@sozobe,
sozobe wrote:
Quote:I think that in Joe's example it has more to do with respect for one's client.
Whether it's for good or ill, the lawyer that shows up in flip-flops
is doing a disservice to her client. She is less likely to be effective.
I can assure u that litigants ofen take their cases
very, very seriously -- sometimes for years on end, as thay await
their day in court. If their attorney showed up wearing sandals,
his client 'd be alarmed n demoralized, wondering:
"
O, NO! What have I gotten myself into?"
It is not uncommon for litigants to fire their trial attorneys;
sometimes thay go thru several different ones.
A jury hearing argument of trial testimoney qua the disputed facts
is less likely to give earnest consideration,
or perhaps less likely even to pay much attention
to someone dressed for a beach picnic rather than someone who is well dressed.
A disgruntled client might think in terms of malpractice litigation
for any lawyer who lost after being so injudicious as to accept Cyclo 's advice.
sozobe wrote:
Quote:Clothing is a form of expression, every bit as much as voice,
the words you choose to use, the language you choose to use,
etc., etc. (the things I mention are a small fraction of total self-
expression modes). Whether she showed up in flip-flops or chose
to speak in, like, teenager up-speak? Ya know?, she made a choice
that made her less likely to represent her client effectively. Still her choice.
Your points r well taken.
David