The Elephant In The Room For Legal AI Remains Elephantine Document Sets – Above the Law

“The
dirty
secret,”
a
veteran
eDiscovery
consultant
told
me,
“is
that
AI
still
can’t
actually
handle
these
massive
document
sets.”
While
the
industry
rushes
toward
AI
adoption,
embracing
its
demonstrated
strengths
and

for
some
insane
and
persistent
reason

its

well-documented
weaknesses
,
one
hurdle
it
can’t
quite
surmount
is
the
ever-expanding
size
of
discovery.
AI
is,
rightly,
lauded
for
its
capacity
to
analyze
and
summarize
large
amounts
of
data,
but
crunching
100
deposition
transcripts
is
one
thing
and
getting
on
top
of
terabytes
worth
of
discovery
is
quite
another.
Context
windows
just
aren’t
that
big.

Which
means
legal
tech
vendors
have
to
get
creative
within
the
limits
of
the
technology.
Today,
at
its

SYNERGY
Legal
Professionals
conference
,
Thomson
Reuters
announced
a
new
beta
feature
that
gets
users
closer.

CoCounsel
Legal’s
new
bulk
document
review
feature
allows
analysis
of
10,000
documents
at
a
clip,
returning
sortable,
user-friendly
results.
The
secret
sauce
is
in
taking
these
big
batches
and
returning
structured
analysis
that
users
can
then

for
lack
of
a
better
term

daisy
chain
to
get
on
top
of
“hundreds
or
thousands
of
documents
far
more
efficiently
than
traditional
manual
methods,”
as
the
press
release
puts
it.

This
underscores,
again,
that

AI
isn’t
replacing
humans
.
Someone
has
to
run
the
requisite
10K
at
a
time
searches
and
deal
with
the
results.
But
it
will

reduce

the
number
of
humans
necessary
to
get
through
these
traditionally
brute
force
searches
and
then
put
everything
together.
The
general
purpose
AI
companies
will
keep
promising
exponential
growth,

but
it’s
just
not
coming

and
the
key
differentiator
for
legal
tech
will
be
building
the
best
workarounds
to
deal
with
AI’s
baked
in
context
window
limitations.

Thomson
Reuters
also
announced
an
agentic
feature
for
“Independent
Execution
of
Legal
Tasks.”
Sigh.
The

record
will
reflect

my
ongoing
disdain
for
the
term
“agentic.”
Independent
research
into
these
so-called
“agentic”
AI
tools
reveals
a
dismal
track
record,
with

failure
rates
upward
of
70
percent
according
to
a
Carnegie
Mellon
study
.
On
top
of
that,
the
term
is
employed
by
the
industry
to
describe
an
AI
tool
that
autonomously
creates
a
multi-step
workflow
and
then
acts
on
it,
which
is
just
an
invitation
to
multiple
points
of
failure
that

even
if
it
worked
better
than
the
studies
indicate

should
terrify
a
lawyer.
On
top
of
that,
compressing
multiple
steps
in
the
lawyerly
process
invites
a
psychological
reordering
that
can
make
lawyers,
well…

dumber
.

But
while
the
new
Thomson
Reuters
beta
tool
will
experiment
with
independent
work,
the

planned
end
state

of
the
feature
is
a
very
useful
tool
that
shouldn’t
worry
lawyers
at
all:

With
the
second
phase,
legal
professionals
will
have
access
to
a
customizable
workflow
builder
that
will
allow
them
to
create,
save
and
share
their
own
workflows
within
CoCounsel
Legal
capitalizing
on
the
trusted
content
and
solutions
from
Thomson
Reuters
as
well
as
the
firm’s
knowledge.
Additionally,
this
facilitates
the
development
of
repeatable,
law
firm-specific
processes
and
supports
reusability
across
teams

ensuring
consistency
while
capturing
institutional
knowledge
and
best
practices.

Building
a
workflow
based
on
the
lived
experience
of
the
lawyers
is
exactly
the
sort
of
tool
a
firm
can
use.
It’s
“autonomous”
to
the
extent
it
checks
and
acts
upon
the
work
it’s
trained
by
the
firm
to
accomplish.
As
with
the
document
review
feature,
the
race
here
is
to
build
something
that
allows
AI
to
be
better
harnessed
to
match
what
lawyers
actually
do.

