DLaw's Blog

View: Text & Photos | Photos only | Text only

Entries: 1 - 5 of 7 First | < Prev | Next > | Last

Entry for October 8, 2006

"A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step."

"The end of a thing is better than its beginning."

Dear Friends and Family,

Three years ago, my pregnant wife in tow, I moved our household east across the continent, from the redwood forest to the gulf stream waters. We settled in a little town north of Hartford, on the border of two kingdoms—the Red Sox and the Yankees—to devote countless hours to the study of the law, and child rearing, in the Constitution State. After three sleep deprived years, I had made a host of new friends (including Fanny Mae, our benevolent benefactress) and had acquired a valuable new lexicon: res ipsa loquitor; res judicata, per curiam, and “collateral estoppel”—as well as “boppy,” “bouncy seat”, “cradle cap,” and “postpartum.”

Having slogged through the rocky landscape of jurisprudence, the University of Connecticut bestowed on me the magnanimous title of Juris Doctor (or Doctor of Jurisprudence). But no sooner had the fanfare sounded and the commencement speeches concluded, when the new title, still lingering in graduates’ ears, sounded hollow and ineffectual. I, Don Quixote, had conquered the vast dunes of the Sahara. I frolicked in the cool sea-froth at the desert’s edge and looked back in ecstasy, if but for a moment, before reality set in. I still had to navigate the Mediterranean before reaching Rome. Oh, false climax! Cruel hoax! I felt the torment of Jacob’s when he lifted Leah’s veil. Yes, it was true: before I could practice law, I had to take the Connecticut Bar Examination. Nay, I had to pass the Connecticut Bar Examination!

The stakes had never been higher, and I couldn’t fold. I’d have to bluff. So I studied the twenty-seven subjects with due diligence (including working out, playing tennis, spending time with my family, going camping, and driving to the coast to see a rare bird only days before the exam) and hoped for the best. As the behemoth approached, during the final weeks and days before its advent, the import of the task before me loomed higher than its spiny crown, ominous like its sulfurous breath. For two days I brandished the mighty pen and dueled twelve hours with the fine print beast.

Victory was uncertain, results dilatory. Two moons I waited and sweated, reconstituting and analyzing those two miserable days until their memory was white-washed with false confidence and artificial doubt. I had begun to work in the firm where I was hired last November. I stood on the brink of an auspicious career, watching the ball in the air—bouncing on the rim, glancing the upright, approaching the foul pole. Nine pins were down and the last one was wobbling precariously.

On Friday, September 29, 2006, the Bar Examining Committee blew its whistle, threw its flag, and approached the middle of the field to pronounce judgment. After two months of deliberation, the jury had reached a verdict. After much ado about nothing, I passed the bar.

So now I have to get up tomorrow morning and go to work. Therefore, I bid you good night and thank you for your thoughts and prayers, your love and support.

"Do not stand at my grave and weep,

I am not there... I do not sleep.

I am the thousand winds that blow...

I am the diamond glints on snow...

I am the sunlight on ripened grain...

I am the gentle autumn rain.

When you waken in the morning's hush,

I am the swift uplifting rush

Of gentle birds in circling flight...

I am the soft star that shines at night.

Do not stand at my grave and cry—

I am not there... I did not die..."

Your friend and lawyer (as of Oct. 30, 2006),

David

2006-10-09 03:03:33 GMTComments: 1 |Permanent Link

I Passed the CT Bar!

Friends and Family,

I found out on Friday, September 29, 2006, that I passed the Connecticut Bar Examination.

I have been recommended to the bar and will be sworn in on Monday, October 30, 2006.

Pop pop fizz fizz...

David

2006-10-03 16:33:05 GMTComments: 1 |Permanent Link

Entry for July 12, 2006

July 12, 2006 (Bloomfield, CT):

Three dissatisfied squirrels were limited to fallen seeds from an unreachable bird feeder in a Bloomfield backyard. "We used to have free access to a feeder here," recalled one of the three unhappy varmints, adding, "I guess this proves there really is no free lunch--at least not anymore." The tenant of the Bloomfield residence who had replaced the old feeder with the new squirrel-proof feeder was unavailable for comment, but a witness said there were no BB holes in the new one, evidence that the squirrels, while perhaps slimmer than their forebears, were subject to diminished risk. A second, self-proclaimed libertarian squirrel, when asked about the apparent change in risk-benefit, complained that she would rather "the 'powers that be' leave the squirrels to their own devices and cease all interference with the free consumption of sunflower seeds, risky or not!" "Besides," she added, "the blood of squirrels is the seed of the perch."

