Around the water cooler: Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione sponsors legal institute

Each week Chicago Lawyer will highlight a different case or legal happening, and solicit your thoughts on the impact of it in the legal community.

Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione, a sponsor of Just the Beginning Foundation’s 2008 Summer Legal Institute, hosted a panel discussion June 20 for more than 40 high school juniors and seniors.

The panelists, which consisted of Brinks president Gary Ropkski; shareholder Nick de la Torre; and associates Julie Leichtman, Michelle Miller, and Rashad Morgan, introduced students to the field of intellectual property, shared memorable cases and answered students’ questions.

Morgan said the students were not afraid to ask questions and talk to the lawyers. They were very impressive, Morgan said. They even came with business cards that they handed out to lawyers they met.

Just the Beginning Foundation is a non-profit organization supporting students of color and traditionally underrepresented groups by providing free educational and mentoring programs to inspire at-risk students and increase diversity in the judiciary and legal profession.

The foundation was built on the contributions of African-Americans in the federal judiciary, and offers a series of pipeline programs aimed at keeping underrepresented students of all ages on a path towards a legal career.

Morgan said, “It’s a great program to explain to kids what kind of law our firm is involved in, open them to areas of law beyond those exposed on TV, and show these kids we do care about them.”

– Danielle Feinstein

Around the water cooler: Q & A with Sandra Frantzen

Each week we will pose these three questions to different lawyers in the legal community.

This week we talk with Sandra Frantzen, a shareholder at McAndrews, Held & Malloy, who has been practicing since 1999.

– What do you find the most interesting about your practice?

Patent lawyers are lucky because we are constantly learning about new technologies.  I have litigated cases involving ultrasonic toothbrushes, angioplasty catheters, rail car parts, printers, bone paste, and other technologies.  In one case, I got to learn how a lava lamp works. It’s a lot of fun. You always get a chance to challenge yourself.

– What makes a good lawyer?

There’s a tendency sometimes to “over-lawyer” things.  A good lawyer takes a business-focused and value-oriented approach to legal matters. He or she understands the client’s business and finds the most cost-effective and value-enhancing way to meet the client’s objectives.

– What is the biggest legal news right now, and what is its impact?

For me, two things. As a patent lawyer, the big news is the Supreme Court’s sudden interest in patent cases. In the past, like many courts, the Supreme Court seemed to avoid patent issues. However, in the last few years, the Supreme Court has changed the patent landscape quite a bit with rulings limiting the scope of patent owner’s rights; for example, making it easier to invalidate patents and harder to get an injunction. The Federal Circuit (which generally has jurisdiction over patent cases) has seemed to respond to this trend.  And even the Patent Office has tried to implement changes. As the public becomes more aware of patent rights, it’s a new world out there.

As an Arab American, I constantly hear about issues swirling around my community.  In fact, there has been a lot of news about immigration generally. Sometimes we forget that we are a nation of immigrants, but there has been a lot of progress. We are in a period in history where we have to strike a delicate balance between national security and the freedoms that make our country so great.  Justice Kennedy recently said that “[l]iberty and security can be reconciled; and in our system they are reconciled within the framework of the law.”  I believe that. And, as legal practitioners, we should work to ensure it.

Chicago Daily Law Bulletin Headlines - Thursday, July 24, 2008

High court applies 10-year limit to indemnity case
Bias claim bounced to trial court once more
House committee probes medically unfit truckers
Justices OK arrest of DUI suspect inside residence
Memo: ‘Good faith’ protects against torture charge
Motorsport boss wins lawsuit over tabloid story
U.S. judge says she told Moussaoui jury ‘they got it right’
Western guvs offer plan for emissions
Satellite radio companies agree to pay $19.7 million in penalties
Mass. House initially approves bill requiring laws be gender neutral
A police force now doubts terror focus
On second thought, court grants immunity
Paying doctors to ignore patients
Trial Notebook:

Building owner has no property right in non-conforming use of billboard
Case Summaries:

Municipalities – TIF funding

Drunken driving – control of vehicle
In The News:

In the law firms

In the bar associations

In Circuit Court

Around the water cooler: DLA Piper and Accenture’s partnership

Each week I will highlight a different case or legal happening, and solicit your thoughts on the impact of it in the legal community.