If
the
AI
bubble
doesn’t

explode
more
epically
than
that
infamous
Subway
sandwich
,
this
is
where
the
action
will
be
for
the
next
few
years.
Don’t
watch
the
AI
as
much
as
what
companies
like
Thomson
Reuters
are
putting
on
top
of
AI.
That’s
the
fun
stuff
and
the
real
differentiator.




HeadshotJoe
Patrice
 is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer
.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or

Bluesky

if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a

Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search
.

Curious About Document Automation? This Checklist Will Set You Up For Success – Above the Law

Integrating
document
automation
into
your
business
is
a
strategic
move
that
can
significantly
enhance
efficiency,
reduce
errors,
and
allow
your
team
to
focus
on
higher-value
tasks. 

It’s
a
pretty
picture

but
where
do
you
start? 

This
checklist
from
our
friends
at
Mitratech
will
help
you
assess
your
organization’s
readiness
for
automation
and
address
key
considerations
before
implementation. 

Download
it
today
and
take
the
next
step
toward
long-term
success,
enhanced
productivity,
and
scalable
growth. 

  

Top 50 Biglaw Firm Increases Its Office Attendance Requirement To Four Days – Just For Junior Associates – Above the Law

The
push
to
bring
associates
back
into
the
office
four
days
a
week
is
accelerating
at
lightning
speed,
leaving
firms
scrambling
to
keep
pace.
These
attendance
mandates
have
typically
applied
firmwide,
but
one
firm
has
taken
the
next
step
in
the
return-to-office
race
by
increasing
its
attendance
requirements
specifically
for
junior
associates.

Dechert

a
firm
that
brought
in
$1,510,775,000 
gross
revenue
in
2024,
putting
it
at
No.
36
on
the
Am
Law
100

recently
announced
that
beginning
on
February
2,
all
rising
second-year
attorneys
as
well
as
fall
associates,
incoming
trainees
must
work
from
the
office
four
days
each
week.
All
business
services
professionals
must
also
follow
the
firm’s
new
four-day
attendance
mandate.
Dechert
partners
are
also
expected
to
work
from
the
office
four
days
each
week,
if
only
to
train
the
junior
associates
who
are
having
this
facetime
requirement
foisted
upon
them.
Elder
attorneys

e.g.,
rising
third-year
associates
and
higher,
as
well
as
all
counsel

are
expected
to
work
from
the
office
three
days
each
week.
The
policy
will
be
enforced
on
a
worldwide
basis.
The

Legal
Intelligencer

has
additional
details:

The
firm
says
that
it
hopes
all
affected
employees
will
see
the
value
in
working
out
of
an
office
to
help
add
energy
to
teams,
foster
greater
collaboration
and
improve
morale
and
success.

“We
continue
to
believe
that
what
makes
Dechert
a
successful
firm
and
a
great
place
to
work
is
our
people,
and
there
is
no
substitute
for
working
together
in
person,”
Dechert
Co-Chairs
David
Forti
and
Mark
Thierfelder
said
in
a
joint
statement.
“Speaking
face-to-face
with
another
person
provides
more
context
and
nuance
than
through
a
screen.
When
together
in
person,
we
collaborate
better,
our
junior
team
members
benefit
more
from
coaching,
and
we
can
more
effectively
respond
to
client
needs.”

Quite
a
few
Biglaw
firms
are
now
requiring
four
days
in
the
office
firmwide,
including
the
likes
of

A&O
Shearman
;

Cooley
;

Covington
Davis
Polk
;

DLA
Piper

(corporate
associates);

Goodwin
;

Hogan
Lovells
LathamPaul
Weiss
Ropes
&
Gray
Sidley;

Simpson
Thacher
SkaddenVinson
&
Elkins
Weil
Gotshal
WilmerHale;
and White
&
Case
Sullivan
&
Cromwell
 has
taken
its
attendance
policy
one
step
further,
requiring
attorneys
to
work
from
the
office
five
days
each
week.

