2012: The Year Lawyers Become Great Through Lawyering, Not The Internet

Analogize two new restaurants. One with a great website, pictures of the beautiful decor, private rooms and a great wine list, ability to make reservations online, and testimonials from customers like Julie R. and Bob W. It also has an active twitter account and Facebook fan page. "Like" them on Facebook for a free appetizer.

The other, located behind a hard to find strip mall, it only has 12 tables, and the website has a couple typos, with the only contact information being a phone number. It says "call for reservations."

In 3 months, the first restaurant goes out of business.

The food was terrible.

In 3 months, you may be able to get a reservation at restaurant 2 that's not at either 5:30 p.m. or 10:15 p.m.

The food is amazing. Everyone is talking about this place.

Everyone was also talking about restaurant 1.

Restaurant 1 thought they would balance the reality that the food sucked, with their awesome internet presence.

And this is what's going on in the legal profession.

Can't get a job? Create a persona on the internet.

No one is hiring you? Start blogging. Blogs are great for Google attention.

Going out and developing relationships will "take too long? Hire a social media expert to blast your mug and (trumped up) credentials all over the net.

Lawyers are being taught that being a good lawyer is second, or third, to marketing on the internet.

Now I'm not unrealistic, if you're doing a good job and no one knows about it, that's a problem.

The question is: who do you want to know about it?

As I ask lawyers frequently, "tell me if the best case you ever got was from the internet."

When the "I found you on the internet" call comes in, do you see dollar signs? Real, dollar signs?

We all use the internet for the same reason - to find the best deal, the cheapest price. Are you the best deal? The cheapest? Is that what you want to be?

My friend Kevin O'Keefe, (and he is my friend by function of him having bought me a beer and otherwise not giving a crap what I say about him nor taking it personally) who never misses an opportunity to (not so) subtlely pimp his blog sales company, tried to say the same thing, but couldn't help himself from encouraging lawyers to participate in the race to the bottom.

I was almost moved to tears that the leading blog salesman for lawyers would pen a post titled:

You have more than an opportunity as a lawyer in the new year : You have an obligation to be great

And it started off in typical fashion, the marketer paying required homage to the God of Marketing, Seth Godin:

Godin shared what he wrote 9 years ago that applies equally today.

Here's a question that you should clip out and tape to your bathroom mirror. It might save you some angst 15 years from now. The question is, What did you do back when interest rates were at their lowest in 50 years, crime was close to zero, great employees were looking for good jobs, computers made product development and marketing easier than ever, and there was almost no competition for good news about great ideas?

Many people will have to answer that question by saying, "I spent my time waiting, whining, worrying, and wishing." Because that's what seems to be going around these days. Fortunately, though, not everyone will have to confess to having made such a bad choice.

Great stuff. Now is the time to set your path, to stake your claim in your profession.

Kevin continues eloquently with Lord Godin's words:

The thing is, we still live in a world that's filled with opportunity. In fact, we have more than an opportunity -- we have an obligation. An obligation to spend our time doing great things. To find ideas that matter and to share them. To push ourselves and the people around us to demonstrate gratitude, insight, and inspiration. To take risks and to make the world better by being amazing.

Yes, yes, yes.

We, as lawyers, have obligations to do great things, to be "amazing."

Yes. Amen.

And then Kevin makes his (pitch) point:

While recent grads and lawyers who have been practicing for decades bemoan the lack of legal work and opportunities, other lawyers are running laps around them by harnessing the power of the Internet.

Curiously, as in most posts written by former lawyers-turned-marketers and social media experts touting their "trade," there is little to no specific examples. When marketers and social media "experts" are asked why they consistently leave out evidence of their claims, they harken back to their days as lawyers and say "would your clients want their names mentioned in a blog post?" They claim that the attorney-client privilege is somehow relevant to the marketer-desperate lawyer relationship. It protects them from having to admit that their claims are just that - claims.

So I don't know which lawyers are "running laps" around other lawyers by "harnessing the power of the internet."

I had a website and a blog long before the marketers darkened the door of our profession, and I have found that harnessing the power of lawyering much more enriching than harnessing the perceived power of the "where are all the cheap, unknowing and easily duped" clients.

But that's me.