About 10 years ago Accenture and DLA Piper attorney David Mendelsohn began working together on the issue of Y2K.

That client-lawyer relationship blossomed over time and today DLA Piper and Accenture team up not only on legal matters, but also on projects to improve diversity through pipeline programs, and provide pro bono services.

“Both of the organizations have values that are in common,” said Christina Martini, hiring partner for DLA Piper’s Chicago office. “A lot of it is about giving back to the community, and a lot of it is about diversity.”

Both companies work together on a number of programs and projects.

For example, they participate in a project with Chicago Public Schools’ John Barry Elementary School to help improve the students’ literacy and vocabulary skills. Each fall attorneys from both organizations teach a semester-long program about the basics of constitutional law. There is also an annual literacy night where volunteers read to the students, and that occurs in tandem with a book drive. And in the spring they work together on a career-tutoring program to help the Barry students think about career interests early on.

“You have to reach out to students at all levels, and try to make a meaningful difference in their lives,” Martini said.

Accenture and DLA Piper also work together on a program called, “Accentuating the DLA Piper Summer Experience” It’s a summer associate program where a group of DLA Piper summer associates get to spend two weeks at Accenture learning about what an inside counsel does.

Last year, five summer associates participated. This year six participated, and visited the Chicago and Reston, Va. Accenture offices for two weeks on a rotation basis, said Joel Stern, Accenture’s director of legal services, Americas.

This program has a number of benefits including exposing summer associates to inside counsel, giving them additional mentors, and helping them create a relationship with Accenture that may benefit them when they someday work at DLA Piper, Stern said.

Many of the law students who participated went back to their law school excited about what they experienced, and excited about Accenture and DLA Piper, he said.

Accenture gets to not only experience high-quality, cost-effective legal support with DLA Piper, but also experiences a partnership that allows them to try to make a difference in people’s lives, he said.

“We have been able to take a normal attorney-client relationship and extend it to the corporate citizenship area,” Stern said. “It continues to grow to this day. It is not only a partnership, but also a lot of fun … The more we talk about it the more these messages will get out and once again that will make a difference. We want other companies to copy us and we are looking at what other companies are doing as well.”

“I think it would be fair to say that the personal relationships that exist are much more meaningful,” Mendelsohn said. “and much more personal than ever would be the case if we would not work on these projects together.”

Around the water cooler: Lawyer endows IP speaker fund

Each week I will highlight a different case or legal happening, and solicit your thoughts on the impact of it in the legal community.

Welsh & Katz founding partner A. Sidney Katz endowed a new intellectual property law speaker fund at The George Washington University Law School called The A. Sidney Katz Intellectual Property Law Speaker Fund.

The law school plans to host at least four speakers each year, and is contemplating also hosting lectures of interest to law school students pursuing a career in intellectual property law. All of the events will take place at the university’s campus in Washington, D.C.

“I think it’s a way of keeping abreast of the changes in intellectual property law, and from people who are in the know,” Katz said. “There are a number of legislative proposals to revise the patent laws in the United States pending in Congress. I would expect those issues will be the subject of discussion also. It could help even our legislators get a handle on what the best reform should be for patents.

“Intellectual property is really become more and more important, I think, strategically for corporate America. There have been a number of recent and major developments in intellectual property.”

Katz received his law degree from the school in 1966 and serves on the Dean’s Intellectual Property Advisory Board. He’s also endowed the A. Sidney Katz Admissions and Financial Aid Reception Center in 2003, and the A. Sidney Katz Archway in 2006, which connects the University Yard to 20^th Street, between G and H Streets, on the school’s campus.

“When I went to George Washington in the 1960s, I think they had the most prominent patent law department in the country,” he said. “And I still think, in my view, that it ranks at the top of all the law schools with respect to particularly patent law. Because that’s my profession, I’ve stayed in touch with them.”

Husch Blackwell Sanders announced in June its intent to combine with Welsh & Katz.

Around the water cooler: Lawyer joining council

Each week I will highlight a different case or legal happening, and solicit your thoughts on the impact of it in the legal community.

Illinois State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias recently appointed Anita Ponder to the Women’s Affairs Council.

The goals of the council include making recommendations to the Illinois State Treasurer regarding initiatives, policies and programs that will have a tangible, positive impact on the female community in Illinois.

