I’m thinking of what the school lawyer would say tothis HS Principal once the law suit hits. Something along the line of “You’re a f***king retard who’s going to cost this school district a big chunk of change!” comes to mind as one appropriate response.
Do lawyers ever do this in real life?
Story is password protected. A synopsis/alternative link please.
I am a lawyer. The appropriate answer to your question is, IMO, “it depends.”
It will depend on whether I think such a beatdown would be constructive. Since I’m likely to have to work with the client (as a witness), breaking him may not be helpful.
But as to the story linked in the OP: I would be very unlikely to “reprimand” the principal. I’m not sure I understand what he did wrong, and the description of the student’s lawsuit sounds very, very frivolous. I’m wondering if this is just an opportunistic set of parents who think they can browbeat the school district into a quick settlement and make some cash.
A disruptive student is sent to the principal’s office, where he is given a choice: suspension for his behavior or join the “Narc Squad,” and help clear the school of drugs. The student refuses, and consequently is suspended. He sues for “emotional distress” and a potential lost scholarship, because some college recruiters were on campus one of the days he was suspended, so he didn’t get to talk to them about a scholarship.
So while I may have a discussion with the principal about his methods and tactics, I don’t think there’d be a beatdown.
Synopsis: kid puts a smartie up his nose as a joke. The principal calls him into his office and tells him he’ll be suspended if he doesn’t “go undercover” to catch other students doing drugs. Kid and parents refuse, so the student is suspended for ten days. Now they’re suing the principal. They also say that because of it, the student missed a meeting with some college recruiters.
A kid got ten days suspension for putting a smartie up his nose?
Was it a special smartie? Did it belong to the principal?
Mine does.
Actually, he pretended to put a Smartie up his nose. He was given Smarties as a reward for good academic performance. The prinicpal gave him the choice of either being suspended or join his “Narc Program”, even after his investigation corroporated the student’s claim it was just a Smartie.
I would say the schoolbarod is fuming mad at the principal right about now. I expect their lawyer will recommend they settle.
BTW - the ste wasn’t password protected for me. I just clicked on the link and there it was. How odd.
P.S…
I guess it’s a good thing I never got caught snorting Lick-'em-ade when I was 12. Who knows what kind of trouble I’d have caught!
Forget about this kid’s lawsuit. Can you imagine the kind of trouble the school system and the principal would be in if one of the shool’s “narcs” got injured or killed as a result of the program? Just a colossal lack of judgement.
IME&O it generally wouldn’t be the lawyer’s position to “discipline” the principal, but instead, the principal’s superiors - the school district - who is most likely the lawyer’s client. Now clients often do like their lawyers to do their dirty work for them, so it would be possible for the school board to instruct their lawyer to give the principal a smackdown.
I can imagine situations where a lawyer would speak very plainly to his client if the client’s actions were harming his legal position. But having said that - generally lawyers are beholden to whoever pays their bills (short of doing anything illegal or unethical). Few clients hire lawyers to be their mommies.
I had a friend who was going through a medium-ugly divorce. Her husband’s mother was being a real pain in the ass. Every time my friend agreed to a particular settlement, the mother-in-law would come back and ask for a little bit more. This happened several times, with my friend giving in each time. Finally, though, the husband’s lawyer said enough was enough, and basically told the MiL to pipe down, they’d gotten a good settlement and he wasn’t going to push for more. Not exactly a beat down, but not just doing what the client wanted either.
Did he not realise you’re meant to inject smarties?
FDF - from the situation you describe, it is unlikely that the MiL was the lawyer’s client. Just pointing out that the lawyer/client relationship implicates a whole bunch of things - not the least of which is who is paying the bills! 
QUESTION (theoritical): Could the principal be brought up on charges of extorsion, or coercion, or something similar?
The principal was abusing his authority to ask an innocent student to potentially jeopardize his own safety (an untrained minor as a narc?) or else be suspended (leaving a blemish on his school record that could affect college admission and miss a meeting with visiting recruiters).
Right. It’s even harder for in-house counsel. I need a pretty good reason to do that with my client: He’s my boss. 
But I’ve definitely given clients an earful under the right circumstances. “You’re a f***king retard who’s going to cost this school district a big chunk of change!” seems especially unlikely to accomplish anything.
As Campion says, in most cases the lawyer is going to either:
Hope for additional business from the scoldee. As the Kevin Spacey character in Big Kahuna says, you can’t talk to a guy like that and expect to keep the account.
Need cooperation from the scoldee in the case at hand. Bullying your own witness is a great way to lose a case.
Have substantial future contact with the scoldee. Even though the scoldee might not pay your bill or have the authority to take business to another firm, he or she might be your contact at the client.
That said, one of my favorite legal memories is sitting in a conference call while the managing partner of my firm went off on several high ranking bankers for about half an hour. They sat there and took it, too. I learned a lot from that encounter.
I don’t do it, but I have a co-worker who mocks and gives the private firm attorneys we work with a very hard time. When their clients come in (our actual shadowy client lives across the country) they come under fire if they annoy him too.
It’s not so much of a verbal beatdown but he can get extremely snarky. But he’s a very charming fellow-it’s absolutely sickening to see them caught between wanting to talk back + being affected by his charisma.
Sometimes when I think think the private firm lawyers are trying to push me around I just shut them down, though I don’t go out of my way to make them squirm like my friend does. We get away with this because we have what they want (money, and the authority to give it away), and not the other way around, so no matter how much it kills them, they’ll make nice and put up with whatever the govt dishes out (lawyers or program officials).
One of the big uncomfortable feelings I have about private practice is that I’d have to suck a lot more metaphorical dick whereas now I have the upper hand in all my dealings. Then again, they’re all 10X richer so I guess it works out.
I’ve never been present, but I’ve heard about some of the scoldings clients have gotten. We are, of course, counselors, and so we counsel. Sometimes we need to use pretty strong language. So there. (Someday I’ll have white hair and wrinkly skin and can get away with it, too. Now I just have to content myself with the occasional woodshedding of a witness.)
What do you think is so special about lawyers that they would behave any different from any other business services professional? Do you think an accounting would call their client a “fucking retard”? Or a management consultant (“dude…your B2B best practices reengineering paradigm is fucking retarded!”) No. They would be fired (unless perhaps they had such a close relationship with the client they were comfortible speaking casually and profanely).
I work with both accountants and lawyers, and (IMO) I think there is a somewhat different flavor to lawyer-cleint relationships vs accountant-client relationships, especially when there is a critical situation on the table that can be affected by personal behavior.