Kevin continues:

The Internet has served as the great equalizer over the last decade. Lawyers have left established firms to chase their dreams of doing the work they want for the types of clients they want with the type of lifestyle they want. Other lawyers have carved out niche practices in larger firms, making them an asset to the firm, as opposed to a liability at the age of 45 or 50.

Lawyers have left established firms to chase their dreams of doing the work they want for the types of clients they want with the type of lifestyle they want?

Because of the internet?

See, I laugh at that, but I'm not Kevin's audience. His audience are those that actually believe that the internet is where their dreams start, and are bound to come true.

People have different types of dreams, I guess.

And then Kevin goes in for the kill (drum roll please):

Never before could a lawyer start a blog to demonstrate their passion, expertise, and care. Rather than a good lawyer taking decades, if ever, to build meaningful business relationships and establish themselves as a go-to lawyer in a niche area of the law, lawyers are doing so in a couple years through blogging.

That's right, the shortcut, the alternative, to developing meaningful business relationships over time and establishing yourself as a go-to lawyer, can be done in a couple years through....

blogging.

That's according to Kevin O'Keefe, of Lexblog (click link for information on how to buy "turn-key professional blog service.")

Kevin ends his post with Godin's question:

Why not be great?

I agree. But blogging doesn't make you great, it makes you a blogger. It may even make you a shitty blogger.

Lawyering doesn't make you great - it makes you a lawyer. Great lawyering makes great lawyers.

Unless you're selling blogs.

Anonymous comments are welcome as long as they say something relevant and half-way intelligent and arent a vehicle for a coward to attack someone. I trust you understand. Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. He is the author of I Got A Bar Complaint.

A Generation Of Proud, Anonymous, Lawyers

The debate over privacy is dead. It isn't really, but apparently, in order to be "cool" on the internet, you must declare something "dead." The debate over privacy though is dead, as there is no privacy on the internet, or in smart phones, and anyone who cries about it, is a moron. Write something, text something, put anything on the internet or in to your phone, and assume someone not intended to see it, will. As lawyers love to say - GOVERN YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY.

But the debate over anonymity is not dead, it is growing, and it is divisive.

I think anonymity is important. It's important when reporting a crime, and can serve other important purposes - like when the statement made can put someone in jeopardy of harm - real harm.

Anonymity is also important to those that are cowards. Without anonymity, blog comments would be vast wastelands of intelligent conversation and vigorous debate by people willing to put their name to their statement/argument/lucid thought. Instead, we get comments about people's appearance, ethnic background, and made up shit that is just written to generate a response.

Anonymity is also important to liars. Without anonymity, someone couldn't comment - without the fear or retribution - on a blog post or news article with something that the writer knows to be false.

Some of it is just silly, and some of it is downright scandalous.

When it comes to lawyers and law students, anonymity is simply pathetic. We are, or are going to be, members of the bar, advocates, leaders. Instead, we are no better than the flip flop wearing, basement dwelling, unemployed and angry citizenry who spend their days protected by their fake name or "Anonymous" on the internet, saying whatever they want, and claiming that they are simply fulfilling their patriotic duty under the First Amendment.

There are two reasons I am not anonymous. I am not afraid of letting people know what I think, and I don't come from an upbringing where I was led to believe it was appropriate to lie about people, and otherwise say things publicly without putting my name to it.

Not only is there a feeling that anonymity is OK today, people believe it is a God given right and dammit if they are going to come out of hiding and speak their mind. Anyone who doesn't think much of online fear-based anonymity, is a dangerous person.

So went the debate a few days ago between myself and a law student. The debate began when this anonymous law student was (like many anonymous keyboard tappers who have found a nice home at Above the Law (ATL)) upset about the new comment policy allowing columnists to decide whether to accept comments. I think the policy is stupid, (ut oh, are they gonna fire me?), I think that people who can't take it are pathetic, but it's the new policy.

This anonymous law student was telling one of the ATL columnists who invoked the policy to "rise above it" and continue accepting comments. I thought it hypocritical that an anonymous law student was telling a (not-anonymous) lawyer to allow comments (the bulk of course which are anonymous), so I stuck my nose in it, and here's the relevant portions of how it went:

First, this anonymous law student announces that a columnist has chosen to no longer allow comments, and then says:

@LawStudentDiary hiding isn't the answer.

