September 2004

Letters to the Editor

Our modes of speech should keep up with the times
I thoroughly enjoyed Judge Nichols' article in the June issue (p. 23). I read it just as I was getting ready to head into a jury trial, and so I especially appreciated the reminders of things I sometimes forget in the heat of battle. But allow me one quibble. Judge Nichols encourages use of the phrase "May it please the court" at the start of each argument. To my mind (and ear) that phrase is more timeworn than time-honored. It reminds me of other best-forgotten legalese terms such as hereinbefore, thereby, and party-of-the-first-part. Certainly, an attorney should acknowledge the fact that a justice or judge has just granted the attorney the opportunity to speak. The most direct way to do this that I have been able to come up with is to say, "Thank you your honor" at the outset. This simple, polite phrase has the added benefit of being completely understandable by one's clients and by anyone else in the courtroom.

Rosemary Daszkiewicz, Seattle

Our disciplinary notices surprise us
Having just read the unusually long "Disciplinary Notices" in the July Bar News, I've come up with a new name for the section: "WHAT were they thinking?!?" Variations might include: "What? Were they thinking?" or "What were they THINKING?!?"

 Eventually, the section could spin off into a game show similar to "What's My Line?" where contestants would guess the bone-headed thing(s) the attorney had done.

Perhaps, instead of the bar, potential attorneys should be tested on time and financial management.

Merry A. Kogut, Herron Island

Our editor is a bonehead some days
I am writing to correct a statement in the "In Memoriam" section of Bar News (July, p. 48) regarding Judge Bill Lewis. He was a colorful character, both on and off the bench. Your article states that he was a founding member of our law firm, which is also misnamed in the article. Bill Lewis was a long-time friend of Fred Smart, who retired from Lee Smart in the mid-80s. However, Bill Lewis was never associated with Lee Smart and was not a founding member of our firm. Your writer obviously cribbed his or her notes from The Seattle Times' article on Judge Lewis and did a subpar job of interpreting The Times' article. It stated that Fred Smart was a founding member of the Lee Smart firm, not Judge Lewis.

Thanks for your attention to this matter.

Dave Martin, Seattle

Back to table of contents >>