You'll love playing Lawsuit!^TM, a board game that lets you experience the thrill of courtroom drama as you hone your trial skills. Lawsuit!^TM was created by Tina Eskreis Nelson, an attorney and a mom, as a Father's Day gift for her husband, to teach their three children a little bit about what their dad (and mom) do as attorneys. Now you can give a Lawsuit!^TM for Father's Day, too (and we're not talking about a paternity action, either)!

Speaking of fun, while not technically a game, check out Law School in a Box. Forget about outrageous tuition, back-breaking casebooks and sadistic Socratic professors. In one portable metal container you'll find a paperback book summarizing the entire law school curriculum, flash card study aids, a comprehensive final examination, and your very own diploma, suitable for framing. Not accredited, but educational nonetheless . . . and very expeditious!

Finally, we present the U.S. Constitution Quiz Deck. Dazzle friends with your mastery of Supreme Court lore, prepare for your final exam, or take some time to goof off discretely in the office.

For your convenience, we've put together two games sets. There's the TBH Fun and Games Set, which includes all of the items described above. And because we're a husband-and-wife team with a soft spot for other entrepreneurial couples, we've created the TBH Family Law Set, which includes Law School in a Box and Lawsuit!^TM Buy the sets to save 10% off the price of the games if purchased separately.

So to celebrate Fathers' Day, from now until June 17, with every order over $50 you'll receive a free U.S. Constitution Quiz Deck. Dad will love it. Find out whether Father really does know best!

While reading the section entitled "The Main Thing Is to Keep the Main Thing the Main Thing," I started thinking about work/life balance and how "the main thing" may vary from person to person, and how work/life balance is often so poorly understood because the phrase suggests that there is a perfect balance between work and life that everyone should attain. That view is (in my mind) so fallacious as to be dangerous. I ran across two paragraphs in First Things First that address the issue beautifully:

We live our lives in terms of roles—not in the sense of role playing, but in the sense of authentic parts we've chosen to fill. We may have important roles at work, in the family, in the community, or in other areas of life. Roles represent responsibilities, relationships, and areas of contribution.

Much of our pain in life comes from the sense that we're succeeding in one role at the expense of other, possibly even more important roles. We may be doing great as vice-president of the company, but not doing well at all as a parent or spouse. We may be succeeding in meeting the needs of our clients, but failing to meet our own need for personal development and growth . . . Balance among roles does not simply mean you're spending time in each role, but that these roles work together for the accomplishment of your mission.

I hold that the mission statement that revolves around the person, not the roles that person seeks to fill, stands the greatest chance of success because the statement recognizes that a variety of attributes and skills will create the life that the person wants to live. The same is true, I believe, for career success. We bring our whole selves to work. As Judge Tuttle put it, "[S]ome specialized and highly developed techniques may be included, but [the professional's] mode of expression is given its deepest meaning by the personality of the practitioner. In a very real sense his professional service cannot be separate from his personal being. He has no goods to sell, no land to till. His only asset is himself."

Work/life balance is necessary to replenish the self and to keep the asset fresh. The balance supports the work. And so (as I continue to seek a different descriptor) work/life synergy renews and sustains the resource that accomplishes the work. Just as some of us need 6 hours of sleep a night and some need 9, the source of renewal will vary in quality and quantity from person to person. What's more, the synergy goes both ways: just as "life" facilitates "work," "work" may facilitate "life." A lawyer may carry out the duties of her work in part to teach her child of what it means to be a professional, or perhaps she may use her work to further her political beliefs. And quality and quantity will vary in this direction as well. What matters is the recognition that each part of a lawyer's life, each role that he chooses to assume, will either support or undermine his overall effectiveness in life—recognition that exists in concert with appropriate action. And that's why "work/life balance" and "work/life synergy" matter.

I challenge you today to consider what roles constitute your life. And then, search for the synergy among the roles that creates the whole. How can you strengthen your performance in each role in a way that will strengthen the whole of your life?

