What to do with the Pile(s) of (Work)?

Growing up, a certain somebody often reminded me of how applicable baseball is to the real world. Having to stare at the real world everyday now, I of course fully appreciate that wisdom: Everyone wears spikes and a glove to court and the bailiffs don't blink twice about all the bats piled up in the jury box. Yeah, not so applicable.

But today, while looking at the piles of things I haven't done yet on my desk, I thought of the old baseball-coach instructions for overcoming a 10-run deficit: Chip away, inning-by-inning.

Law practice when you're not the boss is heavily prone to getting behind. You start out a case with detailed plans, concrete objectives, and know exactly what to do to get where you want to go. Then the inevitable happens, "We've got this brief that I'd like you to work on" or "would you mind . . ." And up go the piles.

So what do you do? Stay late and get them knocked out? Most of the time. But sometimes that's just not an option.

The key for me is to make some progress--get some items checked off the list today (i.e., don't go for the homerun). So I'm identifying phone calls and short letters and knocking those out first. The discovery responses and contract reviews will come later. At the end of the day, my list will be smaller and filled with at least a few crisp, bold strike-out lines, not heavily notated with "started--05/29/09."

So I suppose I find myself digging my spikes into the floor and shooting for a couple of singles before the end of the day. By next Tuesday, I'll have that one-run lead back in time for the closer to come through in the 9th.

Maybe I'll even bring by baseball glove to court next time.

Using RFAs to Deal with Less than Forthcoming Lawyers

Experience really is the best teacher. I have a case where opposing counsel routinely responds to discovery requests with baseless objections. It's a real pain trying to get the case moved when the other side won't provide you with the names of company witnesses or documents that supposedly support certain defenses.

I'm hesitant to file a Motion to Compel and seek sanctions at this point in time because there are more pressing matters in the case to address and it's just plain too early to cry foul in front of the judge.

So for now, I'm laying the groundwork for a swift execution through RFAs like these (let's hope):

1. Admit or deny that you have produced all discoverable documents in your possession responsive to Request for Production No. 1.

2. Admit or deny that you have produced all discoverable documents in the possession of any of your agents, affiliates, or persons within your control responsive to Request for Production No. 1.

3. Admit or deny that you have reviewed all relevant internal files in your possession in connection with your identification of potential fact witnesses.

4. Admit or deny that you have disclosed the names of all potential fact witnesses known to you.

5. Admit or deny that you have disclosed the names of all potential fact witnesses that should, in the exercise of due diligence, be known to you.

6. Admit or deny that you are not withholding any document or material that should, under the Rules of Discovery, be produced in response to Request for Production No. 1.

7. Admit or deny that each objection you have made to any disocvery request above is supported by a specific Rule of Procedure and at least one published opinion from a court of record in this State.

8. Admit or deny that you will not attempt to supplement your discovery responses with documents or material that are presently in your possession.

9. Admit or deny that your attorney has read your discovery responses.

10. Admit or deny that you have read your discovery responses.

Now, let's see what happens when 1 month before trial a mountain of supplemental information is produced and new witnesses pop up.

The Unimpeachable Weather Report (Sort of)

Many times in a case you'll need to prove what the weather conditions were like on a particular day. This may be for obvious reasons, such as in an auto accident case. You may also need to prove someone's whereabouts on a particular day or negate reliance or damages in a construction defect case. For whatever reason, you can probably find the data your looking for straight from Uncle Sam, in admissible form no less.

Michael Steven's blog has a great post about obtaining weather data from the National Climatic Data Center (a branch of the Department of Commerce--who knew?).

The question then arises: What do you do when the opposition argues that the data is suspect because it was recorded, produced, and maintained by someone who was likely miles and miles away from the scene?

Having thought about this a bit further in case I did, I went ahead and requested a certified copy of DOC's EIS-C1 Memo, which explains how the data is collected, analyzed, and maintained. Although I've never been able to actually try it out in a case, there doesn't seem to be any reason why you wouldn't be able to read relevant portions of this memo to a jury.

If anyone tries it, let me know how the evidentiary ruling turns out.