Appellate Law

It turns out that at some firms, clothes DO make the man

By S. COTUS

The Usual Suspects point to this story in the ABA Journal.

Apparently Renee Brissette, a partner at [some law firm named] Manatt, Phelps & Phillips not only assigns work to the best dressed associates, but has no qualms about telling their clients, that their cases are staffed not on the basis of legal acumen, but rather whether their collars and cuffs match. 

Renee Brissette, a partner at [some law firm named] Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, told the newspaper that her law firm passed over a brilliant associate for a plum assignment because he had refused suggestions to improve his attire. Instead the job went to someone who was more professional looking. Brissette told the newspaper she wears Nanette Lepore suits, described as ?unmistakably feminine without being inappropriately flirty.?

Seriously folks, dressing for clients or court is one thing, but do you really need to tell the world that you select your associates on the basis of how they dress?  Some time ago I got a free DVD from the Men?s Wearhouse (which has the word ?swear? in it, which you can see by looking carefully.)  The narrator insisted that companies hire on the basis of, well, who has the best clothes from the Men?s Wearhouse.  Strangely, the only executive they could get to actually say this on the DVD were from places like the DeVry Institute. 

If  Renee Brissette wishes to clarify her remarks (or deny them) or explain why her firm assigns their clients' work on the basis of looks, I will prominently feature them here.  I can be emailed at scotusZZZ@gmail.com (remove the Zs).   

I should note that there are over 100 comments to the ABA?s story. Some people strangely believe that clothes are a form of ?non-verbal? communication. Some people claim that a) people don?t like lawyers (a complete lie); and b) the reason they don?t like lawyers (again, a lie) is because we don?t dress nice enough. Some people just spew hatred.   The problem is that because I can't see the way that they are dressed, I can't tell exactly how much hate they have.

Anyway, gotta work on my ?Supplemental Attire Letter? in which I explain that after I left court, I put on some nicer clothes, and point out that opposing counsel changed into a track suit according to the attached affidavits from six witnesses (one of whom is the former Miss Teen Kazakhstan).

I am not going to bother asking the dean of her law school (New York Law School) to comment on this, because I have get my hair done.  This way I can be appropriately flirty.

Full post as published by Appellate Law and Practice on February 05, 2008 (boomark / email).