However, local squirrel insurers in Hartford, Connecticut, had lobbied strongly for these safety precautions for nearly a decade. An employee of the Hartford spoke on condition of anonymity, "We had to grease a lot of wheels to get the initiative passed, but we maintain that the increased regulation will have a beneficial impact on the economy." Although the beaver is known as the more industrious cousin of the squirrel, widespread use of squirrel-proof bird feeders may ultimately bolster squirrels' reputations by forcing them to actually work for their food. However, one interested party finds the change disheartening. Bill Oppener, CEO of Bird Seed, Inc., bemoaned the foreseeable effect on the corporation's bottom line: "We're not against squirrel safety by any means, but this regulation eliminates a large percentage of a market that we've been tapping for decades." While Mr. Oppener had little hopes for a government subsidy, head counsel at Bird Seed, Inc., Sue M. Ahl, confirmed that the corporation would challenge the regulatory action as unconstitutional as violative of the Equal Protection Clause. "Despite a general lack of precedent as concerns squirrels, we remain confident that the general squirreliness evidenced in many judicial opinions since the Warren Court's institution of the "Dormant" Commerce Clause creates persuasive authority that might be applied to all creatures."

For now, though, the squirrels are taking their new situation with a grain of salt and consuming all the "seeds that fall by the wayside." Conjecture circulating on various blogs suggested that the notorious squirrel bosses will have devised alternative means of extracting the seeds from the new feeder by winter. However, a representative of the De Squirelione family scoffed at the speculation: "We have always respected and will continue to respect the neighborhood regulations, but it does make one wonder whether the 'powers that be' had truly asked what they were 'walling in or walling out.' We won't be left to our pines forever!"

One thing is certain. Whether permanent or temporary, this quiet Bloomfield residence is enjoying a peaceful summer -- even if its bushy-tailed residents can't "have their suet-cake and eat it too."

2006-07-12 20:04:58 GMTComments: 1 |Permanent Link

16 Days Left

I received the following statement via email today. It contains what may be the worst use of an apostrophe I have ever personally witnessed: "If these are yours, or you know who'se they are, please contact me and I will put you in touch with the person who sent me the message." OUCH. That hurt.

Despite rampant apostrophe misuse, I am doing well under the circumstances. Tomorrow morning, I will attend the last Barbri course in preparation for the bar. We will study Trusts & Estates, the final substantive course before B-day! Except for a PMBR course this weekend, which focusses (or focuses -- I've read both recently... any opinions as to which is better? The New Yorker uses "focusses" and the Connecticut Bar Association used "focuses." With all due respect to the highly estimed Connecticut Bar Association, I presume that the editiorial staff at the New Yorker has decided, as a spelling policy, to use a trema to denote diaeresis (as in the word "preëmption")) on (yes, of course you've forgotten what I was even talking about because of my interminable parenthetical) the multistate portion of the bar exam, I will have two weeks to finish studying the bulky tomes of law and practice questions before taking the plunge. Speaking of...

Ciao (My ever-so-slight nod to Italia and its recent victory (or France's failure to win, as the World Cup final might be more appropriately described)).

2006-07-11 02:14:55 GMTComments: 0 |Permanent Link

Entry for July 5, 2006

Three weeks and one day until the Connecticut Bar Examination, and the possibilities for studying are endless. One catch: World Cup match between France and Portugal is on in 15 minutes! Est-ce que Zizou aura encore ce qu'il faut pour vaincre les Portugais? Allez les Bleus!

