3 ms·

You can't actually be guaranteed to win by being in the right. You can be in the right and lose.

• nordsieck 8y ago
  >> Also, lawyers are not like Pokemon. You cannot beat the opposing team's lawyers by having more stronger lawyers. You can certainly lose by having bad lawyers, but you can only be guaranteed to win by being in the right. > You can't actually be guaranteed to win by being in the right. You can be in the right and lose. What he's obviously saying is that there is a seriously decreasing marginal benefit to more expensive (and presumably competent) lawyers. It's better to have competent lawyers and be right than have amazing lawyers and be wrong. Obviously there are shades of grey, nuisance lawsuits are a thing, etc.
  • james_s_tayler 8y ago
    Well his intention is clear. But stating you are guaranteed to win if you are in the right strikes me as naive at best and woefully neglectful of reality at worst. It's probably best stated like "lawyers are not _always_ like Pokemon". Sometimes they very definitely are.
    • geofft 8y ago
      Yeah, my phrasing was sloppy: you're not guaranteed to win whenever you're in the right. But being in the right is a precondition of being guaranteed to win (along with having competent lawyers, a competent judge, etc.).