Ponder, a partner in Drinker Biddle & Reath’s government and regulatory affairs group, said some of her responsibilities in the council include advising the treasurer’s office on broad community trends, upcoming events, potential partnerships and outreach opportunities. The council will also help the office develop programs, and connect with the community.

“I think this council will help the treasurer have an open dialogue with women throughout the state,” she said, “and build positive relationships that can help him kind of initiate and implement significant programs and services that make a difference in the lives of women in Illinois.”

She said the council will meet quarterly, and members will receive information regarding activities and initiative that they can also pass along to others.

“I’m very honored to be part of a group that I think will be making a significant difference in how the treasurer’s office will affect change in the lives of women,” she said.

In the Woodpile: Addressing civility

By Shawn Wood
Seyfarth Shaw

Every other year, the Illinois State Bar Association holds its Allerton Conference, where judges and lawyers spend a few days at the Starved Rock Lodge in Utica to confront an issue impacting our profession.

The topics tackled in prior years have ranged from reforming the jury system to ”The Quest for Justice: Cost, Efficiency and Fairness for All.” In 2008, the Allerton Conference focused on ”Civility Initiatives for Civil Litigation.” When I heard this topic, I’ll confess, I was a little skeptical.

I appreciate that incivility remains a serious issue in our profession. It impacts our day-to-day lives, and, in extreme cases, has caused good lawyers to leave the practice of law.

It’s just that, I attended a civility seminar in DuPage County a few years ago, and I walked away with mixed feelings. The speakers inspired me, but when I attempted to strike up a dialogue with one during the reception, he didn’t show any sincere interest in solving ”the civility crisis.” He was more focused on stalking the waiter for more crab Rangoon.

The articles I’ve historically encountered regarding professionalism and civility often seem well-intentioned, but short on solutions. There’s also a tendency to blame incivility on the younger generation while waxing about the glory days of the profession.

Dishing out this discouraging, ”you missed out” message leaves new lawyers feeling like William Miller in ”Almost Famous,” when legendary rock critic Lester Bangs tells him ”you’re damn good, too bad you missed out on rock ‘n’ roll.”

So imagine my surprise when I attended this year’s Allerton Conference and the entire civility program steered clear of rose-colored nostalgia. In fact, to use a description befitting the professionalism emphasized throughout the conference, it totally rocked.

The speakers at this conference grabbed attendees by the lapels from the outset, providing numbers on the rates of depression, anxiety, hostility, paranoia, social alienation, isolation, alcoholism, divorce, and suicide among lawyers.

The conference then moved quickly to identifying core reasons for the problems, outlining solutions and exploring whose responsibility it is to implement those solutions.

One commentator explained that the very nature of civil litigation involves two lawyers (often Type A personalities) squaring off against one another under circumstances where there will be a winner and loser, and part of each lawyer’s job will be to capitalize on any possible error in judgment that the other side makes.

Others emphasized that client expectations often drive incivility, as the perception lingers that clients favor machismo in their lawyers and make their hiring decisions accordingly.

Another speaker cited the pressures to increase profits-per-partner in firms and outlined what he called ‘’strategic incivility,” positing the well-received theory that most lawyers are not inherently mean-spirited, but are driven to act as such because they believe incivility to be a profitable strategic tactic in litigation.

This lawyer proposed that the solution to the problem of strategic incivility lies in making it unprofitable through a new Illinois Supreme Court Rule, patterned after 28 U.S.C. 1927, sanctioning ”vexatious” conduct.

While further commentary during the conference suggested that the Illinois Supreme Court justices and members of its rules committee in attendance were not enamored with the idea of a new Supreme Court rule governing this issue, courts and local bar associations have made significant strides in identifying and reducing incivility in civil practice.

These programs have included the appointment of respected members of the bar who personally meet and work with attorneys or judges whose conduct fails to satisfy established standards of civility and professionalism.

Some of these measures have met with resistance when tried in other jurisdictions. In California and Arizona, for example, rules which required lawyers to ”abstain from all offensive personality” [insert own joke here] were amended following a 9th Circuit ruling which held this phrase to be unconstitutionally vague.

In other states, lawyers facing charges of incivility have sought to raise First Amendment defenses.

These types of challenges must be considered by any court or bar association seeking to strike a balance between remedying incivility and triggering other legal challenges.

