RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED

 

THE LAST REMAKE OF RES GESTAE

 

 

It is one of the misfortunes of the law

That ideas become encysted in phrases and

thereafter for a long time cease to provoke

further analysis.

 

 

    So wrote the great Holmes, J. in the case of Hyde v. United States, 225 US 347, 32 S Ct 793 (1912).  I have come to the conclusion, born out by years of verbal combat, that our profession clings tenaciously to the well-worn phrase even when the words say so little of the underlying sentiments.  No doubt these time honored expressions stem from a professional preference for exactitude, economy, and the security of prior usage, a kind of res verbicata.  However, the passage of time and the rigors of a modern legal practice have impressed upon those certain phrases a secondary meaning which, in many instances, is far removed from the original context.

The problem struck home recently when I attended Argument Court (is there any other kind?) and observed a colleague receive a stern and unwarranted diatribe from the Bench concerning the difference between opening and striking a judgment.  Having some years earlier received the same stock tirade from the same eminent jurist, and having since learned his fondness for this specific discourse, stemmed from the fact that this issue was the only one he successfully recognized the first two times he flunked the Bar exams, I could only wince in silent and sympathetic agony as my friend suffered the slings and arrows of outrageous justice.  As the interminable finally terminated, my colleague mustered up what remained of his composure and said ÒI thank the Court for pointing that out to me.Ó  When I later shared some coffee and some privacy with my friend, I learned the deeper meaning of his carefully chosen response.

Knowing full well at this stage of my career, there are as many behind as ahead of me in the chronological roster of brothers, I am moved to expedite the painful process of indoctrination those younger lawyers must otherwise face alone.  Accordingly, in an effort to remove the cysts of time from phrases, and in the hope that my modest effort will encourage my colleagues to re-analyze their own favorite expressions, I offer the following glossary of modern legal terms.  I hope that Justice Holmes would approve of it.  In fact, I suspect he would encyst upon it.

EMINENT JURIST:        
                   A judge who has intimidated the

                   entire bar with his lack of judicial
                   temperament and his propensity for
                   waking up at the wrong time.

 

JUDICIAL TEMPERAMENT:   
                   The ability of a judge to refrain

                   from the use of four letter words

                   in the presence of the jury.

 

CRAFTY VETERAN:        
                   An attorney who, after years of

                   benumbing experiences, has become

                   intellectually encapsulated,

                   thereby evoking the false luster

                   of reflective contemplation; also,

                   an insurance adjuster who has had

                   his heart cut out.

 

DISTINQUISHED PRACTITIONER:   
                   A successful, middle-aged attorney

                   well on his way to becoming a

                   crafty veteran.

 

 

PROXIMATE CAUSE:           
                   A causal link between the injured

                   party and the defendant with the

                   highest limits of liability.

 

AB INITIO:           

                   From Guisseppe Abinitio, the 15th

                   century Italian lawyer who invented

                   the fee.

 

REASONABLE MAN:        
                   A theoretical model, who, in any

                   given situation, behaves exactly

                   as your client did; see also,

                   injured and innocent spouse.

 

LEGAL HUMOR:          
                   A clear contradiction in terms

                   e.g. Court en Banc

 

EN BANC:             
                   Legal adaptation of the culinary

                   term en brochette.

                   Cf. Swift sword of justice.

 

FEMME SOLE TRADER:     
                   A sole practitioner specializing

                   in divorce.

 

QUARE CLAUSUM FREGIT:   
                   Latin for ÒI thank the Court for

                   pointing that out to me.Ó

 

SUA SPONTE:          
                   A spontaneous, unsolicited outburst

                   accompanied frequently by unmitigated

                   gall and a complete lack of humility.

                   Also, the behavior of oneÕs internal

                   organs during trial.

 

CONTINGENCY FEE:           
                   Any fee remaining to be paid after

                   the work has been completed.

 

BURDEN OF PROOF:           
                   An affliction of trial lawyers

                   characterized by bent elbows,

                   thickness of speech, and sudden

                   Friday afternoon disappearances.

 

COURTHOUSE:          
                   An edifice to which one retreats

                   to contend with the burden of proof.

 

PRIMA FACIE:          
                   The essential criteria for hiring

                   a new secretary.

 

DICTAPHONE:
                   An epithet, here best left

                   unfinished, reserved as a response

                   to a particularly unpleasant

                   telephone call.

 

 

COMMON PLEA:          
                   Any one of a number of reasons

                   offered by clients pertaining to

                   their refusal to pay your bill.

                   of these, most common are

                   ÒI get paid next weekÓ and

                   ÒWould you take $10 a month for

                   the next seven yearsÓ.

 

                           Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

                           S. Sponte, Esq.

 

Copyright 1978 – S. Sponte, Esq.