Julie Fleming Brown provides professional and personal coaching for lawyers on topics such as client and professional development, job searches, career transitions, and work/life balance. She is also certified to provide the DISC® assessment. Please visit http://www.LifeAtTheBar.com/ for more information and to arrange a complimentary coaching exploration session.

Two cartoons that capture the essence of Lawyer Dads:

©Stu Rees. All rights reserved.

Like these cartoons? Send them to friends, clients or colleagues on greeting cards. To order, visit The Billable Hour Card Store.

Martha Kimes' new book, Ivy Briefs: True Tales of a Neurotic Law Student, has been described as "a One L for the next generation." The Billable Hour Company is pleased to present am excerpt from this book, in which Kimes takes the reader on a journey that the ABA Journal called "sometimes snarky, always emotional and ultimately enjoyable." Plus, one lucky Billable Hour customer, chosen at random from those who make a purchase during the month of June, will receive a copy of the book!

The letter that arrived in the mail on that early December day was thin. More than thin. It was sickly, it was malnourished, it was positively anorexic. I knew at first glance what that meant. Good news from law school admissions offices does not come in anorexic envelopes. Good news comes in thick, heavy packages of impressive heft, packages that look like they've just feasted on filet mignon and chocolate soufflé, packages that scream out "We want you!" The thin envelopes? Those quietly whisper in your ear "You suck." You might as well just toss them into the trash, as there's no sense in torturing yourself with letters that are certain to begin with the overly polite "After a careful review of your application, we are sorry to inform you that..." and always finish with a nice version of "We've decided you're not worthy. But thanks for trying, and we do appreciate having received your $60 application fee." They only need one page to tell you that.

But I am a sucker for punishment, so I opened the anorexic letter. To my sheer and utter shock, the words on the crisp ivory page read "Congratulations. We are happy to welcome you into the Columbia Law School Class of 1997." Accepted. Not rejected. Accepted? To an Ivy League school? OH. MY. GOD. But what kind of law school sends acceptance letters in skinny envelopes? Are these people living in some sort of alternate reality where they don't understand the universal significance of the thin envelope? Or is this all some sort of cruel joke?

With shaking hands, I called my husband, Joe.

"I got in," I croaked.

"What?" he replied.

"Accepted not rejected got in Columbia early admission law school accepted they said yes Ivy League oh shit!!!!!!"

"What?" he asked. "Honey, slow down—I can't understand you."

I believe it was then that I started hyperventilating. "Columbia. Wheeze. Law school. Wheeze. Columbia Law School? Accepted? Wheeze. Early decision program? New York City? CAN'T BREATHE."

"Take a cleansing breath, Martha. Slowly. Breathe in and out."

"Why? Is that how they do it in the Ivy League? Wheeze. Are you trying to tell me that I don't even know how to breathe like the other fancy students there? You don't think I'm good enough? Wheeze wheeze. I mean, I know that I don't exactly come from a long line of Harvard-educated lawyers, but, my God, what kind of person are you? We're still newlyweds—the ink is barely dry on the marriage license. You're not allowed to be cruel yet. You're supposed to be supportive! Wheeze. Congratulatory! And instead you criticize? How dare you? Wheeeeeeze!"

Yeah, that was a harbinger of things to come.

Copyright © 2007 by Martha Kimes

To find out more about Kimes and her path to law school, click here to read the full excerpt on our website.

You guys over there, pair up into groups of three.
~Yogi Berra (1925 - )

People getting together to sue other people dates back to medieval England. Before then, I suppose—with legal access denied—angry mobs did what is expected of angry mobs. Remarkably, even today some groups avoid Rule 23 and opt for self-help.

In 1960 Chief Justice Earl Warren appointed an advisory committee to give some shape to the mush of contradictory rulings on when/how/why classes could be certified as such, and what they could accomplish. The net result was (1) making it easier to bring injunctive actions; and (2) clarifying a "class was a class" when its shared attributes were greater than those of its individual members. These pretty obvious fixes ushered in the age of class actions: an age we have yet to . . . and may never . . . emerge from.