The final point I learned at this conference was that the alleged ”loss of civility” within our profession is something that has been raised and debated over the last three decades.

From the ABA’s Stanley Commission Report (to address a perceived shift away from the principles of professionalism in the 1980s) to the Haynsworth Report (”to better inculcate a higher sense of professionalism among American Lawyers” in the 1990s), every new generation has encountered the same jibe from prior generations who insisted that standards of professionalism were declining.

This provided me with a new, optimistic perspective, because if this perceived decline in civility has been raised for the last 30 years, at least the current leaders are working harder than ever to do something about it.

I accordingly left the seminar with my faith in our profession restored. Or, in Lester Bangs’ parlance, I realized I hadn’t missed out on rock ‘n’ roll after all.

Practical Matters: What makes a good mediator

By David M. Heilmann
Clausen Miller

”Look, you two need to come together, express your emotions, defuse the anger, and work on your ongoing relationship.”

Sounds like Dr. Phil, doesn’t it? Actually, these are a few of the reasons why, according to the American Bar Association, you mediate a case.

Expressing our emotions.

For some reason, I can’t picture myself lying on a couch as former Judge Don O’Connell asks, ”Tell me how you feel today. Are you angry at opposing counsel? Do you think he’s a bitter little man?”

And as for the ongoing relationship part, well, that’s out.

I’ll say, ”hi,” in the elevator and be friendly, but don’t expect dinner.

The ABA is not alone. There are fairly standard definitions of what the mediation process is to entail. In defining the role of the mediator, JAMS notes on its website that ”the mediator does not decide what is ‘fair’ or ‘right,’ does not assess blame nor render an opinion on the merits or chances of success if the case were litigated. Rather, the mediator acts as a catalyst between opposing interests, attempting to bring them together by defining issues and eliminating obstacles to communication, while moderating and guiding the process to avoid confrontation and ill will.”

Is that our expectation of the mediation process?

Is it just someone to facilitate communication? Or is it someone who has knowledge of the legal issues and will give an opinion on where he or she believes the weight of the evidences lies?

The ABA leans toward the former. ”Mediation doesn’t rely on specific points of law. People solve their own problems by looking to the future instead of finding fault or blame. In contrast, the courts make judgments based upon the law.”

If that’s the case, then why do we see so many former judges as mediators? The courts make rulings based upon the law.

Further, a judge is elected or appointed primarily because of his or her legal experience, not expertise in counseling, anger management skills, or the ability to promote loving and harmonious relationships.

As a matter of fact, one or two judges have been known to be downright crabby themselves.

Judge Gomberg yelled at me 20 years ago and I’m still not over it. But I digress.

The traditional definitions of mediation may not comport with what we, in practice, want and expect from a mediator. Many attorneys select mediators, including former judges, precisely because of their knowledge of the law and their ability to offer some legal insight into the issues.

Peter McCabe, a senior partner at Winston and Strawn, offered these thoughts.

”In selecting a mediator, I look for (1) a lawyer with actual experience trying cases involving the subject matter of the litigation; (2) a trial judge who has had many years of experience trying cases involving the subject matter of the litigation; or (3) a lawyer or layperson with substantial knowledge and experience of the particular industry in which the litigants find themselves.”

Key was the knowledge and experience with the subject matter. Why?

”I want someone who will have credibility while making the case to either my opponent or his client — or perhaps to my own client — that a particular settlement makes good business and litigation sense. If the mediator doesn’t fall into one of these categories, then I generally find that the mediation will be doomed from the start.”

Veteran trial attorney Robert Heyne of Tressler, Soderstrom, Maloney & Priess had similar sentiments. ”A mediator has to be prepared for discussions of the fact issues and the law. Then, through meetings with the parties, there comes a narrowing of the factual and legal issues and that suggests the value of the case.”

Again, more than facilitating communication, the preferred effort from the mediator was working on narrowing the legal issues.

One of my partners, Scott Ritchie, agreed.

”Every mediator should have a good command of the relevant law, be willing to devote the time necessary to learn the important facts creating the controversy, and then objectively explain the relative strengths and weaknesses of the merits of the case to each of the parties to direct the parties to resolution.”

Many mediators and attorneys will tell you that the most successful mediations are those where it is the attorneys who have worked in advance with their clients to put emotions aside and to have realistic expectations from the process.

