This week marks my 20 year anniversary of being called to the Bar. Pretty neat. I’ve been practicing as a personal injury lawyer for pretty much all of that time. I’ve learned a lot over the past 2 decades. If I could go back in time and share some pearls of knowledge with my much younger, and more handsome self, here’s what I would have to say:
- Everyone’s path is different. In law school, you’re made to think there’s a cookie cutter approach as to what happens after your graduate from law school. Graduate from law school. Then get an articling job in the City of your choice, at the firm of your choice, in the area of law of your choice. Work at that law firm for a few years, climb their hierarchical ladder, get made partner, and let the good times roll. It’s all made to seem, and to sound, very linear. That’s how it can work for some. But for most lawyers, that’s not how the journey works at all. The practice of the law; just like life; is full of twists, turns, ups and downs. Not everything is going to go according to some grand plan which was conjured up in law school. Just because your colleagues are doing things one way, doesn’t mean that way is right for you. And it certainly doesn’t mean that’s how things are going to pan out for you either. Think of it as you would a diverse vegetable garden. Each plant in your vegetable garden is different; and will have different needs to produce. Some require more water, some require less direct sun. Others are finicky when it comes to soil Ph levels. The path to growth, and what is required for that growth to occur might be similar, but it’s not the same for each plant. The same variances applies to new calls and lawyers of all stripes. Everyone’s growth and path will be different. That doesn’t means that one path is better than the other. You have to do what’s right for you.
2. Talking a Big Game is Puffery, not Advocacy. They say that lawyers, in particular litigation lawyers go into the practice of the law because they like to argue, or because they like to talk. As you practice, you will meet all sorts of talkers, and talk they will. They will talk to pump up their own tires. They will talk to break the ice. They will talk to impress their clients. They will talk to impress a sense of righteousness. They will talk because they’re nervous. They will talk to pass it off as a billable hour. They will try to intimidate you, persuade you, or influence you with their talk. But at the end of the day, talk is cheap. It costs nothing to talk. The best lawyers I’ve seen listen and see right through the BS. And once the time for talk has ended, they act on it and get down to business. Courts want things in writing. Pleadings, Motion Records, Affidavits, Facta, Statements of Law and Fact, Books of Authorities, Compendium all in writing! Judges want things in writing. Often, they make up their minds before they’ve heard the oral arguments from the lawyers. Even when settling a file, insurers like to see settlement proposals in writing. Pre-Trial Memos and Mediation memos are in writing. Your client will not come out on top of his/her case if the written argument is not on point. The other side will NOT be persuaded if you have not sufficiently papered the file and if they don’t have anything in writing. You can be the most eloquent orator in the world. If you have nothing on paper (especially in civil law) you won’t stand a chance.
3. The Civil Courts Don’t Work as Well as you might think. With over 20 years of post call experience, I feel like I’ve earned the right to say that. I’ve been to Courthouses all across Ontario. Some operate better than others. The smaller the Courthouse, the nicer and more competent the Court staff. Unless somebody called in sick that day in which case they will be short staffed. But, for the most part, the Courts don’t work properly as a whole. They lose documents or fail to file documents correctly. They aren’t properly staffed. They don’t have enough Judges. They all have different nuances such that what’s done at one Courthouse isn’t the same as another Courthouse leading to limited commonality. People are trying really hard behind the scenes to get things right and to clean things up. But it’s not enough. There’s not enough money allocated to the civil justice system to get things done properly. The standard of what’s acceptable has dropped considerably since when I was called to the bar back in 2004. When I graduated from law school, I was told that the Courts were a true palaces of justice. Everything withing those palaces worked properly. Mistakes were few and far between. And if mistakes happened, they were fixed quickly so that each case moved forward as expeditiously as possible. Clients who pay their lawyers by the hour are finding that they are paying their lawyers more money to fix problems caused by the Court, rather than fixing problems which the lawyers were retained to fix in the first place. These administrative problems in the Courts have not gotten any better with time. I suspect that they will continue to get worse as Courts are trying to do more, with less resources.
4. It’s more about the Facts of the Case, then it is about the Law.
Law students and new calls might believe that eloquent technical arguments on intricate points of the law form the bulk of the practice of litigation. That this is what lawyers do all day, and every day. But that can’t be further from the truth. In civil cases, it’s all about the facts. And those facts are argued and challenged. It’s the facts which form the “meat and potatoes” of the case.
But don’t take my word for it. Here’s what The Honourable Justice Myers had to say about this from Veerasingam v. Licence Appeal Tribunal, 2024 ONSC 3730
“The facts matter.
Many lawyers graduate from law school thinking that their cases will be won with erudite advocacy concerning esoteric questions of complex jurisprudence intertwined with contemporary ideals of public policy reform.