“Days will be long but the years will fly right by
We’ll never be as young as we are tonight
Baby, ain’t that right?”
~ Make It Sweet, Old Dominion
Welcome to #153.
Luke Perry died Monday. He was 1 birthday shy of 53.
If you don’t know Luke Perry, he was an actor. Countless outlets, including the New York Times, covered his death. For purposes of this column, and with no offense to younger legal professionals & law students who are Riverdale fans, Perry played Dylan McKay on Beverly Hills, 90210.
Until I heard that he’d died, I hadn’t thought of him in a long, long time. Still, the news struck me. Because Dylan McKay reminds me of Younger Me.
No matter how old you are, there was, is, or will be someone who reminds you of Younger You. Someone who makes Today You laugh at Younger You, while also making Today You realize that there’s no better time than now to create Future You.
That’s wellness. Let me explain.
I did my undergrad at UVM, then entered GW Law in 1990. Back then, FOX wasn’t available in Vermont. It was available in the DMV. One of Younger Me’s thrills in moving to D.C. was the ability to watch The Simpsons.
Correct. Younger Me arrived at law school eagerly awaiting access to a cartoon. What can Today Me say? That cartoon is still running.
Anyhow, 90210 debuted on FOX that fall. Thinking back, I’m not sure I liked it. But, I’m positive Younger Me was addicted to it.
Here’s where laughing at Younger Us comes in.
First, don’t we always laugh at our former selves?
Seriously mom! A comb over, disco collar, and sweater with bicyles on it?
Second, for those of you who watched 90210, what were we thinking? Seriously! Would you want your high school daughter hanging around with a guy who looked as old as Dylan? At least he was only 24 when the show opened. Andrea was 29! Steve was 26 and has WAY more hair in his current Wiki pic than he did on the show. It’s comical that we bought into the notion that they were high school students.
But maybe laughing at Younger Us isn’t a bad thing. Because laughing is good, and journeys down memory lane can be fantastic.
Prepping this post last night, Perry’s passing started me down a Google/YouTube/Prime-playlist rabbit hole of all things 90210 and the 90s. I loved the trip. I put some ribs on the grill, poured a Jack & Coke, and got lost in what used to be. It made me happy to revisit things that made Younger Me happy.
And that’s okay. No matter who your Luke Perry/Dylan McKay was, is, or will be, it will always be okay, every now and then, to go down the rabbit hole to Younger You. Try it. I guarantee that you’ll smile, if not laugh.
Smiling and laughing are wellness.
Which gets me to Future Us.
I’m not yet old enough to have had my Luke Perry die.
Because he could’ve been me.
And I’ve not yet taken a week off in March to go to spring training.
I’ve not yet learned to play piano or any of the guitar parts to Paradise City. Or visited Alaska.
I LOVE college football. Many years ago, my dad moved to a town in North Carolina that is within easy driving distance of several major college football schools.
I’ve not yet worked from his house in October, spending the autumn weekends driving to college football games.
Younger Me would be shocked at all I haven’t done. And Luke Perry is dead. There is zero chance that Younger Me would’ve bet on Dylan McKay dying before I did the things Younger Me resolved to do.
You are the same. There are many things that Younger You expected you to have done by now. And it’s not an age thing. Whether 26 or 86, Yesterday You might’ve resolved to do something that Today You is already putting off.
Those things are wellness.
As Old Dominion sings, “we’ll never be as young as we are tonight.” In other words, no matter how old you are today, you are tomorrow’s Younger You.
Do the things that Younger You wanted to do.
Do them today.
PS: for you OD fans, and from your emails I know many of you are, I love their music and I’m all about their No Shoes Nation vibe. So much so that Today Me resolves that Future Me will soon let the windshield frame the ocean while the radio is coast-to-coastin’. Alas, what Today Me wouldn’t give to let that surf side Santa Anna wind mess up the hair that Younger Me had as a 3L.
As one of my former players asked “where’d the flow go bro?”
Dude, that s(tuff) don’t just Snapback.
Onto the quiz!
- None. Open book, open search engine, text/phone/email-a-friend.
- Exception – but one that is loosely enforced – #5 isn’t open book. (“loosely enforced” = “aspirational”)
- 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@
- 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
- Please consider sharing the quiz on social media. Hashtag it – #fiveforfriday
This morning, Client shared information with Lawyer that caused Lawyer reasonably to believe that Client intends to commit suicide tonight. Lawyer wants to disclose Client’s intent to someone who can intervene. Under Vermont’s rules, Lawyer
- A. must not disclose client’s intent
- B. must disclose client’s intent
- C. must disclose client’s intent, unless client affirmatively told Lawyer not to
- D. may disclose client’s intent
If a lawyer is holding funds to which both a client and third person claim interests, the lawyer must:
- A. disburse the funds as directed by the client
- B. hold the funds until the dispute is resolved
- C. pay the funds into court
- D. withdraw from representing the client
Which is correct? A or B?
In an ex parte proceeding, a lawyer ____________ a duty to inform the tribunal of all material facts that will assist the tribunal to make an informed decision, even if the facts are adverse to the lawyer’s client.
- A. has.
- B. does not have.
Lawyer called me with an inquiry. I listened, then said “it’s okay as long as
- the client gives informed consent,
- the person doesn’t interfere with your professional judgment or relationship with your client, and,
- you do not share information with the person that is otherwise confidential and protected from disclosure by Rule 1.6.”
Given my response, what did Lawyer want to know if the person could do?
- A. retain Lawyer
- B. meet with Lawyer to share information helpful to the client’s matter
- C. pay Lawyer to represent the client
- D. None of the above
Judge Merrick Garland made headlines this week, and it had nothing to do with his nomination to the United States Supreme Court. Rather, it had to do with two topics near and dear to this blog, one of which is the duty of competence.
Judge Garland authored an appellate decision in which he noted that the trial lawyers for one of the parties had conducted an incredibly competent cross-examination. Throughout the opinion, Judge Garland compared the trial lawyers’ cross-examination to one conducted by a fictional lawyer who is also near & dear to this blog.
Name that fictional lawyer.