Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
Lawyers operate at the fulcrum of life’s upheavals. Failing to decide at crucial moments has consequences that reverberate far beyond the courtroom.
To be truly effective, we must reclaim our role as ‘counselors at law’—a phrase more prevalent fifty years ago.
Our presence at jury verdicts, during catastrophes, and missed opportunities demands constant vigilance; the truth is, everything can change in an instant.
Consider the jury’s verdict: after months of preparation, the outcome is sealed in the split second their decision is spoken. Miss a crucial objection? The chance vanishes and cannot be undone—again, in an instant.
Navigating complex legal puzzles rarely follows a straight path. One case morphs into three others. If we cannot adapt to the shifting contours of law and conflict, we will falter. The unprepared lawyer risks migraines—and malpractice.
Large firms thrive on shared insight; partners are rewarded for collaborative problem-solving. Solo practitioners, by contrast, make bold strides, championing cases without committee approval. Both have essential roles.
Clarence Darrow, whose autobiography reminds us that “the earth…is only a speck of mud floating in the endless sky,” illustrates that impact does not require a crowd.
When I began 35 years ago, legal research meant hefty bills—hundreds of dollars per hour on WestLaw. Today, cases appear online moments after publication. The right answer, previously hidden, is now found in an instant.
AI shouldn’t be feared. It’s a tool—an extraordinary one—that reveals what we need at lightning speed, provided we know how to wield it.
As a child, I asked my father about the meaning of “The Practice of Law.” His response was immediate: ‘We can’t know it all. We have to keep learning—or do something else.’
Historical Turning Points
Brown v. Board of Education (1954): After years of advocacy, the Supreme Court’s decision ended school segregation in a single ruling.
Miranda v. Arizona (1966): Years of argument culminated in a split-second judgment, creating the ‘Miranda warning’ and reshaping criminal procedure.
Eisenhower Matrix: President Eisenhower taught us to distinguish between urgent and important; missing a vital objection—or delaying a motion—can change the trajectory of a case.
D-Day Decision: Eisenhower—counter to Churchill’s advice—gambling everything, changed world history with a single, high-stakes call.
Closing reflection
The legal profession is the intersection of history and urgency. Every day brings moments demanding immediate decision, counsel, and action. To hesitate is to invite consequences—sometimes, in a fateful instant.•
__________
Roy Graham is a criminal and family lawyer in Bloomington. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.