Comments on: Why Do Lawyers Acquiesce In Their Clients’ Misconduct? – Part I http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/ Wed, 19 Jun 2013 08:36:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Why Do Lawyers Acquiesce in their Clients’ Misconduct? — Part IV « The Situationist http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-19109 Fri, 06 Aug 2010 14:34:42 +0000 http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-19109 [...] lawyers acquiesce in their clients’ frauds and other misconduct.  For background, please access Part I, Part II and Part III of this series.  In this segment, I will focus on the relationship between [...]

]]> By: Sample of Situationist Posts « http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-16155 Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:23:25 +0000 http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-16155 [...] Why Do Lawyers Acquiesce In Their Clients’ Misconduct? – Part I & Part II (by Sung Hui Kim) [...]

]]> By: Lawyers’ leadership down and dirty? http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-11303 Sun, 06 Jan 2008 22:41:27 +0000 http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-11303 [...] a great discussion of this check out Why Do Lawyers Acquiesce In Their Clients’ Misconduct? – Part I, Part II, Part III, by Sung Hui [...]

]]> By: Cheating Doesn’t Pay . . . So Why So Much of it? « The Situationist http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-6858 Fri, 14 Sep 2007 15:59:22 +0000 http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-6858 [...] Hui Kim’s related posts on why lawyers acquiesce in their client’s misconduct, click here and [...]

]]> By: Judging judges « Thought Capital http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-5688 Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:45:14 +0000 http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-5688 [...] (If that was fun, see also their look at jury selection, and why lawyers acquiesce to clients’ misconduct.) [...]

]]> By: Why Do Lawyers Acquiesce In Their Clients’ Misconduct? – Part II « The Situationist http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-503 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 02:54:44 +0000 http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-503 [...] by Sung Hui Kim on April 2nd, 2007 In my last posting, Part I of this series, I left off asserting that there are enormous psychological pressures for lawyers, [...]

]]> By: hewlet packard » Why Do Lawyers Acquiesce In Their Clients’ Misconduct? – Part I http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-453 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 21:07:37 +0000 http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-453 [...] unknown wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerpt… shown is that lawyers are often involved in the process that ultimately enables their clients to break the law. Take, for example, the recent scandal of the Hewlet-Packard spying fiasco: “On September 28, 2006, a visibly exhausted . … [...]

]]> By: mrnorwood http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-197 Tue, 20 Mar 2007 15:19:52 +0000 http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/why-do-lawyers-acquiesce-in-their-clients%e2%80%99-misconduct-%e2%80%93-part-i/#comment-197 But this scandal begs the question

I know this sounds terribly pedantic, but it doesn’t beg the question; it raises the question. To “beg the question” is to engage in circular logic that fails to answer the question posed.

]]>