I\u2019m not sure whether this is a FUBAR or just a run of the mill SNAFU. We expect that judges should behave in a judicial manner, and I shouldn\u2019t have to explain what that means. Google it if unclear. A Florida judge has been publicly reprimanded<\/a> for stating in open court that he was thinking about shooting lawyers appearing before him. That judge had also described the attorneys as \u201cKeystone cops\u201d and the \u201cApple Dumpling Gang.\u201d Again, if you don\u2019t know the references, Google them. The judge has apologized (duh) and recused himself from handling matters involving the appearing lawyers. He has also acknowledged that he needs to chill when there are contentious matters before him.\u00a0 Aren\u2019t most matters contentious? If not, they wouldn\u2019t be litigated.\u00a0<\/p>\n Some folks may consider this merely a SNAFU, but I think this is definitely a FUBAR. In the \u201cWhat were they thinking?\u201d aka the Chutzpah Department, disbarred California lawyer John Eastman is making a return engagement to the ATL news by signing on to help Penn law professor Amy Wax beat back her own tale of woe.\u00a0Wait, what? The disbarred Eastman is going to represent Wax? How can he? The California Bar pulled his ticket to ride. He can\u2019t even appear pro hac vice.\u00a0<\/p>\n And then there\u2019s Katie Zacharia, 47\u2019s new press secretary. who claims that she is a lawyer. She graduated from law school in 2011. However, any bar passage anywhere? \u00a0Jurisdiction, admission date and bar number, please. Turns out she failed the bar and is still referring to herself as a lawyer<\/a>. Snafu or FUBAR?\u00a0<\/p>\n What\u2019s in a name? In \u201cRomeo and Juliet,\u201d Shakespeare wrote that a \u201crose by any other name would smell as sweet.\u201d That may be true for roses, but what about for what our profession chooses to call, \u201cahem,\u201d hallucinations?\u00a0<\/p>\n Naturally AI is top of mind these days everywhere, as is that delightful term \u201cAI slop.\u201d And of course, there are always hallucinations, which can and do get lawyers in trouble with the bar.\u00a0I don\u2019t think that these should be called \u201challucinatons.\u201d That is really too polite a term. What you find in a brief or letter or any other documents citing nonexistent authority is not a hallucination, but, at the very least, a misrepresentation. A lie by any other term is still a lie. With the possibility of bar discipline, not to mention bench slaps of varying degrees and consequences, should we use the term \u201cFUBAR\u201d instead?\u00a0<\/p>\n And as if we needed yet another cringeworthy lawyer stunt that is definitely FUBAR material, what about Missouri Sen. Eric Schmitt, the former Missouri attorney general, who tried to gotcha former Special Counsel Jack Smith in a Judiciary Committee hearing last week?. Schmitt attempted to portray Smith as a liar\/perjurer when Schmitt asked Smith a question that puzzled Smith, about whether he had attended a Hawks game in Atlanta on a certain date. But Schmitt had confused the Atlanta Hawks with the Iowa Hawkeyes. Whoops! Now who looks stupid? Leave it to a woman senator, Amy Klobuchar, to clean up the mess.<\/p>\n \u00a0Schmitt also called Smith a \u201ctotal dirtbag.\u201d\u00a0 Who is the dirtbag here? Charming language for anyone to use or be described as. And who says that there\u2019s no civility left among lawyers? No wonder that we are held in such low regard, as we should be, given these kinds of antics. Call it what you will: SNAFU or FUBAR. There\u2019s probably a better expression for this kind of behavior. Suggestions welcomed.<\/p>\n Jill Switzer has been an active member of the State Bar of California for over 40 years. She remembers practicing law in a kinder, gentler time. She\u2019s had a diverse legal career, including stints as a deputy district attorney, a solo practice, and several senior in-house gigs. She now mediates full-time, which gives her the opportunity to see dinosaurs, millennials, and those in-between interact \u2014 it\u2019s not always civil. You can reach her by email at\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>oldladylawyer@gmail.com<\/em><\/strong><\/a>.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n \n The post Beware Of FUBARS<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n Have you noticed, or perhaps it\u2019s just me, that FUBARS tend to breed? If there is one FUBAR, more emerge. What\u2019s the difference between a SNAFU and a FUBAR?\u00a0Degrees of idiocy.\u00a0<\/p>\n So how is this for a FUBAR?\u00a0Tennessee tries to execute a female death row inmate<\/a>, Christa Pike, by lethal injection. After repeated failed attempts to kill her by that method (problems finding a vein and other mishaps by nonmedical staff at the prison), she lived and was rushed to the hospital. The hospital treated her and released her back to prison. Does anyone beside me see the FUBAR here? If the stated intent was to kill her, then why take her to the hospital? Is this an oxymoron, with the emphasis on moron? <\/p>\n I\u2019m not sure whether this is a FUBAR or just a run of the mill SNAFU. We expect that judges should behave in a judicial manner, and I shouldn\u2019t have to explain what that means. Google it if unclear. A Florida judge has been publicly reprimanded<\/a> for stating in open court that he was thinking about shooting lawyers appearing before him. That judge had also described the attorneys as \u201cKeystone cops\u201d and the \u201cApple Dumpling Gang.