”There is some point beyond which a client would not accept settlement, so the lawyers must help the client find that point of indifference and commit in advance to accepting any offer that is superior to that point or position, offered Robert Knuepfer, a senior partner at Baker & McKenzie.

”Going for everything inevitably leads to failure. Mediation is compromise, not a winner-take-all exercise.”

Unless of course you’re really, really angry and need that time on the mediation couch.

Pro Bono: The right to counsel

By Margaret C. Benson
Chicago Volunteer Legal Services

Happy birthday, America. You look great! Can you believe it’s been 232 years? It seems like only yesterday when our guys were sweating it out in Philly. Sure, you’ve had some growing pains, but, for the most part, it’s been a pretty good ride.

Normally, we’d sing the Happy Birthday song, but let’s celebrate your special day with Irving Berlin’s great ”God Bless America.” Not only is it a classic, but an immigrant, one of millions who have contributed to your greatness, wrote it.

Just ask founding father James Madison. He said, ”America was indebted to immigration for her settlement and prosperity. That part of America which had encouraged them most had advanced most rapidly in population, agriculture and the arts.”

Thomas Jefferson said, ”Our ancestors … possessed a right, which nature has given to all men, of departing from the country in which chance, not choice has placed them.”

Consider that: immigration as a right. That’s a very American concept. We Americans have always prided ourselves on spreading our gospels of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law around the world.

So, consider the young man seeking asylum from a repressive regime that wants to silence him for speaking out against the persecution of minorities. He believes in freedom of speech.

That’s American.

Consider the couple who emigrated here to find a better life for their young children. They want citizenship so that they can vote. How American is that?

And the adult children who want to bring their aging parents here so that they can comfort and support them in their remaining years. American family ideals, right?

Consider the immigrant who wants to flee an abusive marriage, but can’t because her home-grown husband threatens her with deportation. Protecting her and their children is the American thing to do.

And, finally, consider that America is a nation of laws, and that the protection of our laws and our legal system extends to everyone within our borders, including those here illegally.

People need attorneys to access the law. More importantly, our legal system uses attorneys to guarantee its protections.

That’s where you come in. Although the law gives non-U.S. citizen-immigrants the right to counsel, they have to find and hire attorneys on their own. That’s pretty hard to do with limited English skills and limited resources. It’s nearly impossible when you are sitting in a Homeland Security detention cell awaiting deportation.

Attorneys who are interested in handling pro bono cases for immigrants get compelling cases that help them acquire new legal skills or hone existing ones.

Want litigation? Asylum cases, which nearly always go to trial, provide invaluable practical litigation experience.

Or, would you prefer a different type of heart-tugging case? Represent a detained adult or juvenile fighting a deportation order, or a woman who qualifies for immigration benefits under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) because she’s been abused by a U.S. citizen or a permanent resident.

Not really a Perry Mason or Denny Crane type? Then help people complete and file their applications for lawful permanent residence or citizenship.

If you’d prefer to limit your pro bono work to non-immigration cases, don’t worry there’s plenty you can do. Newly arrived Americans are more likely to need legal assistance, and less likely to find it on their own. Thanks to sleazy landlords, cheating employers, illegal ”notario publicos,” and similar miscreants, Chicago’s immigrant community has plenty of need for pro bono attorneys.

Ethnic bar associations and neighborhood organizations can verify that. Amicus Poloniae, a Saturday-morning legal aid clinic on Milwaukee Avenue in the heart of Chicago’s Polish community, is always packed with Poles who need legal help. The Indo-American Bar Association hosts a Saturday afternoon clinic near Devon Avenue, where Indian, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi clients see volunteer attorneys for help with immigration, consumer, employment, and any number of garden-variety legal issues.

American law protects us all native-born and immigrants. So, whether you believe that our current immigration policy should be strictly enforced, or is a joke, whether you favor a wall or open borders, celebrate America’s birthday by representing an immigrant, pro bono.

It’s the red, white, and blue thing to do. Contact the National Immigrant Justice Center for asylum, immigration, and VAWA trainings and cases.

Contact Veronica Rodriguez at Chicago Volunteer Legal Services at (312) 332-1649 if you are interested in volunteering at Amicus Poloniae, the Indo-American Clinic, Asian Human Services Legal Clinic, or several other neighborhood clinics that serve primarily immigrant clientele.