As
soon
as
you
find
out
about
office
attendance
plans
at
your
firm,
please email
us
 (subject
line:
“[Firm
Name]
Office
Reopening”)
or
text
us
at (646)
820-8477
.
We
always
keep
our
sources
on
stories
anonymous.
There’s
no
need
to
send
a
memo
(if
one
exists)
using
your
firm
email
account;
your
personal
email
account
is
fine.
If
a
memo
has
been
circulated,
please
be
sure
to
include
it
as
proof;
we
like
to
post
complete
memos
as
a
service
to
our
readers.
You
can
take
a
photo
of
the
memo
and
attach
as
a
picture
if
you
are
worried
about
metadata
in
a
PDF
or
Word
file.
Thanks.


Dechert
Moves
to
4-Day
In-Office
Policy
for
Business
Service
Professionals,
Jr.
Associates

[Legal
Intelligencer]





Staci
Zaretsky
 is
the
managing
editor
of
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to

email

her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on BlueskyX/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.

Other Law Schools Could Learn A Thing Or Two About Fundraising From My Alma Mater’s Annual Giving Campaign – Above the Law

As
I
write
this,
it
is

Tommie
Give

Day,
the
cleverly
branded
annual
day
of
scholarship
fundraising
for
the
University
of
St.
Thomas
in
the
Twin
Cities.
I’m
just
about
to
make
a
small
donation
to
my
alma
mater.

Making
a
donation
to
the
law
school
you
went
to
might
seem
unremarkable.
Indulge
me
for
a
moment,
though.
I
think
it’s
worthwhile
to
take
a
look
at
all
the
things
this
school
has
done
right
to
entice
someone
like
me
who
otherwise
might
be
a
fairly
unlikely
donor
to
this
particular
cause.

Now,
you
might
first
be
wondering
why
I
think
of
myself
as
an
tough
donor
to
snag,
especially
considering
I
had
a
generally
good
experience
at
my
law
school
and
think
I
got
an
education
substantially
better
than
that
I
saw
nearby
peers
getting
at
competing
schools.
Generally
I
think
supporting
education
is
a
good
thing,
and
it
is
even
mildly
self-serving
to
support
the
law
school
you
went
to
as
it
helps
bolster
the
profile
of
your
school
among
potential
employers
(though
alumni
giving
is
no
longer
considered
directly
as
a
metric
in
the

U.S.
News
rankings
,
and
you
should
be
looking
at
a
better
law
school
ratings
system
anyhow

like
the
one
right
here

at
Above
the
Law).

All
that
being
said,
a
lot
of
justified
resentment
is
out
there
among
law
school
graduates.
Law
school
is
too
expensive,
law
schools
allow
their
matriculants
to
accumulate
way
too
much
debt,
and
law
schools
pump
out
far
too
many
lawyers
considering
the
number
of
good
jobs
actually
available
to
graduates.

While

I
don’t
have
the
same
concerns
about
debt

as
many
of
my
cohorts,
I
have
a
few
resentments
of
my
own.
You
see,
my
law
school
is
a
Catholic
institution.

This
might
have
been
a
plus
to
me
at
the
time
I
was
choosing
a
law
school,
but
I’ve
been
an
atheist
for
over
a
decade
now.
I
am
truly
revolted
by
some
of
the
things
school
resources
have
gone
to,
like

advocating
to
strip
people

of
their
reproductive
rights.

That
is
a
really
hard
thing
to
get
over,
and
I’m
not
over
it,
and
I
will
never
be
over
it.
That
being
said,
every
single
person
I
went
to
that
law
school
with
who
I
am
still
close
friends
with
has
the
same
opinion
as
me
on
this
stuff.
I
was
helped
by
a
good
scholarship,
they
were
helped
by
scholarships,
and,
thank
noble
Fortuna
(she’d
be
a
really
appropriate
patron
goddess
for
a
law
school,
wouldn’t
she?)
one
can
choose
within
several
categories
where
your
Tommie
Give
Day
donation
goes,
enough
of
which
are
comfortably
distanced
from
anything
having
to
do
with
banning
abortion.

So,
check,
that
is
one
thing
this
law
school
has
really
done
right
in
its
donation
campaign:
allow
donors
to
get
their
money
to
some
needy
students
and
away
from
the
outright
evil
wing
of
the
institution.
The
really
big
win,
however,
the
thing
that
gets
me
onboard
more
than
anything
else,
is
the
sense
of
community
my
law
school
has
cultured.