2006-07-05 18:50:28 GMTComments: 0 |Permanent Link

View: Text & Photos | Photos only | Text only

Entries: 1 - 5 of 7 First | < Prev | Next > | Last

Site Home



	DLaw's Blog

		The occasional post-bar musings of a friend, lover, father and corporate lawyer.
		View: Text & Photos \| Photos only \| Text only Entries: 1 - 5 of 7 First \| < Prev \| Next > \| Last Entry for October 8, 2006 "A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step." "The end of a thing is better than its beginning." Dear Friends and Family, Three years ago, my pregnant wife in tow, I moved our household east across the continent, from the redwood forest to the gulf stream waters. We settled in a little town north of Hartford, on the border of two kingdoms—the Red Sox and the Yankees—to devote countless hours to the study of the law, and child rearing, in the Constitution State. After three sleep deprived years, I had made a host of new friends (including Fanny Mae, our benevolent benefactress) and had acquired a valuable new lexicon: res ipsa loquitor; res judicata, per curiam, and “collateral estoppel”—as well as “boppy,” “bouncy seat”, “cradle cap,” and “postpartum.” Having slogged through the rocky landscape of jurisprudence, the University of Connecticut bestowed on me the magnanimous title of Juris Doctor (or Doctor of Jurisprudence). But no sooner had the fanfare sounded and the commencement speeches concluded, when the new title, still lingering in graduates’ ears, sounded hollow and ineffectual. I, Don Quixote, had conquered the vast dunes of the Sahara. I frolicked in the cool sea-froth at the desert’s edge and looked back in ecstasy, if but for a moment, before reality set in. I still had to navigate the Mediterranean before reaching Rome. Oh, false climax! Cruel hoax! I felt the torment of Jacob’s when he lifted Leah’s veil. Yes, it was true: before I could practice law, I had to take the Connecticut Bar Examination. Nay, I had to pass the Connecticut Bar Examination! The stakes had never been higher, and I couldn’t fold. I’d have to bluff. So I studied the twenty-seven subjects with due diligence (including working out, playing tennis, spending time with my family, going camping, and driving to the coast to see a rare bird only days before the exam) and hoped for the best. As the behemoth approached, during the final weeks and days before its advent, the import of the task before me loomed higher than its spiny crown, ominous like its sulfurous breath. For two days I brandished the mighty pen and dueled twelve hours with the fine print beast. Victory was uncertain, results dilatory. Two moons I waited and sweated, reconstituting and analyzing those two miserable days until their memory was white-washed with false confidence and artificial doubt. I had begun to work in the firm where I was hired last November. I stood on the brink of an auspicious career, watching the ball in the air—bouncing on the rim, glancing the upright, approaching the foul pole. Nine pins were down and the last one was wobbling precariously. On Friday, September 29, 2006, the Bar Examining Committee blew its whistle, threw its flag, and approached the middle of the field to pronounce judgment. After two months of deliberation, the jury had reached a verdict. After much ado about nothing, I passed the bar. So now I have to get up tomorrow morning and go to work. Therefore, I bid you good night and thank you for your thoughts and prayers, your love and support. "Do not stand at my grave and weep, I am not there... I do not sleep. I am the thousand winds that blow... I am the diamond glints on snow... I am the sunlight on ripened grain... I am the gentle autumn rain. When you waken in the morning's hush, I am the swift uplifting rush Of gentle birds in circling flight... I am the soft star that shines at night. Do not stand at my grave and cry— I am not there... I did not die..." Your friend and lawyer (as of Oct. 30, 2006), David 2006-10-09 03:03:33 GMTComments: 1 \|Permanent Link I Passed the CT Bar! Friends and Family, I found out on Friday, September 29, 2006, that I passed the Connecticut Bar Examination. I have been recommended to the bar and will be sworn in on Monday, October 30, 2006. Pop pop fizz fizz... David 2006-10-03 16:33:05 GMTComments: 1 \|Permanent Link Entry for July 12, 2006 July 12, 2006 (Bloomfield, CT): Three dissatisfied squirrels were limited to fallen seeds from an unreachable bird feeder in a Bloomfield backyard. "We used to have free access to a feeder here," recalled one of the three unhappy varmints, adding, "I guess this proves there really is no free lunch--at least not anymore." The tenant of the Bloomfield residence who had replaced the old feeder with the new squirrel-proof feeder was