There is No Economy in Justice

I spent nine hours in a courtroom; I am neither a lawyer, nor a criminal.

In the matter of an issue which I pursued, I sat in a courtroom for nine hours without food or drink (not counting the obligatory tap water). For one hour and 45 minutes of the nine hours I listened to the discussion of a concept. There were three different perspectives, sort of like the definitions for adequate, sufficient, and satisfactory. They have similar meanings yet they do not mean exactly the same thing. We traced the roots of its use in the legal system, as it is today, to 1792. Two reference books were used and an actual case and opinion from 2003 was also referenced. The court went in recess for some time. The judge returned and let the parties know that he decided that the original intention was in fact permissible.

I recall the judge stating something to the effect of, “there is no economy in justice,” and I agree, to an extent. If the wayward lawyer had simply done their homework, we would not have been trapped on a judicial island for nine hours, without food, and some semblance of economy of scope would have been reached. On the other hand, I was satisfied that the judge was committed to the case, and would spare no expense to find a judicial resolution.

Although I do something similar within the financial realm, when I am at work I move about as desired. I have food and beverage at regular intervals, as I choose, and I vet out the minutia of an issue, to this extent, only occasionally. This experience certainly generated appreciation for the work that goes into trying a case: the nuance and subtleties of language, human motivation and intention; the depth and breadth of knowledge of the individual lawyer; and then there is the concern and attentiveness to detail of the judge to get opposing teams to work from an agreed upon premise. Also, in appreciation of my everyday freedom, going forward, I am thankful to simply have my lawyer represent me in such matters.

The law can be “interesting,” however, unless you are a lawyer or studying to be a lawyer, most of us do not have the time or desire to learn the nuances of the law. For this reason we hire a lawyer that specializes in the law topic for which we have a case we wish to bring forward or that we wish to defend against. Likewise it is most prudent to confer with a lawyer when engaging in business activities, such as incorporation, copyrights, patents, and contracts. Conferring with a lawyer helps business owners to increase start-up speed, to avoid pitfalls, and to make informed decisions.

After first-hand experience of a long and arduous day in court, the upcoming eXponere Group roundtable concerning business rights will be a welcome distraction. There may not be economy in justice; however, there is certainly value in awareness to know when to engage a lawyer to fight for you and your business.