More
than
one
of
those
aforementioned
godless
close
friends
has
called
me
on
a
previous
Tommie
Give
Day
to
encourage
a
donation.
No
institution
is
a
monolith.
All
institutions
are
made
up
of
people,
and
my
friends
from
law
school
are
some
of
the
best
people
I
know.
The
fact
that
people
I
know
and
respect,
people
who
vehemently
reject
the
most
damaging
aspects
of
Catholic
dogma,
still
care
enough
about
the
school
to
solicit
a
donation
speaks
very
highly
of
what
they
felt
they
got
out
of
their
educations,
and
to
what
we
can
help
provide
to
others
like
us
coming
up
through
the
ranks.

Then
to
a
far
lesser
extent,
there
is
the
power
of
raw
corporate
branding
and
rampant
materialism.
Although
not
all
law
schools
can
get
away
with
this
one

my
alma
mater
arose
from
an
undergraduate
university
that
now
has
Division
1
athletics

they
should
if
they
can.
I
now
have
a
stocking
cap
and
a
scarf,
with
leather
chopper
mittens
on
the
way,
all
emblazoned
with
the
school
logo
and
colors
as
little
donation
incentivizing
premiums
over
the
years.
Intellectualizing
how
my
donation
might
help
out
some
young
misfit
like
myself
is
all
well
and
good,
yet,
sometimes
you
also
just
want
a
new
hat!

While
law
schools
are
doing
a
lot
of
things
wrong,
this
is
an
example
of
one
of
them
doing
something
right.
I
actually
think
alumni
giving
was
a
valid
metric
for
U.S.
News
and
should
have
stayed
part
of
that
ranking
system
in
some
way.
It’s
an
imperfect
measurement
that
nonetheless
gives
prospective
students
a
pretty
good
idea
of
maybe
one
of
the
most
meaningful
considerations
in
making
a
decision
about
where
to
go
to
law
school:
do
a
lot
of
the
graduates
appreciate
what
they
received
there
enough
to
make
an
annual
donation,
or
is
there
a
high
percentage
of
the
graduates
apparently
harboring
regrets?




Jonathan
Wolf
is
a
civil
litigator
and
author
of 
Your
Debt-Free
JD
 (affiliate
link).
He
has
taught
legal
writing,
written
for
a
wide
variety
of
publications,
and
made
it
both
his
business
and
his
pleasure
to
be
financially
and
scientifically
literate.
Any
views
he
expresses
are
probably
pure
gold,
but
are
nonetheless
solely
his
own
and
should
not
be
attributed
to
any
organization
with
which
he
is
affiliated.
He
wouldn’t
want
to
share
the
credit
anyway.
He
can
be
reached
at 
[email protected].

Pentagon policy shop stonewalling Congress, Republican senators say – Breaking Defense

WASHINGTON

In
a
rare
moment
of
public
intraparty
frustration,
Republican
senators
today
blasted
a
top
Defense
Department
official
for
not
cooperating
with
congressional
oversight.

Throughout
a
confirmation
hearing
held
by
the
Senate
Armed
Services
Committee
for
three
different
Pentagon
nominees,
senators
from
both
parties
aired
their
frustrations
with
what
they
described
as
Pentagon
policy
chief
Elbridge
Colby’s
opaque
decision-making,
asserting
that
lawmakers
were
not
kept
abreast
of
key
moves
like
the
recent
announcement
of

withdrawing
US
troops

from
Romania. But
it
was
comments
from
Republicans,
especially
Armed
Services
Chairman
Roger
Wicker,
that
stood
out.

“Throughout
this
year,
the
committee
has
had
a
relatively
positive
relationship
with
the
Pentagon,
especially
Secretary
[Pete]
Hegseth
and
Deputy
Secretary
[Steve]
Feinberg.
I’ve
been
disappointed
to
find
one
exception
to
that
cordiality:
Members
and
staff
of
this
committee
have
struggled
to
receive
information
from
the
policy
office
and
have
not
been
able
to
consult
in
a
meaningful
way
with
the
shop,
either
on
the
National
Defense
Strategy
or”
a
review
of
the
US
military’s
global
force
posture,
Wicker
said
in
opening
remarks
during
the
hearing.