Brian Tannebaum - But you're anonymous.

Then after the typical nasty shit that happens when someone like me tries to talk to someone like her, @lawstudentdiary says a couple interesting things:

You either allow people to be anonymous and thus be honest, or you have real people, who have to self-censor.

and

If no one was allowed to be anonymous, you wouldn't have hardly any commentators.

Then of course, as twitter goes, someone else jumps in and claims that this is about something much more important:

@clarinette02 @btannebaum @lawstudentdiary May I ask you : Who were the very first drafters of the US constitution? haven't I heard they were anonymous?

Yes, and I've had Tang, just like some of our Astronauts.

And then of course, I finally got the "you stupid old man" comment:

@LawStudentDiary @ @btannebaum Haha, okay. Most of the internet is anon. Some of your fellow ATLers are too. It's how things work. I'm sorry you don't get it.

That's me, Mr. he doesn't get it.

I do though. I get it.

I just don't like it.

I don't mind that people are allowed to be anonymous. There's no requirement for people to say who they are while mindlessly typing things that make total sense to them and the world in which they live. But this entitlement (there's that word again) that society has, that law students and lawyers have, that not only can I be anonymous, but I have to be because if anyone knew what I really thought, I'd be homeless or have the shit beat out of me, is disgraceful.

Think about it - you, reading this. Lawyer, law student. Is this what you wanted? To become an advocate and then spend your days in hiding on the world wide web, in fear not just of your own stupidity and hate, but more importantly, in fear of your cogent thoughts, ideas, perspectives on life?

That's who you are when you are anonymous - no one.

Anonymous comments are welcome as long as they say something relevant and half-way intelligent and aren't a vehicle for a coward to attack someone. I trust you understand.

Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. He is the author of I Got A Bar Complaint.

Does The North Carolina Bar Advocate Blogging About Accidents To Get Cases?

One of the tried (tired) and true marketing methods used by cheesy personal injury lawyers is to blog about horrific accidents in order to get the Google attention they want and hope that the grieving family finds them on the internet and retains them so they can get their 40%.

This is a disgusting practice that's been resoundingly trashed on the internet.

But not by the marketers:

Dale Tincher of consultwebs.com writes yesterday,

As you know, obtaining quick notice about local accidents and injuries will help your law firm in many ways. First, if you are aware of accidents early, you may have a chance of getting an inside track on a case. Additionally, if you post something on your website quickly, you may be found and have an opportunity to get a case. Posting information on your website, blog and social media will also help your rankings. Google rewards websites for frequent updates and activity.

Doesn't surprise me that as there's more and more desperate-to-make-money-lawyers out there that these pathetic tactics become more attractive. Why spend the time building a reputation when you can fake one on the internet?

But this is what interested me:

Dale is the project consultant for the North Carolina Bar Association’s endorsement of Consultwebs.com, Inc., as the only Web consulting firms endorsed by the North Carolina Bar Association’s Technology Assistance Program (TAP.)

Not a very well written sentence, but what I got from it is that the North Carolina Bar endorses this firm in some way.

I'd like to know why?

I'll be right here.

Anonymous comments are welcome as long as they say something relevant and half-way intelligent and arent a vehicle for a coward to attack someone. I trust you understand. Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. He is the author of I Got A Bar Complaint.

A New Blogger The Marketers And Starbucks Lawyers Missed

According to those worshipped on the internet these days, lawyers only blog for profit, and working in an office is a sure fire road to nowhere. We are in a marketing sewer and all lawyers are to follow the lawyer in front of them down to the pile of shit called the internet, typiing away for the sole purpose of business, and working from their dining room table when Starbucks kicks them out.

Lawyer Joe Scura must have been out the day the unemployed former nothing lawyers were busy scamming other lawyers young and old in to thinking that working alone from home and blogging for clients was the only way to riches and fame.

His website and blog violate about every marketing rule that exists.

Fasten your seatbelt marketing scum - here's Joe out of the box on his website:

Joe Scura opened his first law office in 2009

2009! You idiot! Rule number 1 - never, NEVER say how long you've been out unless it's more than 5 years.

What the marketers would have told Joe was to start with:

Joe Scura is an experienced criminal defense lawyer that will fight for your rights for a reasonable fee.

