Five for Friday #86

Welcome to the 86th #fiveforfriday!

Before I get to my 86-related story, I have a question: have you seen the weekend’s weather report??  Folks, I’ve blogged often on issues related to lawyer assistance and lawyers helping lawyers.  This weekend, help yourself.  Get outside!!  Yesterday I drove 302 from Barre to Wells River.  The early foliage is fantastic!  Not to mention, there is a TON of stuff going on around Vermont this weekend, literally something for everyone. For instance:

Find something!

Now, back to the Quiz #86.

86 is the end of a trilogy that includes 75, 78, me, my dad, and the Boston Red Sox.

I’m superstitious.  Especially when it comes to sports.  When the Steelers play a big game, I sit when they’re on offense and I stand when they’re on defense.  Same with the Sox: chair when they’re up, pacing when they’re in the field.  Just last year I brought to Goodwill a bunch of perfectly good Steelers gear that I’d worn during a game that they lost.  Big playoff win for one of my favorite teams? On the day of the next playoff game I’ll eat the exact same food as I had on the day of the win.

So many rules, many of them much more detached from reality complicated than the ones I’ve admitted too.

But my simplest rule is “don’t call Dad until the game is over.”

Flashback: October 25, 1986.  Game 6. Boston Red Sox at New York Mets.  Red Sox up 3 games to 2.

The game was tied 3-3 after 9.   In the top of the 10th, Dave Henderson hit a solo home run and Marty Barret doubled to drive in Wade Boggs.  Going into the bottom of the inning, the Sox led 5-3 and their Win Probability was 92%.  In other words, throughout the history of baseball, teams in the Sox’ position – up by 2 going into the bottom of the last – had gone on to win 92% of the time.

I was a sophomore at BC, a young, dumb, and broke (college) kid.  During the commercial break after the top of the 10th, I called my dad. He was watching back in South Burlington.  I said “Dad, we’re going to win the World Series!!!”

Boston’s Win Probability rose to 99% after Calvin Schiraldi retired the first 2 Mets.  Then,  a bunch of bad stuff happened, including this.  The Red Sox lost the game and, two nights later, lost the World Series.

It was my fault.  Because I called my dad. I truly believe – and maybe only sports fans will understand – that my call to my Dad affected the mojo.   It wasn’t until 2004 that I felt some sense of relief.  Still, the call haunts me.  So much so that I nearly passed out when, just a few weeks ago, my dad texted “looks good” to my brother and I DURING a Sox-Yankees game.

Dad, if you’re reading, remember the rule!

Onto the quiz!

Rules

  • None.  Open book, open search engine, text-a-friend.
  • Exception:  Question 5.  We try to play that one honest.
  • Unless stated otherwise, the Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct apply
  • Team entries welcome, creative team names even more welcome.
  • E-mail answers to michael.kennedy@vermont.gov
  • I’ll post the answers & Honor Roll on Monday
  • Please don’t use the “comment” feature to post your answers
  • Please consider sharing the quiz with friends & colleagues
  • Share on social media.  Hashtag it – #fiveforfriday

Question 1

With respect to legal ethics, which involves a different set of rules than the others?

  • A.  Net dividends
  • B.  Screening
  • C.  Overdraft Notification
  • D.  Three-Way Reconciliation

Question 2

If an attorney calls me with an inquiry and my response includes use of the word “imputed,” what did the attorney most likely call to discuss?

  • A.   The advertising rules
  • B.   Trust account management
  • C.   A potential conflict of interest
  • D.  A client unable to make informed decisions due to an impairment

Question 3

With respect to legal ethics, which of the following is most often associated with the provision of “unbundled” legal services?

  • A.   Limited representation agreements
  • B.   Reasonable precautions in the electronic storage & transmission of client data
  • C.   Trust account management
  • D.  The rule prohibiting communication with a represented party

Question 4

Today I’m presenting a CLE at a conference in North Conway, NH.  The topic is “legal ethics in the tripartite relationship.”  The audience will consist of lawyers who practice:

  • A.   Family law
  • B.   Real Estate Law
  • C.   Tax Law
  • D.   Insurance Defense

Question 5

Regular readers know that I’m big on Rule 1.1: the rule that requires lawyers to provide competent representation.  So, today, Question 5 involves competence.

Today’s answer is a color. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to identify the color.  Here’s the clue.

  • I am a color.
  • In one of the most competent witness examinations of all-time, Attorney Vincent Gambino asked witness Mona Lisa Vito about me.
  • Specifically, noting that both the 1963 Pontiac Tempest and 1964 Buick Sklyark were made by GM, Gambino asked Ms. Vito whether both models were available in me.
  • Ms. Vito testified “They were!”

WHAT COLOR AM I?

the-quiz

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s