Groucho never wanted to be a member of any club that would accept him as a member. But recognizing the inherent leverage in a class action suit, attorneys battle as much over class commonality as the alleged underlying tort. These actions have taken on something in the manner of populist, economic referendum: mostly-private initiatives significantly affecting the way business does business.

Not surprisingly, the internet has become a recruiting tool. Even my mediocre searching skill discloses scores of sites—most financed by law firms—the prime objective of which is to turn individual complaints into a million-member march on whatever by dispensing information on current suits, and soliciting instances of injury to evaluate potential for future actions. Classactionorg.com even purports to gives the "pros and cons" of class actions, though only the pros are listed. (One quick sidebar: the author of the small white paper evaluating pros and cons is listed as Professor George Mentz, JD, MBA, CWM, CPM, MFP, CAM, RFT, CTEP. The Professor's defense of using the internet to put together class actions seems closely linked to his profession of internet recruiting. And p.s: he's the registered owner of classactionorg.com. He does, however, list links to three other complaint sites, including myclassactionlawsuit.com. Which he also owns.)

Costs (drags) to the American economy, to innovation and initiative; the needs of the many (millions helped) versus the needs of the few (thousands hurt); the very role of the judiciary versus the legislature—all social, political and fiscal questions class actions continually bring into focus. Perhaps, as with any tool, there's no way to conclude all results are good. Or bad. And so refinements continue, as they do with every law, regulation, rule, court decision, abs braking system, pollution control, prescription drug recommendation/warning, commission-sale incentive, disclosure or disclaimer.

We Americans, after all, love to tinker.

Bob Pladek is the normally civil Special Sections Editor for New Jersey Lawyer. This article is reprinted with their permission, which wasn't overly begrudgingly given. Bob's views, thankfully, are entirely his own. Send a nice note to him at Robert.pladek@njlnews.com

To view Juris Comic, click here

I got some time
before I pass away
have a nice portfolio
and an IRA

A large nest egg as you might quess
it's recorded in my bequest, it's my will...

I've got so much money,
the relatives envy me
couldn't spend it in 2 lifetimes,
maybe three

I guess it's understood
why my family treats me so good, it's my will...

Instrumental

The kids treat me nice
call twice a day
I'm on the board of Directors
of the United Way

They're so kind and you ask why,
They can't wait until I die
For my will...

Just one of the hilarious songs on

If you've done work on real estate,
But lack of payment is your fate,
You may pursue redress by means
Of filing some mechanic's liens.
(Some building sites, it seems to me,
Though hubs of great activity,
Create more exercise for lawyers
Than for carpenters or sawyers.)

It's very crucial to comply
With all the precepts that apply;
Else your filing will be tossed,
And your lien may well be lost.
(Opposing counsel wracks his wits,
Picking statutory nits,
Endeavoring to demonstrate
That your lien should get the gate.)

Liens are statutory works,
With lots of complicated quirks,
And if these tests you do not pass,
The common law can't save your ass.

The law prescribes the service dates,
After which the lien abates
If proper service is not made
Or service proof is not displayed.

A lien can help you to get paid
For improvements you have made,
But if you don't take proper pains
Losses may supplant your gains.

A willfully inflated lien
Can put your claim in the latrine;
The Court's empowered to decide
That you must pay the other side!
(To add insult to injuries,
Also pay his lawyer's fees!)

With every Lien Law dictate met,
A "happy ending" stage is set;
To collect the funds the owner owes,
File an action to foreclose.

When, at last, your goal's achieved,
And money worries are relieved,
Thank the one who brought the thrill-
By paying your attorney's bill!

Fred C. Russcol, Esq. is Of Counsel to Castro & Remer, P.C. in White Plains, New York. This poem was originally printed in the Westchester Bar Journal and is reprinted with the permission of the Westchester County Bar Association.