in-house [[litigation]] team is basically the [[complaints department|complaints division]] of the firm. Be wary when they wield inordinate influence. In recent times, some 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]] lacking the appetite for any call, however safe, or any risk, however remote.
For if you ''do'' wind up in court, hasn’t your contractual architecture ''already'' failed you utterly? To be sure, it might be a nice surprise to find the deckchair to which you are clinging floats, but how much nicer would it be were it still sitting on the sun-deck of a vessel still steaming towards the New World? Contract design should avoid icebergs. A litigator can only help with sorting out whose fault it is once one has been hit.