“This
does
not
match
our
experience
with
the
first
Trump
administration,”
said
Wicker,
a
Mississippi
Republican
who
has
largely
avoided
criticizing
the
Trump
Pentagon
until
now.
He
then
added,
“the
situation
needs
to
improve
if
we
are
to
craft
the
best
defense
policy.” 

Colby
serves
as
the
undersecretary
of
defense
for
policy,
sometimes
described
as
the
third-most
important
job
in
the
Pentagon.
A
long-time
think
tanker,
Colby
emerged
in
the
first
Trump
administration
as
a
leading
China
hawk
voice,
a
role
he
rode
into
his
current
position,
which
places
him
in
charge
of
crafting
the
National
Defense
Strategy
among
other
responsibilities.

However,
Colby
has
also
emerged
as
a
lightning
rod
for
criticism,

reportedly

driving
decisions
to
pause
aid
to
Ukraine
and
launching
a
review
of
the
AUKUS
trilateral
security
pact

moves
that
reportedly
caught
members
of
the
administration
by
surprise.
More
recently,
the
expected
focus
of
the
NDS
on
homeland
defense
instead
of
conflict
in
the
Pacific
has

led
to
grumblings

among
the
China
hawk
community
he
previously
championed.

Senators
largely
directed
their
displeasure
at
Austin
Dahmer,
the
Trump
administration’s
nominee
to
serve
as
the
Defense
Department’s
assistant
secretary
for
strategy,
plans
and
forces

a
position
whose
title,
lawmakers
revealed,
was
changed
without
their
awareness.
Lawmakers’
discontent
also
comes
amid
a
broader
crackdown
by
the
Pentagon
on
communications
with
Congress
that
was

previously
reported

by
Breaking
Defense. 

“The
guy
you’re
going
to
go
work
for
has
been
really
bad
on
this,
the
worst
in
the
administration,”
Sen.
Dan
Sullivan,
a
Republican
from
Alaska,
said
to
Dahmer
when
discussing
how
Colby
was
difficult
to
reach.
Dahmer’s
current
role,
performing
the
duties
of
the
deputy
under
secretary
of
defense
for
policy,
and
the
new
post
he
has
been
nominated
for
both
fall
under
Colby. 

“But
man,
I
can’t
even
get
a
response,
and
we’re
on
your
team!”
an
exasperated
Sullivan
added,
who
along
with
Wicker
stated
that
it
appeared
the
Pentagon’s
policy
shop
was
actually
undermining
President
Donald
Trump’s
goals.
 

Throughout
the
hearing,
Dahmer
fielded
questions
on
a
range
of
topics,
including
a
pause
on
Ukraine
aid
and
lethal
strikes
on
small
boats
the
Trump
administration
asserts
are
trafficking
drugs.
According
to
Dahmer,
he
was
“not
aware”
of
any
halt
in
aid
to
Kyiv

despite
a
high-profile
Oval
Office
blowup
that

temporarily
stopped

the
flow
of
weapons
and
a
separate,

publicly
confirmed

stockpile
review

and
Romanian
officials
were
informed
of
the
withdrawal
of
a
US
brigade
from
the
country
in
advance.
(Sen.
Elissa
Slotkin,
a
Democrat
from
Michigan,
asserted
that
Bucharest
was
blindsided
by
the
brigade
withdrawal
based
on
conversations
with
Romanian
officials.)

Lawmakers
were
briefed
three
times
about
the
Romania
decision
as
well,
Dahmer
said,
though
senators
on
the
committee
disputed
that.
After
publication
of
this
report,
Pentagon
Press
Secretary
Kingsley
Wilson
said
in
a
statement,
“The
Committees
were
pre-notified
of
the
decision.
Briefings
were
offered
to
the
Committees
this
week.”

“You’re
clearly
avoiding
answers
to
questions
that
you
should
have
been
acutely
aware
of
in
your
position.
That
does
not
augur
very
well
for
your
role
and
the
future
of
the
Department
of
Defense,”
Sen.
Jack
Reed,
a
Democrat
from
Rhode
Island
and
the
committee’s
ranking
member,
said
after
questioning
Dahmer
on
the
decisions
to
pause
Ukraine
aid
and
remove
troops
from
Romania.