The Virtual Office crew (who of late have insisted this is the future of law) drops out of Joe's world at the second sentence, where he says:

This office is devoted to providing exceptional representation to real people faced with real legal problems

Then there's his first blog post:

Two Years In Solo Practice

There you go again Joe, being all honest and transparent and just violating every rule of sleezy marketers.

A better title would have been: My Advice To Young Lawyers After Years In Private Practice (2 is plural after all.)

Joe continunes with the first reason he writes this post:

I would like potential clients to know who I am and where I’m coming from.

Oh man Joe, you want them to know the truth about you? Really?

Here's more bad news: Joe went to law school not to make money, but: with the goal of becoming a criminal defense attorney

And while I want you to go to Joe's blog and give him the many hits he obviously doesn't care about, here's a clip of what to expect (so the "how to make money fast like today as a lawyer" crowd doesn't waste their time.)

If I could stress one point here, it would be “just work”. You could spend hours in your office tweaking your website, tweeting, answering questions on AVVO, (all of which I’ve done btw) but if you want to be a young solo the most productive thing you can do to build your practice is develop skills as an attorney and do good work

Welcome aboard Joe, and congratulations on your first "Like," from me.

h/t: Mark Bennett

Non-anonymous comments welcome. Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. He is the author of I Got A Bar Complaint.

The Silence Of The Lambs

Lawyers at their core are advocates. They speak out. They take positions. Some take on cases and clients that are controversial, tough, and unpopular. Others toil in the background, but represent clients nonetheless.

The others are not lawyers. They are businessmen and women with law degrees who check under their fingernails throughout the day to make sure there's not a speck of dirt. They work "in" the legal profession, so they say, as they try to make a buck off their brethren with their consulting, marketing, and books.

Staying silent is a marketing tactic these days. Anyone in the blogosphere or on social media has seen the fear that defines today's marketing lawyer. The scared silent ones are not here to advocate, opine, or take a stand for anything - they are here to create a personal brand - to make everyone like them, to enjoy their irrelevancy in the Happysphere.

And so young Joseph Rakofsky has filed suit against 74, no 75, no 76, no, wait, between 74-80, and more to come defendants known simply as "the internet."

In response, "the internet" has spoken.

Since the filing of the lawsuit by Joseph Rakofsky, real lawyers everywhere have weighed in.

So I checked around to see what some of the "others," those with law degrees who are in the business of selling to and writing for lawyers were saying about this lawsuit.

Surely Susan Cartier Liebel, head cheerleader of Solo Practice University, where lawyers pay to learn about, well I don't know what they learn because I'm not a student, would have something important to say about this young solo's collapse:

Nope.

And social media "expert" Adrian Dayton, who calls himself an "experienced corporate lawyer" after a total sum of 8 months at his law firm. Here's what he had to say:

Which Movie Does Your Law Firm’s Social Media Policy Most Closely Resemble?

Kevin O'Keefe, who sells blog platforms to lawyers?

Facebook for lawyers : Wonderful relationship building medium for business development.

Larry Bodine, one of the premier lawyer marketers in the country? Surely he would want to comment on the biggest marketing fiasco in recent history?

Love it or hate it, Avvo.com is a force to be reckoned with in Law Firm Marketing

Niki Black, the queen evangelist of tech for lawyers who occasionally writes advice posts for young lawyers?

Well, maybe young Joseph needs a Droid: Droid Apps for Lawyers

The "others" have made sure to say nothing. It's not an accident. It's intentional. They would never weigh in on something this controversial. It's not good for business, for the "personal brand." Maybe they'd get sued and then that would be just so awful, wouldn't it?

They've decided that staying out of real legal issues, issues of the day that are controversial, is better for their brand. Their relevancy exists only to those who think they are fabulous, and that they hold all the secrets of tech, marketing, and social media. They have their own vision of their importance to the legal profession.

Those of you who remain silent, congratulations. I'm sure your personal brand is meaningful. To whom, I have no idea.

Fear has its use but cowardice has none.
- Mahatma Gandhi


Non-anonymous comments welcome. Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. He is the author of I Got A Bar Complaint.

Would You Hire Me Based On My Blog?

