AGING LAWYERS AND NEW CALLINGS
Michael Sean Quinn*
The self improvement
literature for aging baby boomers has a number of books on how to bounce back
or avoid retirement* (“Start something new.”) or how not to quit** “Do it [or not] just right/”). One attractive option is to change
“specialty” from antitrust litigation to suing nursing homes (or defending them
if insurance companies will hire someone crowned in gray) or handing
guardianship matters for those who need it or for those who think someone else
needs it. (*See Chris Tarrell, UNRETIREMENT: HOW BABY BOOMERS ARE CHANGING THE WAY WE THINK ABOUT WORK, COMMUNITY AND THE GOOD LIFE (2014).) See Peg Streep and Alan Bernstein, MASTERING THE ART OF QUITTING; WHY IT MATTERS IN LIFE, LOVE AND WORK (2013)
literature for aging baby boomers has a number of books on how to bounce back
or avoid retirement* (“Start something new.”) or how not to quit** “Do it [or not] just right/”). One attractive option is to change
“specialty” from antitrust litigation to suing nursing homes (or defending them
if insurance companies will hire someone crowned in gray) or handing
guardianship matters for those who need it or for those who think someone else
needs it. (*See Chris Tarrell, UNRETIREMENT: HOW BABY BOOMERS ARE CHANGING THE WAY WE THINK ABOUT WORK, COMMUNITY AND THE GOOD LIFE (2014).) See Peg Streep and Alan Bernstein, MASTERING THE ART OF QUITTING; WHY IT MATTERS IN LIFE, LOVE AND WORK (2013)
Some new “callings” are not such
a good idea. Renting a law office somewhere inside a used car dealership may or may
not be one of them. Inelegant, to be sure. May get you kicked out of the
country club. But some might regard the rigorous vindication of some creditors’
rights not only a noble calling but one that invigorates.
a good idea. Renting a law office somewhere inside a used car dealership may or may
not be one of them. Inelegant, to be sure. May get you kicked out of the
country club. But some might regard the rigorous vindication of some creditors’
rights not only a noble calling but one that invigorates.
One that should probably be
avoided is being a drug dealer. A lawyer
in Austin, Texas is apparently learning this the hard way. He did that and got
caught. The poor devil was allegedly
selling heroin to an undercover cop (or maybe a mere law enforcement informant). As if this
weren’t enough of a problem, this aging “idiot” is now accused of “inviting” the
ostensible drug purchaser to murder someone for him in exchange for a very small
fee–“small” given the act sought.
avoided is being a drug dealer. A lawyer
in Austin, Texas is apparently learning this the hard way. He did that and got
caught. The poor devil was allegedly
selling heroin to an undercover cop (or maybe a mere law enforcement informant). As if this
weren’t enough of a problem, this aging “idiot” is now accused of “inviting” the
ostensible drug purchaser to murder someone for him in exchange for a very small
fee–“small” given the act sought.
In mid September, counsel
(“Edward Imbecile, Esq.”[Esq”]—“www.ObtuseAttorney.com”) was charged with
solicitation to commit capital murder. That which is easily findable on the “Net,” including a visual, tends to support the idea found
in the charge.
(“Edward Imbecile, Esq.”[Esq”]—“www.ObtuseAttorney.com”) was charged with
solicitation to commit capital murder. That which is easily findable on the “Net,” including a visual, tends to support the idea found
in the charge.
Two—maybe three–questions
immediately occur to me. (1) Why was Esq. not charged with a drug offense as
well as solicitation? (2) Who did Esq want whacked and (3) why?
immediately occur to me. (1) Why was Esq. not charged with a drug offense as
well as solicitation? (2) Who did Esq want whacked and (3) why?
One of the people I talk to
frequently, receive questions from, and occasionally listen to, theorizes that Mr. Imbecile was not
actually selling drugs—a practicing attorney could have done it more cleverly and obscurely that this—and didn’t actually want to hurt anybody—not even an adult offspring who no
longer paid attention to him. No. My interlocutor’s theory is that this poor, woe-some fellow was very broke and was looking for a free place to live, sleep and
eat. He conjectures that this move might
be a way to deal with loneliness, and it will certainly get the attention of
his kids, if only momentary. In similar cases, my partner in dialogue has , in the past, even speculated that
some people who end up like Esq may be pursuing some sort of charitable
obligation.
frequently, receive questions from, and occasionally listen to, theorizes that Mr. Imbecile was not
actually selling drugs—a practicing attorney could have done it more cleverly and obscurely that this—and didn’t actually want to hurt anybody—not even an adult offspring who no
longer paid attention to him. No. My interlocutor’s theory is that this poor, woe-some fellow was very broke and was looking for a free place to live, sleep and
eat. He conjectures that this move might
be a way to deal with loneliness, and it will certainly get the attention of
his kids, if only momentary. In similar cases, my partner in dialogue has , in the past, even speculated that
some people who end up like Esq may be pursuing some sort of charitable
obligation.
Myself? I reject this view.
Esq’s is a shade young for a man to pursue this adventuresome course. Esq’s investment of his only asset–his time–is
probably going to be a large one–too large I suspect. So I don’t really have an explanatory theory.
Maybe there is some truth to my friend’s theory. Esq will be able to continue the practice of law, although it will no doubt be of the unauthorized, and therefore criminal, practice of law. This would certainly meet the criteria for a sort of jail-house unretiring: it would be from from sleaze-ball creditors’ rights litigation to very, very low fee criminal work for the confined
criminal.
Of course there are other ideas, as well. One might experiment with the idea that Mr. Imbecile was creating
a street satire on the “retirement avoidance” literature. But that idea presupposes a certain level of comedic, subtly, sophistication and creativity, and there is not history of there being inclinations in this direction on the part of Esq.
Esq’s is a shade young for a man to pursue this adventuresome course. Esq’s investment of his only asset–his time–is
probably going to be a large one–too large I suspect. So I don’t really have an explanatory theory.
Maybe there is some truth to my friend’s theory. Esq will be able to continue the practice of law, although it will no doubt be of the unauthorized, and therefore criminal, practice of law. This would certainly meet the criteria for a sort of jail-house unretiring: it would be from from sleaze-ball creditors’ rights litigation to very, very low fee criminal work for the confined
criminal.
Of course there are other ideas, as well. One might experiment with the idea that Mr. Imbecile was creating
a street satire on the “retirement avoidance” literature. But that idea presupposes a certain level of comedic, subtly, sophistication and creativity, and there is not history of there being inclinations in this direction on the part of Esq.
Michael Sean Quinn, Ph.D.,
J.D.
J.D.
The Law Firm of Michael Sean Quinn et
Quinn and Quinn
1300 West Lynn Street, Suite 208
Austin,
Texas 78703
Texas 78703
(512)
296-2594
296-2594
(512)
344-9466 – Fax
344-9466 – Fax
Recent Comments