Check out www.illinoisprobono.org to find other organizations that represent or offer legal services to immigrants.

3L and the City: Hire me!

By Maria Vasos
Chicago-Kent College of Law

I am a recent J.D. graduate with a certificate in criminal litigation and a lot of practical litigation experience through externships and clinics. If you are looking to hire a young trial attorney at a firm or government agency, e-mail mariavasos@gmail.com.

For this, my last column, I have decided to shamelessly hawk myself to the magazine’s readers in hopes that someone will offer me a permanent position. This should come as no surprise to those in tune with the realities of the job market these days.

For example, last month Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal laid off 37 lawyers, including six partners, four of counsel, and 27 associates — mostly in the areas of real estate and litigation. These, combined with its support staff layoffs, represented 7 percent of its 1,700-person workforce, in response to a falloff in work due to the economic decline.

New graduates not only have to compete with each other for the scarce decent availabilities left open in the bad economy, but they also have to compete against experienced attorneys who also find themselves in need of employment.

This especially does not bode well for new graduates, like myself, who are interested in hard-hit fields, like litigation.

It used to be that to get into the courtroom right away and gain valuable trial experience, young attorneys could join the state’s attorney’s or public defender’s offices for at least a few years to learn the ropes. With the county budget crisis still looming overhead like a dark storm cloud, this is no longer the case. Not only is there a hiring freeze, but actual assistant state’s attorneys and assistant public defenders are struggling and barely able to hold onto their jobs.

Earlier in the year, before the sales tax increase passed, there was talk of a 13 percent cutback in the criminal justice division, which would have resulted in the layoff of almost 200 assistant state’s attorneys and over 130 assistant public defenders, along with the closing of at least two suburban courthouses.

It is not just the poor, unstable economy that is making job searching difficult, it is also the increasing number of law students flooding the market. There are more graduating law students, in part because of the enrollment of hopeful students, and in part because universities are starting up more law schools. Since 1995 alone, the number of ABA-accredited law schools has increased 11 percent to 196.

There is a great Wall Street Journal online article from September 2007 entitled, ”Hard Case: Job Market Wanes for U.S. Lawyers.” It talks about how the legal market is not keeping up with general inflation and how the supply of lawyers is drowning the demand. It is a very sobering piece to those of us who are embarking on a legal career. I read and re-read this article regularly to give myself a reality check during my job search.

And graduating law students should be worried, because they have a huge burden of student-loan debt to pay that their predecessors did not have to worry about. Tuition rates at law schools have almost tripled the rate of inflation over the past 20 years.

The wsj.com story reported that, according to the ABA, 2006 graduates of public and private law schools had borrowed an average of $54,509 and $83,181, up 17 percent and 18.6 percent respectively.

Having gone to a private law school, I can say unequivocally that those numbers are low-balled compared with the actual numbers of the majority of my colleagues and myself.

Undoubtedly those figures take into account trust-fund babies who had their legal education handed to them on a silver platter, which skew the results. This also does not take into account undergraduate loan amounts that many students also have to shoulder upon graduation. Many students find themselves saddled with ”a mortgage” in student loans when the reality hits that only very few new lawyers will land a highly lucrative position.

I, too, have delusional hopes of getting my dream job, where I do exactly what makes me happy and get paid loads for doing it, but I always come to my senses shortly thereafter.

My most recent smelling-salt was the loan calculator feature during my online ”exit loan counseling” for my financial aid package. By inputting the total amount of all of your student loans, the calculator will determine how much you need to make in order to ”live comfortably.”

According to my numbers, the calculator said that I need to earn $173,000+ annually. This, of course, nauseated me to no end because that is a pipe dream if I ever saw one in my life. But I have made my peace with my studio apartment and cheap Asian-import car, which should help balance my expenses.

What stings now is being incessantly asked what job I have lined up. After giving my standard response that I’m focusing on the bar right now, for some reason people proceed to tell me about how their daughter/nephew/ neighbor was hired at [insert big firm here], but then turned it down to work at [insert other lucrative opportunity here], like somehow that bit of news would make me feel better about my own desperate situation.

So, please save me from any more exercises in self-deprecation and hire me. I am great, you’ll see.

Next Page »