I haven't been here for a couple weeks. Well, I've been here, just not here. I've been reading, commenting on other blogs, reading other comments on other blogs about me, getting a little depressed about the oil disaster, and then I came to this conclusion:

People think they can tell a lot about a lawyer from a blog.

For example, I read this about me on another blog:

I'm pretty sure Tannenbaum, someone this click of CDL bloggers all seem to like very much, is not someone I'd ever recommend and that opinion is also based entirely on his writing, which tends to be shallow and reeks of self-promotion

The commenter was at least honest - he would not recommend me as a lawyer for a client solely based on my blog posts. It's a risk I take. I'm sure there are more out there that think I'm a complete jerk, based only on my blog posts.

This commenter believes I am what I blog. He's partially right. Those that know me say they "can hear me" through my writing. There's a pretty common thread in all my writing. I don't like whiners, or people who got into law because they thought it entitled them to money. I don't have time for social media "experts" who just couldn't hack it in law or anything else and lie about their backgrounds. I don't like those consultants out there that have no success to speak of, and are only in business to take advantage of broke young lawyers, and I despise stupidity.

But there's a lot more to know - stuff I don't discuss for whatever reason. If I was truly a self-promoter here, I would have a different style of writing, or hire someone to write for me. I would be much better off blogging about Bar Rules all the time as far as Google is concerned. Instead, I just say what comes to my mind. I know that's a foreign concept for the marketing lawyers

But this is my outlet. Have I been hired because of this blog? Partially. I do real work for real clients who, even though they may find out about me here, still have to contact me. Some may do so and think I'm not the right lawyer for them. Some may call and be surprised that I don't jump down their throat. Then again, some lawyers blog and appear real nice and sweet, but aren't.

One thing I'll never get over is how every blogger I meet is either taller or shorter than I thought.

But I digress.

Only those I've actually spoken to, privately e-mailed with, or better, met in person, can truly say they know me - and that goes for everyone else out there. Sure, if you're a serial liar, or resume puffer on your website, I don't need to go further. But just because you write a blog, one shouldn't make the leap that this is who you really are.

Until you've spoken to someone, seen them with their kids, heard their philosophies on issues other than what they blog about, or spoken to others about them, a judgment based on a blog is worthless. It's worse than judging a book by its cover, it's like judging a library based on one book.

My friend who commented above just doesn't like me. He doesn't like me "based entirely" on my writing, and because of my writing, he's not recommending me to any clients. I can imagine the conversation:

I need a lawyer in Miami. I was given Brian Tannebaum's name.

Oh, don't hire him. Have you read his blog? He admitted to making a mistake in a case.

"But this recommendation was from a former client who seemed pretty happy.

I don't care what he did for a client, I read his blog.

Yeah, silly. But hey, decisions are made for lots of different reasons.

Making a decision to hire a lawyer is one that is much more important than a collection of blog posts, at least to lawyers who value that decision.

Whether you are hiring a lawyer because of a blog, or not, you're making a huge mistake.

I know, I've made them.

Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. He is the author of I Got A Bar Complaint.

Lawyer Blogging Tip: When the Judge Is A "Total Asshole"

It's always fun to chat with folks who firmly believe the First Amendment applies to blogs. It mostly comes from commenters who insist their angry hate filled comments against the blogger be published, but it also comes from lawyers who don't believe they give up certain Constitutional Rights when they enter the Bar.

Let's review:

Model Rules of Professional Conduct

Maintaining The Integrity Of The Profession

Rule 8.2 Judicial And Legal Officials

(a) A lawyer shall not make a statement that the lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the qualifications or integrity of a judge, adjudicatory officer or public legal officer, or of a candidate for election or appointment to judicial or legal office.

Over at Legal Profession Blog, we learn of a now-fired Illinois public defender suspended for 60 days for allegedly blogging about her cases while exposing client confidences, revealing her complicity in a client's fraud on a court, and referring to one judge as "clueless" and another judge as "a total asshole,"

This wasn't the first time this lawyer tangled with the Illinois Bar. Back in 2001, she:

....filed a motion to substitute a judge (recusal), that included false statements about the judge's financial obligations and credit limits. The motion also contained false allegations that the judge had conducted an ex parte interview with Barringer's client's son.

In Florida, we're all too aware of this issue. Lawyer Sean Conway called a judge a "evil unfair witch," and bought himself a Reprimand and a $1250 fine.