\u201d Again, if you don\u2019t know the references, Google them. The judge has apologized (duh) and recused himself from handling matters involving the appearing lawyers. He has also acknowledged that he needs to chill when there are contentious matters before him.\u00a0 Aren\u2019t most matters contentious? If not, they wouldn\u2019t be litigated.\u00a0<\/p>\n Some folks may consider this merely a SNAFU, but I think this is definitely a FUBAR. In the \u201cWhat were they thinking?\u201d aka the Chutzpah Department, disbarred California lawyer John Eastman is making a return engagement to the ATL news by signing on to help Penn law professor Amy Wax beat back her own tale of woe.\u00a0Wait, what? The disbarred Eastman is going to represent Wax? How can he? The California Bar pulled his ticket to ride. He can\u2019t even appear pro hac vice.\u00a0<\/p>\n And then there\u2019s Katie Zacharia, 47\u2019s new press secretary. who claims that she is a lawyer. She graduated from law school in 2011. However, any bar passage anywhere? \u00a0Jurisdiction, admission date and bar number, please. Turns out she failed the bar and is still referring to herself as a lawyer<\/a>. Snafu or FUBAR?\u00a0<\/p>\n What\u2019s in a name? In \u201cRomeo and Juliet,\u201d Shakespeare wrote that a \u201crose by any other name would smell as sweet.\u201d That may be true for roses, but what about for what our profession chooses to call, \u201cahem,\u201d hallucinations?\u00a0<\/p>\n Naturally AI is top of mind these days everywhere, as is that delightful term \u201cAI slop.\u201d And of course, there are always hallucinations, which can and do get lawyers in trouble with the bar.\u00a0I don\u2019t think that these should be called \u201challucinatons.\u201d That is really too polite a term. What you find in a brief or letter or any other documents citing nonexistent authority is not a hallucination, but, at the very least, a misrepresentation. A lie by any other term is still a lie. With the possibility of bar discipline, not to mention bench slaps of varying degrees and consequences, should we use the term \u201cFUBAR\u201d instead?\u00a0<\/p>\n And as if we needed yet another cringeworthy lawyer stunt that is definitely FUBAR material, what about Missouri Sen. Eric Schmitt, the former Missouri attorney general, who tried to gotcha former Special Counsel Jack Smith in a Judiciary Committee hearing last week?. Schmitt attempted to portray Smith as a liar\/perjurer when Schmitt asked Smith a question that puzzled Smith, about whether he had attended a Hawks game in Atlanta on a certain date. But Schmitt had confused the Atlanta Hawks with the Iowa Hawkeyes. Whoops! Now who looks stupid? Leave it to a woman senator, Amy Klobuchar, to clean up the mess.<\/p>\n \u00a0Schmitt also called Smith a \u201ctotal dirtbag.\u201d\u00a0 Who is the dirtbag here? Charming language for anyone to use or be described as. And who says that there\u2019s no civility left among lawyers? No wonder that we are held in such low regard, as we should be, given these kinds of antics. Call it what you will: SNAFU or FUBAR. There\u2019s probably a better expression for this kind of behavior. Suggestions welcomed.<\/p>\n Jill Switzer has been an active member of the State Bar of California for over 40 years. She remembers practicing law in a kinder, gentler time. She\u2019s had a diverse legal career, including stints as a deputy district attorney, a solo practice, and several senior in-house gigs. She now mediates full-time, which gives her the opportunity to see dinosaurs, millennials, and those in-between interact \u2014 it\u2019s not always civil. You can reach her by email at\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>[email\u00a0protected]<\/em><\/strong><\/a>.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Have you noticed, or perhaps it\u2019s just me, that FUBARS tend to breed? If there is one FUBAR, more emerge. What\u2019s the difference between a SNAFU and a FUBAR?\u00a0Degrees of idiocy.\u00a0 So how is this for a FUBAR?\u00a0Tennessee tries to execute a female death row inmate, Christa Pike, by lethal injection. After repeated failed attempts […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":165117,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-165116","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/165116","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=165116"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/165116\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/165117"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=165116"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=165116"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=165116"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/abovethelaw.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2022\/02\/GettyImages-1159025799-300x200.jpg\" "\\"\\"")
<\/figure>\n
\n