This week we take a break from our normal conversations for the annual Christmas Light-Roast edition of the show. 

It seems like every year when I sit down to write these episodes I have the same thought: “What new is there possibly left to say about Christmas?”

So instead of meditating on the day itself, for 2024 I decided to focus my thoughts towards the future -well, a very short distance into the future.

The day after Christmas - at least in countries that don’t celebrate Boxing Day - isn’t widely discussed. 

But if you’ve ever woken up at 3am to put together a present or had to host a family dinner, then you know that no matter how well you plan, there’s always that small voice of worry. 

But sometimes when your plans veer off course, you end up finding the destination you arrived at was more beautiful than you could have planned in the first place. 

So for this week’s episode, hear how an unmade documentary, a controversial jazz album, and scheduling error led to the greatest Christmas special of all time, and why it still serves as a reminder that the simplest moments are the ones that truly make the season bright. 

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays from everyone at Legal Grounds.

-Mike

When discussing any task that was accomplishable but time-consuming, one of my old man’s goto phrases was, “Hell, you can stand on your head and gargle peanut butter for (insert amount of time), so you better get to it.”

It’s a phrase my son’s and I still use today, and while there is more jest than earnestness in its use, there are times in life - be they professional or personal - when we all have to gargle peanut butter.

And while in most professions, and hopefully all relationships, the goal is to get to a point where this ISN’T the case, when someone decides to become a trial attorney they are signing up for a job that guarantees there will be times when work cannot be ‘balanced’. 

But as my guest and I discussed this week, just because we know we’re going to have to “gargle peanut butter” at some point - say, when a major case goes to trial - that doesn’t mean we have to treat everything that crosses our desk like it’s a top-priority. 

As a former prosecutor and trial attorney whose firm just celebrated its 25th year in business, Mark Perkins shares how he had to learn these lessons the hard way. In his words, after powering through much of his career on adrenaline, he began to feel off. 

But the journey it would lead him on was filled with valuable lessons on kindness and the power of vulnerability when it comes to dealing with mental-health.

It was a wonderful and story-filled conversation that, if anything, has plenty of laughs. 

As always, enjoy the show.

Walking away from this week’s conversation I have a new theory:

If time-machines existed, a lot of attorneys would still be trying their first case. 

We’ve talked before about how perfectionism runs deep in the legal profession, but the concept of Anxious Advocacy as a root cause for this trait is something I hadn’t run across until preparing for this latest episode. 

It’s also the reason for my time-machine theory. 

No matter if you win or lose, as a trial attorney, you are always doing a post-mortem on a case. 

Why didn’t something work?

What can be done better?

What did we miss?

And while those are valuable questions to ask, all attorneys, but especially young attorneys, can get so worried about what they might do wrong that they suddenly believe they can’t do ANYTHING right.

And while these are my words, not her’s, I think Anxious Advocacy might best be described as a self-induced imposter syndrome. 

To talk about this and a whole lot more, I’m joined this week by Renée Pardo.

A practicing attorney with over 25 years of trial experience in both the public and private sectors, she has been an Assistant District Attorney in both Texas and New York.

And as of February 2024, she is also the founder of Renée Pardo Coaching which provides coaching for attorneys, particularly women, struggling with anxious advocacy, helping them to navigate new spaces and advocate for themselves.

We talk about the challenges (both old and new) faced by women in the law, Renée’s skeptical embrace of self-improvement models, and why lawyers in particular seem to fall for the illusion of control. 

Enjoy the Show

The line between zealous representation and being an obstinate ass is often said to be a fine-line to walk as attorneys. 

After all, if the OTHER side is playing hardball, the temptation to fight fire with MORE fire can almost seem like a responsibility. 

But as my guest today so eloquently puts it, “lawyers that fight over every issue do it because they don’t know the issues that actually matter.”

This week I was lucky to be joined by veteran trial attorney and founding partner of The Champion Firm, Darl Champion.

Consistently recognized in the National Trial Lawyers ‘Top 100’ in the State of Georgia, he has represented clients in every federal district court in Georgia, the Georgia Court of Appeals, Georgia Supreme Court, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, and numerous state and superior courts throughout Georgia.

In our conversation we discuss the slow erosion of civility on both sides of the docket, how lawyers of impact, be they defense or plaintiff, have more in common than not, and why more of us need to approach our cases with the mindset of problem solving, not winning.

As always, enjoy the show.
_________________
SHOWNOTES:

Mindset - Carol Dweck
The Slight Edge - Jeff Olson

There are few things more stressful as a trial attorney than the jury selection process. 

Even if you’re confident in your case, your arguments have been tested and refined, and every piece of evidence is on your side, picking jurors is a stark reminder that so much is out of your control. 

And because the ways in which all of us receive and retain information is changing, it’s up to attorneys to adapt the ways in which they approach jurors.

From the effects of polarization,the expectations around evidence, and generally shorter attention spans, there is so much to unpack about the way juries continue to evolve. 

Thankfully, I’m joined by Jury Consultant and Strategic Advisor, Dr. Christina Marinakis to help me do just that. 

With over 20 years of experience, Dr. Marinakis is the CEO and Founder of Immersion Legal which specialize in jury research, jury study, and applied practice in law and psychology. 
 
Dr. Marinakis has assisted trial counsel with jury selection and daily trial monitoring across the country on some of the most substantial cases of our time, including her assistance to the prosecution with jury selection in State of Minnesota v. Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd.

