I recently listened to an audio book called The Art of Communicating by Thich Nhat Hanh.

I have read various books by this world renowned speaker and teacher of mindfulness, and I highly recommend reading or listening to some of his work.

I consider myself well versed in the art of communication. I have read many books and articles on how to improve communication in various settings. However as I listened to this audio book, I realized that my view of communication was very one sided.

It seems that most of us think that communication is the way we verbally . . . [more]

Children dressed in suits, we drive silently. The one kid slides in a cassette tape and I hear it for the first time, a song I will listen to for the rest of my life in a trance, o’ let the sun beat down upon my face, as I look out the window. I don’t know the song and I want to ask but the music fills the space and there is no other space, not for speaking, not for laughing, not for crying.

We step into the stone building and everyone is there, all in black and white. . . . [more]

Do you know where the word “trial” come from? Its origins date back to the 12th-century French word trier, meaning “try,” “pick out,” or “cull.” By the 15th century, it referred to “an examination before a court” or “putting to proof by examination.”

But interestingly, and not accidentally, by the 16th century the definition of “trial” had grown to include “being subject to affliction or trouble through experience.” Today, it also commonly refers to an “ordeal,” with equally fun synonyms like “hardship,” “suffering,” and “nightmare” — any of which would probably resonate with the average recent litigant.

Trials aren’t . . . [more]

“Jury Duty” is a courtroom spoof-comedy reality show where the only victim is Ronald Gladden, who thinks he’s going to be a juror. Ronald is “picked” as a juror in a civil trial, except he is the only one who isn’t in on the theme of the show. The judge, counsel, fellow jurors, and witnesses are all actors, but Ronald is not. In one scene, the competent plaintiff’s counsel presents a kind of virtual reality reenactment of the scene which is the subject of the civil litigation, and it truly impresses the jurors. The bumbling counsel for the defense does . . . [more]

Shutting down her computer for the day, Mary noticed how anxious she was. Yet again, she had received no feedback on the legal opinion she had drafted for the partner, and she was beginning to worry if her job was in jeopardy.

In law firms, far too often, “no news is good news.” You will hear what you did wrong or badly but are much less likely to hear what went well.

In the demanding field of law, nurturing the growth of junior lawyers is essential for their professional advancement and the firm’s ongoing success. And if you are taking . . . [more]

In my last post, “The Potential for Reducing Claims with Plain Language”, I noted that poor communication is a leading cause of professional liability claims against lawyers. Convoluted client letters and emails may lead to clients making decisions on matters they don’t fully understand. A plain language approach offers the potential for reducing claims risk for lawyers and their clients in addition to making the law and legal processes more comprehensible for self-represented litigants. Fortunately, a plain language approach in legal training and an increased emphasis on plain language legal writing, including judicial decisions, is underway.

But has . . . [more]

Why be mediocre? Smart strategy developed thoughtfully and executed astutely ignites success that is stratospheric.

Strategy within many law firms is considered optional. These firms prefer to do what they’ve always done, then sweat and bleed to grind out results.

That’s because they choose to play it safe and run with the rest of the competitive herd. But running with the herd does not protect you from harm, it simply makes you one of many.

Playing it safe is a prevalent trait within the risk-averse legal services industry. But how tiresome and dull, not to mention frustrating. This is precisely . . . [more]

Recently, I attended the Trilogy Tour.

For those of you who are not familiar with it, this was a four hour concert with Enrique Iglesias, Ricky Martin and Pitbull.

Pitbull was last to perform and within a few minutes of starting, he stopped his band and apologized to the crowd that he screwed up.

I did not understand why he stopped as all seemed to be going great, yet he explained to the audience that he dropped his mike and we deserved to know that he is there to give a great performance and admit his mistakes.

I was shocked . . . [more]

1.

You know the look. A genuine smile, a pleasant surprise, a comfortable pride, man-to-man, he says “Hello! How are you?” a little too loud in a . . . [more]

Following ChatGPT’s public release in November 2022, there has been growing discussion about how generative AI intersects with lawyers’ professional obligations as found in codes of conduct. I published some early thoughts on this topic in Slaw.ca (see here and here). Several Canadian law societies have now also published guidance. Providing this sort of information is essential, in my view, for building needed tech literacy in the profession, particularly as AI becomes increasingly integrated into common tools that lawyers already use on a daily basis. Unfortunately, we have already seen that appropriate AI use by lawyers is not inevitable . . . [more]

Most of the semi-permanent controversy concerning articling revolves around whether it should be retained as a requirement for lawyer licensure, and if so, how the profession can ensure there are enough articling opportunities for all licensure candidates. Rarely discussed, but relevant to both inquiries, is a simpler question: How long should the articling term last?

It’s revealing that there’s no single answer to that question. Currently, most Canadian jurisdictions impose a 12-month or 52-week articling period, which may include time spent in a bar admission course. In Ontario, however, the articling term is ten months long, and in British . . . [more]

The focus of my career has shifted from primarily creating legal information for those without legal representation to now include risk management and loss prevention for lawyers. This expanded focus has also broadened my view on the importance of plain language for our profession. The benefits of a plain language approach for self-represented litigants are clear, but it also offers the potential of reducing claims risk for lawyers and their clients.

As noted in the recent Slaw article by Jennifer Leitch, NSRLP Executive Director, “Thinking Like a Non-Lawyer: When Plain Language is Not Enough”[i], there is . . . [more]