Paris day 3: going to class

Can I ever be on time for anything?  Well, we could have if we’d ignored the delightful petite dejeuner awaiting us downstairs in the breakfast nook.  But we don’t.  Then we underestimate the walking time and thus arrive at the seminar midway through Jack Sheridan’s speech.   We would have been even later if we had stopped at all of the patisseries and boulangeries along the way.  He does employment cases and I haven’t heard him speak before.  He’s talking about a method to demonstrate emotional damages in whistleblower cases.  I like the way he does it with a rating scale.  The problem I would have doing this in a PI case, is jury bias.  In his cases, the client is seen as the hero taking on the big corporation.  In PI cases, the plaintiff starts off being viewed as the threat to community by even bringing a lawsuit.  Any questions?  No one raises their hand.  I ask one.  Almost get an answer  but not really.


Paul Luvera goes next.  He refers us to book after book – I like his continual quest for the holy grail of how to try the best case.  He is just as good as always on the topic of jury communication and voir dire.  Lots of thoughts.  Lots of powerpoint slides.  I don’t wait until the end before asking questions. I am a pest.  I wanna know what he has to say.  He doesn’t mind my interruptions and answers most of them.  And then during break Lita answers the one he didn’t really address in depth.  She is quite inspiring and scary knowledgeable on jury issues.

Jan Eric Peterson and his wife Margie Peterson do a joint presentation on generational issues.  An interesting topic which raises more questions than solutions.   I make it about half way through before I have to get up and walk around. In looking at the generalized traits of all the groups, I appear to be more Millennial than Boomer.  My minimal attention span of course tops the list.  I ask a question near the end.  It isn’t answered.  Which is so apparent that someone else says it isn’t answered.    This is most likely now going to become a game with me so be forwarned.  I’m going to ask a question and keep track of who answers and who doesn’t.  So far Luvera is in the lead for answering most of them.

Vicky Vreeland is next on changing faces in jury pools.  I can’t be fair and neutral when I evaluate Vicky because I adore her too much.  But she’s fun and good and then we end.  Time for mange (eat in French).  I am tres eloquent!

Vicky takes Ed and I to a little bistro down the street and near her hotel.  We are in a little corner nook.   I get a nice salad, Ed gets cassoulet and Vicky gets a quiche and salad.  I’m a bit jealous of the quiche.  I should have ordered that.    We have a delightful time.  At one point, Vicky says that I seem a little vague.  I explain that it’s just that I’m not only listening to her, but behind her I’m watching the goings on within the restaurant.  For example – they have served about a dozen napoleons to various tables – must be one of the specialties.  Plus the coffee process, the various food platters, and all the hustle and bustle – I can’t miss a single detail.

We say au revoir to Vicky and head back to the hotel – but not before we go into a patisserie.  I get a palmier (looks like a palm leaf), Ed gets an almond croissant.  He is oohing and aahing and says it’s the best thing he’s ever eaten in his entire life.