A lawyer's response to a court order was criticized for pretentious writing and inconsistencies in style. Judge Failla preferred direct communication from Mr. Feldman to assess his sincerity. The response had attempts at contrition and a plan to prevent future errors, but distractions due to flowery language and quotes diminished its effectiveness. It showcased the lawyer's awareness of mistakes but failed to convey genuine remorse, leaving the judge unconvinced.
Each citation, each argument, each procedural decision is a mark upon the clay, an indelible impression. [I]n the ancient libraries of Ashurbanipal, scribes carried their stylus as both tool and sacred trust-understanding that every mark upon clay would endure long beyond their mortal span.
The Court wants to hear directly from Mr. Feldman, so that it can give him the opportunity to prove [himself] worthy to carry the stylus once more in service of justice and truth.
The writing style in it differed markedly from the writing style in the letter he submitted to the Court three days later. Mr. Feldman's Response contains an extended quote from Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 and a metaphor about an ancient stylus.
Mr. Feldman's Response provided a nice template of explaining how it happened, expressing contrition, and proactively giving the judge a gameplan to avoid future mistakes.
Collection
[
|
...
]