Nikki was the best at lawyering.
She went to work to do some lawyering.
All the other lawyers were impressed by her lawyering skills.
She went to work to do some lawyering.
All the other lawyers were impressed by her lawyering skills.
by Rahc August 31, 2007
A zealous advocate acting as an agent for a client. The duty to the client is a fiduciary duty, the highest duty the law can impose. As a result of this duty a lawyer is required to obtain extensive knowledge of the law along with a high level of legal research and analysis skills. Another result of the fiduciary duty is that the attorney must act in the client's best interest regardless of personal interests or moral objections. The lawyer must use any tool given by the law to ensure the most attractive outcome for the client, including technicalities and vague language.
Lawyers are often criticized for the duties they are bound to uphold. Lawyers are also criticized for following poorly written laws that they are bound to follow, created by the legislative branch of government, which represents the people.
Lawyers are the people's most important defense against governmental and private intrusions on personal and property rights.
Lawyers knowledge of the law makes abuse of their duties especially dangerous to a society that relies on them.
Lawyers are the people's most important defense against governmental and private intrusions on personal and property rights.
Lawyers knowledge of the law makes abuse of their duties especially dangerous to a society that relies on them.
by J. Peterson March 23, 2006
A person who knows about the law, the loopholes in the law, and the Constitution (the Constitution has no loopholes), and will use any and all of the above to get you out of whatever stupid ass mess that your stupid ass got you into. You will love this person, until you pay them, when you will hate them, but at least you will be out of jail, unless you lost. A lawyer typically is an unhappy looking nerd typing on a blackberry, unless they work for the government, in which case they are harder to pinpoint.
Marc: Look at that lawyer, he scares me shitless with his knowledge of the law and the Constitution
Anne: What are you talking about, lawyers are just like us
Marc: What are you, on drugs?
Anne: (Hours later, after coming off high) Yes, I was. The cops arrested me for possession. I have to call my lawyer now
Anne: What are you talking about, lawyers are just like us
Marc: What are you, on drugs?
Anne: (Hours later, after coming off high) Yes, I was. The cops arrested me for possession. I have to call my lawyer now
by Arnold43214 October 6, 2007
by BlackRainmanlol August 18, 2008
Layman: what beautiful day!
Lawyer: NO! it's a horrible day filled with legal issues! But fear not, because I am reasonably convinced that we can fix the problem of the possible undermining of competition law in the UPC regime, that will manifest itself as the UPC not allowing competiton law defenses in 'hold up' standard essential patent cases as the basis for a denial of a preliminary injunction in a infringement case even if the proprietor has given an offer that is not nessecarily against the practice of giving licenses on FRAND (Fair Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory) terms, but none the less has rejected an offer from the alledged infringer that certainly does fall within the scope of FRAND terms, that is likely to appear because of the inherent risks of doctrinal isolation, by simply broadening the scope of the indispensability test, thus, not only allowing a competition law defense because the would-be licensee intends to offer a new product or service that the propritor does not provide and there is a potential consumer demand for this product or service, without there being any objectively justifiable reasons for the refusal and that the refusal must must entail an elimination of competition in a secondary market but also if the proprietor is dominant in the sector and the would be licensee gives an offer that falls within the scope of FRAND terms, even though it might be lower than what the proprietors usual fees are.
Layman: The who the where and the what now?
Lawyer: NO! it's a horrible day filled with legal issues! But fear not, because I am reasonably convinced that we can fix the problem of the possible undermining of competition law in the UPC regime, that will manifest itself as the UPC not allowing competiton law defenses in 'hold up' standard essential patent cases as the basis for a denial of a preliminary injunction in a infringement case even if the proprietor has given an offer that is not nessecarily against the practice of giving licenses on FRAND (Fair Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory) terms, but none the less has rejected an offer from the alledged infringer that certainly does fall within the scope of FRAND terms, that is likely to appear because of the inherent risks of doctrinal isolation, by simply broadening the scope of the indispensability test, thus, not only allowing a competition law defense because the would-be licensee intends to offer a new product or service that the propritor does not provide and there is a potential consumer demand for this product or service, without there being any objectively justifiable reasons for the refusal and that the refusal must must entail an elimination of competition in a secondary market but also if the proprietor is dominant in the sector and the would be licensee gives an offer that falls within the scope of FRAND terms, even though it might be lower than what the proprietors usual fees are.
Layman: The who the where and the what now?
by frey54 May 19, 2016