The lesson - if you're going to blog about judges, do it anonymously.

Seems ridiculous, but it's the way things are. Had Conway made that comment without the courage to include his real name, there would be no Reprimand, no link to any story about his comment. (P.S. the judge, widely criticized by the Bar, has decided not to seek re-election.)

Back to the suspended former PD.

The First Amendment doesn't apply to blogs. The First Amendment doesn't apply to lawyers who blog. It's a troubling issue. We go to school to become advocates, and agents of change, yet we are restricted from making certain comments about others. To some, this is troubling, to others, it is the only way we maintain integrity in the profession. Name calling is unprofessional, it demeans the profession, and should be regulated, says the Bar. To others, we show disrespect to the First Amendment by preventing ourselves from speaking our mind.

The rules of our profession cause these types of comments to be made quietly, at restaurants, in the halls, by both judges and lawyers. As judges always say, "you talk about us, we talk about you."

This is now the second lawyer I've seen sanctioned for disparaging comments about judges (although our PD here was sanctioned for other reasons as well.)

If you are a coward, and make these comments anonymously, you can make them all day, every day, with no repercussions. But put your name to your thoughts, and suffer discipline.

There is something very wrong with that.

Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. He is the author of I Got A Bar Complaint.

Some Of Us Get Tired Of Hearing....

Although there is a whole new generation of bloggers that are told success is having enough keywords in a post to generate SEO, putting the blog high up on the Google chain and causing the flood gates to open with client calls, one of the true signs of a successful blog is that it generates discussion and debate.

And that happens here. I love it.

Much of this blog is my opinion. This comes from some experience, and I hope that someone, or even a few people take something from it that helps them.

But I'm not here for you, and I'm not here to be "nice," and I'm not here to tell you things that will make you feel better. I didn't start this blog to coddle the unemployed lawyers who went to law school only for the end goal of graduating and receiving their six-figure BigLaw check.

I prefer the truth. Always have.

So when I post about whether looking for "any job I can get is hurting you," I'm happy to read this comment:

It was not much fun reading some of the "There will be no jobs/Do you REALLY want to be a lawyer?" posts, especially as graduation/get a job/pass the bar pressure started to build.

Your emphasis on knowing what you want to do, getting to know the local legal community, and improvising on the job search (on a post last summer) was extremely valuable to me. Although it wasn't possible for me to work for free for a local attorney, in the hopes of getting a future job, I was able to negotiate with the three-attorney firm where I'd clerked since my first summer for continued employment. I don't make ideal money. I don't do ideal work. But I JUST started practicing, so I don't have the relationships with other lawyers and the courts that justify the big dollars. There are no perfect clients--just the ones who pay, and pay less for my time than my bosses'.

I can credit you with making crystal clear the importance of a realistic and flexible view of what I would be able to do with my degree and license. I don't see you as preaching from your very comfy chair with your feet up at all. You're further down the road trying to share your experience navigating this career. So I'll say a big fat "THANKS" for all the free, honest advice.

And I"m happy to read this comment:

No offense, but I'm so sick of the high and mighty job advice from people who got out of it and market not legal services but advice to all the other disgruntled lawyers. We may be BS artists, but the problem is we recognize it in you, BT. You have to get what you can get, and some of us get tired of hearing about how you should only do what you are passionate about, yada, yada, yada. You are dreaming! Moreover, you're just selling bullshit. So, give us all a break.

This is the type of dissenting view that is the enemy of those who spend their days convincing lawyers like me that I need to develop a personal brand. Sit on twitter for 5 minutes and you'll see lawyers "tweeting out" platitudes about themselves and other niceties, avoiding any dissenting opinion, criticism, or debate. Most of them barely practice law, or haven't practiced in years, so debating anything regarding the legal profession is done on the surface, or ignored because it's "negative."

I am a lawyer. I advocate. People disagree with me - normally the lawyers standing across the courtroom. I can take it. I actually like it. Without it, things would be pretty boring here.

So come, tell me you hate me, tell me you don't want to hear it anymore. Tell me I don't know what I'm talking about.

It's OK, this is why I'm passionate about what I do - it gives me the opportunity to listen to those who aren't.

Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. He is the author of I Got A Bar Complaint.