Reed
also
asserted
that
the
Pentagon
reshuffled
the
portfolios
of
deputy
assistant
secretaries
who
would
report
to
Dahmer,
if
he
is
confirmed
to
his
new
role,
without
properly
consulting
Congress. Inside
Defense

reported

that
the
Pentagon’s
policy
shop
is
being
overhauled
by
merging
roles,
dissolving
positions
and
renaming
posts

changes
that
Wicker
said
were
spelled
out
in
a
letter
dated
Oct.
8
but
only
delivered
Sunday
night.

“I
understand
that
media
reports
can
be
wrong,
believe
me,
but
it
just
seems
like
there’s
this
Pigpen-like
mess
coming
out
of
the
policy
shop
that
you
don’t
see
from”
other
offices,
said
Sen.
Tom
Cotton,
a
Republican
from
Arkansas.
Cotton
then
asked
Dahmer
why
he
thinks
that
is.

“Senator,
I
would
like
to
understand
that
myself,”
Dahmer
replied,
blaming
“fake
news”
and
“inaccurate
reporting.” 



UPDATED
11/4/25
at
5:47
PM
ET
with
comment
from
the
Pentagon
on
the
withdrawal
of
US
troops
from
Romania,
as
well
as
clarification
from
Sen.
Tom
Cotton’s
office
about
the
Peanuts
character
Pigpen.

Morning Docket: 11.05.25 – Above the Law

*
It’s
tariffs
day
at
the
Supreme
Court!
While
some
wonder
if
the
liberal
justices
will
find
themselves
awkwardly
embracing
non-delegation
arguments,
maybe
the
textualists
on
the
other
side
can
just
focus
on
the
statute
not
including

the
word

“tariff”
and
leave
it
at
that.
[Bloomberg
Law
News
]

*
Judge
Ho
wants
the
Fifth
Circuit
to
make
it
easier
for
companies
to
scam
the
government.
[Reuters]

*
Alito
freaks
out
over
the
suggestion
that
Scalia’s
brand
of
textualism
was
mostly
for
show.
[Balls
and
Strikes
]

*
Multiple
firms
involved
in
effort
to
make
Denny’s
go
private.
Because
nothing
says
Denny’s
like
five
people
fighting
over
how
to
split
the
check
at
the
end.
[Law360]

*
Dechert
goes
to
4-days
in
office.
[Legal
Intelligencer
]

*
Is
AI
an
honor
code
violation?
Hm.
Hey,
ChatGPT,
“Is
AI
an
honor
code
violation?”
[ABA
Journal
]

*
Founding
law
firm
partner
pushed
out
over
“use
of
private
jets
and
yachts.”
The
Brits
are
so
weird…
over
here
that
just
makes
him
the
perfect

pick
to
run
the
FBI
.
[Times
of
London
]

Aimless And Considering Law School? – See Also – Above the Law

The
Daily
Show
Open
Has
A
Career
Suggestion:
And
we
follow
it
up
with
a
couple
disclaimers.
ChatGPT
Is
No
Harvey:
Kim
Kardashian’s
ChatGPT
legal
queries
had
some
infuriating
results.
At
The
Cutting
Edge
Of
AI
And
DEI:
Davis
Wright
Tremaine
Managing
Partner
Jaime
Drozd
drops
some
gems.
Who
Knew
The
Richest
Could
Be
That
Unlikable?:
Kirkland
&
Ellis
faced
some
unwanted
feedback
from
private
equity
groups.
Idiot
Sandwich
As
A
Legal
Strategy:
The
sandwich
was
so
powerful
that
even
the
ballistic
vest
couldn’t
stop
the
smell
of
mustard.

Care For A Beer With That Ballot? – Above the Law



Ed.
Note:

Welcome
to
our
daily
feature

Trivia
Question
of
the
Day!


Which
was
the
last
state
to
lift
the
ban
on
alcohol
sales
on
Election
Day?


