Forums

[pony_trekker]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I don't get a defense lawyer disliking plaintiff's lawyers, or vice versa. Why?

I also don't understand the idiotic need to identify with one group. I used to do both types of cases at the same time. I'd work for a bank in one case, a debtor in another. I've sued an insurer while working for an insurer. It's all just business. I can't imagine getting emotionally involved in this silliness. This idea of exclusively "being on the side of the common man" or "being on the side of business" is so gay. On the criminal side, US Attys and DAs jump over to the defense side to make more money all the time.

I don't see how anyone can be really good at either defense or plaintiff's work wwithout having worked on the other side of the table. It helps you understand your adversary.

If I had my druthers were I forced to remain a lawyer, I'd probably be a crim defense lawyer again (if only it paid what I need...). The idea of prosecuting people and ferreting out corporate malfeasance just doesn't do it for me. I'm too soft. I think everybody deserves a few scandals, arrests, etc... I don't like the moralizing and zero tolerance attitude that goes along with suing people. We all make mistakes. I feel bad holding people accountable.

But, I do have bills, so I do what pays, whatever side of the table it might place me on...

Blah, blah blah. You'd never be a good plaintiff's lawyer.