unavailable for comment, but a witness said there were no BB holes in the new one, evidence that the squirrels, while perhaps slimmer than their forebears, were subject to diminished risk. A second, self-proclaimed libertarian squirrel, when asked about the apparent change in risk-benefit, complained that she would rather "the 'powers that be' leave the squirrels to their own devices and cease all interference with the free consumption of sunflower seeds, risky or not!" "Besides," she added, "the blood of squirrels is the seed of the perch." However, local squirrel insurers in Hartford, Connecticut, had lobbied strongly for these safety precautions for nearly a decade. An employee of the Hartford spoke on condition of anonymity, "We had to grease a lot of wheels to get the initiative passed, but we maintain that the increased regulation will have a beneficial impact on the economy." Although the beaver is known as the more industrious cousin of the squirrel, widespread use of squirrel-proof bird feeders may ultimately bolster squirrels' reputations by forcing them to actually work for their food. However, one interested party finds the change disheartening. Bill Oppener, CEO of Bird Seed, Inc., bemoaned the foreseeable effect on the corporation's bottom line: "We're not against squirrel safety by any means, but this regulation eliminates a large percentage of a market that we've been tapping for decades." While Mr. Oppener had little hopes for a government subsidy, head counsel at Bird Seed, Inc., Sue M. Ahl, confirmed that the corporation would challenge the regulatory action as unconstitutional as violative of the Equal Protection Clause. "Despite a general lack of precedent as concerns squirrels, we remain confident that the general squirreliness evidenced in many judicial opinions since the Warren Court's institution of the "Dormant" Commerce Clause creates persuasive authority that might be applied to all creatures." For now, though, the squirrels are taking their new situation with a grain of salt and consuming all the "seeds that fall by the wayside." Conjecture circulating on various blogs suggested that the notorious squirrel bosses will have devised alternative means of extracting the seeds from the new feeder by winter. However, a representative of the De Squirelione family scoffed at the speculation: "We have always respected and will continue to respect the neighborhood regulations, but it does make one wonder whether the 'powers that be' had truly asked what they were 'walling in or walling out.' We won't be left to our pines forever!" One thing is certain. Whether permanent or temporary, this quiet Bloomfield residence is enjoying a peaceful summer -- even if its bushy-tailed residents can't "have their suet-cake and eat it too." 2006-07-12 20:04:58 GMTComments: 1 \|Permanent Link 16 Days Left I received the following statement via email today. It contains what may be the worst use of an apostrophe I have ever personally witnessed: "If these are yours, or you know who'se they are, please contact me and I will put you in touch with the person who sent me the message." OUCH. That hurt. Despite rampant apostrophe misuse, I am doing well under the circumstances. Tomorrow morning, I will attend the last Barbri course in preparation for the bar. We will study Trusts & Estates, the final substantive course before B-day! Except for a PMBR course this weekend, which focusses (or focuses -- I've read both recently... any opinions as to which is better? The New Yorker uses "focusses" and the Connecticut Bar Association used "focuses." With all due respect to the highly estimed Connecticut Bar Association, I presume that the editiorial staff at the New Yorker has decided, as a spelling policy, to use a trema to denote diaeresis (as in the word "preëmption")) on (yes, of course you've forgotten what I was even talking about because of my interminable parenthetical) the multistate portion of the bar exam, I will have two weeks to finish studying the bulky tomes of law and practice questions before taking the plunge. Speaking of... Ciao (My ever-so-slight nod to Italia and its recent victory (or France's failure to win, as the World Cup final might be more appropriately described)). 2006-07-11 02:14:55 GMTComments: 0 \|Permanent Link Entry for July 5, 2006 Three weeks and one day until the Connecticut Bar Examination, and the possibilities for studying are endless. One catch: World Cup match between France and Portugal is on in 15 minutes! Est-ce que Zizou aura encore ce qu'il faut pour vaincre les Portugais? Allez les Bleus! 2006-07-05 18:50:28 GMTComments: 0 \|Permanent Link View: Text & Photos \| Photos only \| Text only Entries: 1 - 5 of 7 First \| < Prev \| Next > \| Last Site Home