Hint:
The
Election
Day
ban
on
alcohol
sales
started
in
the
mid-1880s
and
was
intended
to
discourage
bribery
at
the
polls
(a
long-standing
U.S.
tradition

dating
back
to
George
Washington
),
but
wasn’t
lifted
until
2014.



See the
answer
on
the
next
page.

Judge Resigns From Bench Over Traffic Tickets – Above the Law

(Image
via
Getty)

What
is
the
most
you’ve
paid
for
a
traffic
ticket?
Getting
a
traffic
ticket
in
New
York
usually
sets
folks
back
a
couple
hundred
bucks.
However,
there
are
some
outliers:
a
traffic
ticket
cost
a
New
York
judge
his
robes.
Law.com
has
coverage:

A
western
New
York
jurist
has
resigned
amid
a
probe
that
he
tried
to
invoke
his
judicial
office
to
avoid
being
issued
tickets
for
unlicensed
driving,
a
state
watchdog
said
Monday.
Former
Clarkson
Town
Court
Justice
Ian
Penders,
an
attorney
since
2014,
quit
the
bench
amid
the
New
York
State
Commission
on
Judicial
Conduct’s
investigation.

The
CJC
said
the
judge
in
Monroe
County
had
been
stopped
by
police
twice
in
June,
and
on
Aug.
15
pleaded
guilty
to
the
misdemeanor
charge
of
aggravated
unlicensed
operation
of
a
motor
vehicle
in
the
third
degree.

You
got
stopped
twice?
Learn
to
quit
while
you’re
behind,
man.

While
this
isn’t
an
excuse
for
the
former
judge’s
behavior,
it
goes
to
show
that
location
really
matters.
Were
the
judge
trying
to
get
around
New
York
City
proper,
he
probably
would
have
been
able
to
catch
a
train
or
three
to
get
where
he
needed
to
go.
Once
you
leave
the
five
boroughs
and
actually
need
a
car
to
get
around,
you
open
yourself
up
to
all
sorts
of
foolishness.

While
this
is
definitely
one
of
the
tamest

Judges
Behaving
Badly

stories
I’ve
ever
seen,
the
threshold
for
the
appearance
of
impropriety
is
very
low
at
the
end
of
the
day.
If
you
don
the
robes
and
gavel,
you
have
to
be
on
your
best
behavior

even
when
you’re
just
getting
from
A
to
B.


Western
NY
Judge
Resigns
After
Invoking
Office
in
Attempt
to
Avoid
Traffic
Ticket,
Judicial
Conduct
Watchdog
Says

[Law.com]



Chris
Williams
became
a
social
media
manager
and
assistant
editor
for
Above
the
Law
in
June
2021.
Prior
to
joining
the
staff,
he
moonlighted
as
a
minor
Memelord™
in
the
Facebook
group Law
School
Memes
for
Edgy
T14s
.
 He
endured
Missouri
long
enough
to
graduate
from
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
School
of
Law.
He
is
a
former
boatbuilder
who
is
learning
to
swim, is
interested
in
critical
race
theory,
philosophy,
and
humor,
and
has
a
love
for
cycling
that
occasionally
annoys
his
peers.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected]
and
by
tweet
at @WritesForRent.

Kim Kardashian Was ‘Channeling’ Her Own Divorce Lawyer In Her New TV Role – Above the Law

Kim
Kardashian
(Photo
by
Dave
Benett/Getty
Images
for
Disney+)



Ed.
note
:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature,

Quote
of
the
Day
.


Yes.
The
inspiration
was
Laura
Wasser,
who
is
a
two-time
Kim
K.
divorce
attorney.
I
was
channeling
her.
I
was
inspired
by
my
own
divorce
attorney.






Kim
Kardashian
,
who
stars
in

Hulu’s
“All’s
Fair”

as
Allura
Grant,

a
divorce
lawyer
who’s
getting
a
divorce,
in
response
to
a
question
posed
by

Teyana
Taylor
,
who
is
also
featured
on
the
show,
as
to
whether
Kardashian

pulled
from
any
personal
experience

when
she
was
building
your
character
.
She
went
on
to
say
that
her
character
on
the
show
would
have
made
a
good
divorce
lawyer
for
herself
in
real
life.





Staci
Zaretsky
 is
the
managing
editor
of
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to

email

her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on BlueskyX/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.