This is definitely a conversation for the trial attorneys out there, but anyone with a passing curiosity in jury-trials will enjoy this peek behind the curtain. 

Enjoy the show. 

For as ever present as it is, the Billable-Hour is still one of those topics on the Defense side of the Bar that is deemed somewhat taboo. 

Some of this, I believe, comes from a natural - though not at all helpful - competitive mentality. After all, the number of hours we bill is frequently worn as a ‘Badge of Honor’, and so why would we want to “share our secrets”?

But as my conversation today hopefully highlights, there is often a deeper set of reasons many Attorneys, myself included, come to loathe the billable-hour; the most treacherous of which is tying our INNER worth to our OUTER performance. 

This week I’m joined by Emily Logan Stedman, commercial-litigation Partner at Husch Blackwell. 

Most recently she is the creator and host of The Grace Period Podcast which aims to have honest conversations about striking a better balance, developing coping strategies, and destigmatizing mental health for stakeholders across the Legal Profession. 

Emily writes frequently and openly about her struggles and strategies when it comes to all-consuming billable-hour.

Our conversation this week aims to leave listeners with new tools to tackle the worst part of being a Defense attorney, while also reminding them that they’re not alone. 

Enjoy the show. 

Of the many many books I used to read to my sons, there are only a few that I could confidently recall, but a family favorite was (and remains) “Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day.”

No matter what age, it’s good to be reminded that some days are just going to suck, and in a lot of cases - just like Alexander - these reasons are completely out of control. 

At the end of the book, Alexander is able to go to bed, reassured by his mother that everyone is allowed to have bad days. 

But whereas Alexander isn’t going to have to face the same problems the next day, as attorneys we’re often faced with the same set of problems day after day, case after case. To be fair, it’s our job to solve problems, but when we’re unable to separate our self-worth from work-product we’re setting ourselves for a ride on the Doom-Loop.

Matt Cianflone returns to the show this week to discuss his latest article, “Shattering the Doom Loop”, which explores the causes, symptoms, warning signs, and solutions for pulling out of a professional and personal nose-dives alike. 

We talk about how quickly the line from adversary to enemy can become blurred by miscommunication, why the ways we think about ‘winning’ a case have become distorted, and how distanced-self-talk can help ground us in our lowest moments. 

Jokes about lawyers and technology are one of those things that tend to write themselves, but in my conversation this week with Karl Seelbach I walked away thinking about how the days of being a tech-averse profession may very well be coming to an end. 

A seasoned litigator, Karl is also the founder of SKRIBE AI, a software platform for capturing and analyzing legal testimony as an alternative to the traditional court reporting service. 

As someone who has taken more depositions than they could count, what Karl and his team are doing piqued my interest and I wanted to chat with him about how they’re navigating new legal frontiers while also acknowledging the potential for disruption.

We talk about everything from how low cost depositions can increase access the justice to what AI REALLY can and can’t do.

It was one of the most wide-ranging conversations we had so far on A.I., so give it a listen and enjoy the show. 

When it comes to watching any sort of legal drama, be it television or film, most - if not all - of the scenes that take place inside the courtroom focus on either the lawyers, the judge, or the witness. 

But when it comes to the jury, we tend to only see them during opening or closing remarks, and even then they almost always act more as a set-piece than a character. 

Now occasionally you get the shot of a jury reacting to the most sensational part of a case, but for the most part they tend to fade into the background - both literally and figuratively. 

But as my guest today is wise to point out, when it comes to actually trying a case the jury is perhaps the most scrutinized corner of any courtroom, which is why the best lawyers learn to build a relationship with them. 

Similar to how a stage actor builds a rapport with their audience, as attorneys we too have to recognize that even when we’re not speaking we can still be the center of someone’s attention. 

Anne Redcross Beehler is a litigation attorney who represents corporate and individual clients in a wide range of matters across California and New York.

With both civil and criminal experience under her belt, over the past decade Anne’s practice has increasingly focused on the real estate industry where she has represented tenants, landlords, and everyone in between

Anne is also a regular contributor to LAW360 and the Orange County Lawyer, and she has worked for the US Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York and clerked for the NY State Court of Appeals.

This week she sits down to talk about bullying in the law, why sometimes being underestimated can be your best asset, and why My Cousin Vinny is the top legal film of all time.  

__________________
SHOWNOTES

Information on ALIGHT

While I know there isn’t any science to back it up, somewhere in my 30’s I remember hearing the “Fact” that if you could do something for 30 days straight then - BOOM - it’s a habit. 

A sort of accelerated version of ‘practice makes perfect’. 

In reality, it’s often the spaces, people, and organizations we find ourselves immersed in that slowly but inevitably shape how we interact with the world.

But as my guest this week reminds listeners, when leaders experience major transitions, we need to remember that a lot of what we’ve learned no longer works. 

Joe Bogdan is the outgoing Chief of Enlisted Force Development for the United States Air Force, and founder of Waypoint Front Solutions. 

After 24 years of service he is retiring in September of 2024, but true to form, this transition is one Joe has been planning for a long time. 

This week he sits down with Mike to discuss what it looks like to have to give up some of the leadership-tools you’ve perfected for ones you never had to consider, why we need to see the small transitions is practice for the larger ones, and the danger of losing ourselves to our accomplishments. 

________________________

SHOWNOTES

• Contact Joe
• Joe's Reading List