Acker + Associates P.C. Attorneys

Recently at a court hearing, I found myself facing off against three opposing attorneys.  I had brought the motion and the three attorneys were each taking turns trying to convince the judge to reject my argument.  The hearing had gone well and there was a pause.  It was my turn to respond to their weak defense and summarize my argument. 

I was reminded of my 8 year old son on the soccer field.  He had just dribbled through several defenders and into a clearing in front of the goal.  He was about to send the ball into the net, just as I was about to send the opposing parties back to their checkbooks.

The common factor that placed us both in a position to score was what happened off the pitch or outside of the courtroom--a concept that is not novel but often missing in our culture today.  Call it preparation, practice, or putting in the time.

Advances in technology have sped up life.  Letters have been replaced with email.  If email is not fast enough, there is texting.  Need an immediate answer to just about anything?  Do a Google search.  

We want instant gratification.  We expect to put that soccer ball in the net, just like FIFA 12.  When it bounces out of bounds we promptly respond that we are just not as naturally gifted as the Messis and Ronaldos of the world.  Bad grades in school?  Must not be smart.  Not advancing in your job?  Must not have been born with the right skill set.  An immediate answer to anything. 

Whether or not this reasoning is flawed, which I believe it is, the real problem lies with the message we are sending to ourselves and kids.  If the going gets tough, promptly give up. 

And after years of showering praises on our children and giving trophies to everyone on the team, the trend now is to provide perspective, let them know that they probably will not be president, pro baller, or rocket scientist...give up. 

I prefer to tell my kids, you can be or do anything you want, you just have to put in the time--advice that we could all use.

Comments Write Comment

With national elections heating up, a dispute is brewing over corporate campaign contributions.

The US Supreme Court will soon decide whether to allow the Attorney General of Montana to present argument to defend Montana's alleged refusal to comply with the Court's recent decision.  The decision, known as Citizens United, proclaims that a corporation's "free speech" rights trump limits on corporate campaign contributions. 

The Court argues that there is not sufficient evidence of corruption by corporations.  Montana's AG Steve Bullock says otherwise.  He argues that Montana's Corrupt Practices Act was implemented in 1912 to stop the undue influence in the sparsely populated state by large, outside corporations.  With recent public pressure, the Court may decide to revisit Citizens United, which could have ramifications across the country.

As a footnote, Steve is currently the frontrunner for governor of Montana and, although he will likely deny it, has his sights on the White House.  I know ... Steve and I began our legal careers together studying for the LSAT, among other college, after-class activities.

Comments Write Comment