I had a long day today.  Reviewed 5,000 pages of deposition transcripts given by all sorts of doctors -- pathologists, radiologists, oncologists, nephrologists, pulmonologists ... Not a single word was useful! Imagine the fun. 

So here is a response to 写写's question -- No, as civil defense attorneys we don't get the morally challenging cases at all, those that make one's job less boring. 

However, it does not mean that we would never be torn between duty and conscience.  In fact, I had one of those moments not too long ago.  The plaintiff was an 85 year-old gentleman who had just been diagnosed with colon cancer.  Right after his diagnosis, his counsel filed a motion asking for an expedited trial ... and I had the guts to oppose it! 

There were five defendants in that case.  I was the only one who did not agree that this poor old man deserved a speedy trial.  You can imagine how evil I looked in Plaintiff's reply papers sent to everyone.  "All the other defendants managed to show some sympathy to a terribly sick elder plaintiff," Plaintiff said.  We had defense meetings every other week.  "All the other defendants" could have reminded me to be sympathetic too! It might be easier to jump out the windows than finish reading the reply.  

Then there came the oral argument.  I was too embarrased to argue the motion myself.  I sent a junior assoiate instead: "It would be good for you to experience what it is like being a defense attorney, how it feels to be attacked by your adversary AND slammed by the court." 

Underneath my faked concern for his professional growth was my real fear of having to read my mean brief in front of the judge.  If I could, I would have taken my name off the signature page altogether. 

So there it was, a moment of poor professional judgment. And to give you confidence in our judicial system, my opposition was denied. 

10 hours of transcript review on a sunny spring day, what a fun life! ---