PM
Sophie—
I can’t believe you’re disappointed in DG, or surprised. (Anger, I accept.) What did you expect him to do? He’s your boss, for Lord’s sake, at a firm that makes a lot of money and, not incidentally, pays you a bigger salary than anyone else I know. Matt won’t make as much as you until he’s 60, if then. Do you know how much a second-year associate architect makes?
As I recall, you always decided to do what your mother wanted “plus tard.” “Who knows,” you’d say, “I could be dead later and not have to do it.”
How about coming around the drama school Friday night and watching
The Real Thing
rehearsal? We can get a drink after. I’d like you to meet the director, Harry Mortensen. He’s third-year and very talented. Everyone wanted to work with him. He’s also dark and brooding and smart and witty. If you fell for him, he could just break your heart. Right up your alley, sweetie.
Love and kisses,
Maggie
TRAYNOR, HAND, WYZANSKI
222 CHURCH STREET
NEW SALEM, NARRAGANSETT 06555
(393) 876-5678
MEMORANDUM
Attorney Work Product
From:
Joe Salerno
To:
Sophie Diehl
RE:
Request from David
Date:
March 24, 1999
Attachments:
Sophie—
David has asked to borrow you for 5–15 hours a week for the next several months. He said it was an important case, and he wouldn’t ask unless it
was
important, would I mind? I don’t see why he put it to me as a request. We’re usually not so punctilious with each other. But do you mind?
I know you’ll get all your work for us done, and I won’t assign you a new case without first discussing it with you. I got the sense from David’s testiness that perhaps he didn’t have that kind of discussion with you. But a managing partner has to manage. I don’t envy him his job.
Love,
Joe
Matter of Durkheim
----
From: Sophie Diehl
To: David Greaves
cc: Hannah Smith
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 18:26:22
Subject: Matter of Durkheim
3/24/99 6:26 PM
David—
I’ll need help with the Durkheim divorce. Will you do it? Felix? I don’t think Fiona would want the job, but I may be wrong. What are the next steps?
Sophie
TRAYNOR, HAND, WYZANSKI
222 CHURCH STREET
NEW SALEM, NARRAGANSETT 06555
(393) 876-5678
MEMORANDUM
Attorney Work Product
From:
David Greaves
To:
Sophie Diehl
RE:
Matter of Durkheim: Attorney Assignment; Use of Email; Meeting
Date:
March 24, 1999
Attachments:
Hannah printed out your email. I’ll work with you on the Durkheim case. Felix is up to his ears in divorces at the moment, and, as you wrote, Fiona is not a good choice. It wouldn’t work well, a junior associate taking the lead over a junior partner. I’ll explain it to her.
We should meet this Friday to talk about the case. (I’ll be out of the office tomorrow.) What about 3 p.m. in my office? In the meantime, look over some of the separation agreements we have in the files. In addition to the Habermans’, I recommend the Colliers’, Jason and Rebecca Peele’s, the Crawfords’, and the Goldsteins’. And, most important, the Peele file, in its entirety. Kahn & Boyle were the attorneys for Jason Peele. They play by their own rules. You should know what you’re up against. They’re not good lawyers, only mean ones, but the latter often passes for the former.
In the future, please do not use email to discuss a case, no matter how insignificant the information you are conveying may strike you. I have thought about this a good deal; I am not simply being a Luddite. I recognize email’s uses, but I persist in thinking that most communications between attorneys and between attorneys and their clients should not be transmitted electronically. It’s too easy for email to be misdirected, forwarded, hacked into. There is always the risk that someone other than the designated recipient will read your email. I worry not only that confidentiality will be broken but that by using email, we are playingfast and loose with the lawyer-client
Sophie—
I can’t believe you’re disappointed in DG, or surprised. (Anger, I accept.) What did you expect him to do? He’s your boss, for Lord’s sake, at a firm that makes a lot of money and, not incidentally, pays you a bigger salary than anyone else I know. Matt won’t make as much as you until he’s 60, if then. Do you know how much a second-year associate architect makes?
As I recall, you always decided to do what your mother wanted “plus tard.” “Who knows,” you’d say, “I could be dead later and not have to do it.”
How about coming around the drama school Friday night and watching
The Real Thing
rehearsal? We can get a drink after. I’d like you to meet the director, Harry Mortensen. He’s third-year and very talented. Everyone wanted to work with him. He’s also dark and brooding and smart and witty. If you fell for him, he could just break your heart. Right up your alley, sweetie.
Love and kisses,
Maggie
TRAYNOR, HAND, WYZANSKI
222 CHURCH STREET
NEW SALEM, NARRAGANSETT 06555
(393) 876-5678
MEMORANDUM
Attorney Work Product
From:
Joe Salerno
To:
Sophie Diehl
RE:
Request from David
Date:
March 24, 1999
Attachments:
Sophie—
David has asked to borrow you for 5–15 hours a week for the next several months. He said it was an important case, and he wouldn’t ask unless it
was
important, would I mind? I don’t see why he put it to me as a request. We’re usually not so punctilious with each other. But do you mind?
I know you’ll get all your work for us done, and I won’t assign you a new case without first discussing it with you. I got the sense from David’s testiness that perhaps he didn’t have that kind of discussion with you. But a managing partner has to manage. I don’t envy him his job.
Love,
Joe
Matter of Durkheim
----
From: Sophie Diehl
To: David Greaves
cc: Hannah Smith
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 18:26:22
Subject: Matter of Durkheim
3/24/99 6:26 PM
David—
I’ll need help with the Durkheim divorce. Will you do it? Felix? I don’t think Fiona would want the job, but I may be wrong. What are the next steps?
Sophie
TRAYNOR, HAND, WYZANSKI
222 CHURCH STREET
NEW SALEM, NARRAGANSETT 06555
(393) 876-5678
MEMORANDUM
Attorney Work Product
From:
David Greaves
To:
Sophie Diehl
RE:
Matter of Durkheim: Attorney Assignment; Use of Email; Meeting
Date:
March 24, 1999
Attachments:
Hannah printed out your email. I’ll work with you on the Durkheim case. Felix is up to his ears in divorces at the moment, and, as you wrote, Fiona is not a good choice. It wouldn’t work well, a junior associate taking the lead over a junior partner. I’ll explain it to her.
We should meet this Friday to talk about the case. (I’ll be out of the office tomorrow.) What about 3 p.m. in my office? In the meantime, look over some of the separation agreements we have in the files. In addition to the Habermans’, I recommend the Colliers’, Jason and Rebecca Peele’s, the Crawfords’, and the Goldsteins’. And, most important, the Peele file, in its entirety. Kahn & Boyle were the attorneys for Jason Peele. They play by their own rules. You should know what you’re up against. They’re not good lawyers, only mean ones, but the latter often passes for the former.
In the future, please do not use email to discuss a case, no matter how insignificant the information you are conveying may strike you. I have thought about this a good deal; I am not simply being a Luddite. I recognize email’s uses, but I persist in thinking that most communications between attorneys and between attorneys and their clients should not be transmitted electronically. It’s too easy for email to be misdirected, forwarded, hacked into. There is always the risk that someone other than the designated recipient will read your email. I worry not only that confidentiality will be broken but that by using email, we are playingfast and loose with the lawyer-client
Similar Books
