Archive for July, 2006

What does a million dollar car look like?

Ok the Maybach Exelero is still a concept car at this point but if it is released is expected to go for a cool million. Who the hell would pay a million dollars for a car?

Maybach Exelero

Click Picture to Enlarge

What not to write when you don’t get the job

Ok the level of people’s intelligence out there never seizes to amaze me. Now this guy was turned down for a job so he decided to write a letter to the company, now you would think it would be saying things like “Thanks for consideration”, I appreciated the opportunity or something like that but no this guy instead writes this.

From: Chatman, Carliss

Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 11:42 AM

To: Rumbaugh, Holly; Dennis, Patrick; Lankau, Tim

Subject: FW: request to reconsider George Luce

This is a guy I interviewed last week. WTF?

—–Original Message—–

From: []

Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 11:25 AM

To: Johnson, Loreatha

Cc: Schick, Robert M.; Davidow, Jennifer; Harvin, David; Pipkin, Emily; Kornegay, Nancy; Mehta, Persis; Murphy, George; Hodge, Justin; Reeder, James; Chatman, Carliss; Held, Kenneth; Lawson, Corey; Powers, Jason; Omar, Amin

Subject: request to reconsider George Luce

Dear Loreatha,

I received your letter dated May 11, and I am extremely disappointed that Vinson & Elkins has chosen not to extend me an offer. I remain convinced that V&E is the right firm for me. While it is hard to quibble with the verdict of a panel of 14 people, I believe that a real mistake was made, and I ask that my application be reconsidered.

I assume that V&E’s chief objective in hiring new associates is to get the best people it can get. Please consider the fact that in law school, I earned the top score in my section on EVERY PAPER in both of my legal writing courses. (The grading was done anonymously.) My article was selected for publication in the Northwestern Law Review, which is one of the top law reviews in the country. Judge Amy St. Eve, a federal judge with whom I externed, will tell you that I was the best extern she ever had (and her externs were mostly cream-of-the-crop Northwestern students, many of whom went on to federal appellate clerkships). The Judge I work for now, as well as other people with whom I have worked, will tell you that I have unusual talent as a legal analyst. I suggest that before you conclude that I don’t measure up to V&E’s standards, you ask people with whom I have worked what they think about my work and my abilities. At risk of sounding arrogant, I submit that I would be a standout performer at V&E, even though V&E is an elite firm that can select from among the best candidates.

I sensed that some of my interviewers were uncomfortable with the fact that I am not committed to a specific substantive area of law. I would argue, however, that the tools that we bring to the table as lawyers are far more important than the direct, “relevant” experience we bring. “Practical” experience is no substitute for creative intelligence, intellectual sophistication, and pure tenacity. The career clerk in my judge’s chambers has 20+ years of experience, so she knows a lot of things that I don’t know. But she is not in my league as a legal analyst and writer. I have seen enough during my clerkship to say with confidence that I am capable of better work – far better work – than most of the “experienced” attorneys who practice before my judge.

As a judicial clerk, I have been deeply immersed in all sorts of cases at every phase of the litigation process. There are many procedural issues that are common across all different substantive areas of law. There are many connections and overlaps between the different substantive areas. Even within a given substantive area, every case is different, turning on its own facts. The relatively inexperienced associates who specialize in a particular area will have only seen a small part of the universe of possible issues that may arise in their area. Given these facts, I am highly skeptical that, say, a 3rd-year associate who has specialized in “oil and gas” is going to be light years ahead of me in that field. The hypothetical 3rd-year associate will certainly know a lot more than I know about the art and practice of lawyering. But it is highly doubtful that her substantive oil and gas knowledge (which of course exceeds mine) will give her a significant advantage over me when it comes time to analyze the next oil and gas case (which will no doubt involve issues that neither of us have seen before). I want to work on interesting, challenging cases, but I don’t believe it would be rational for me to arbitrarily limit myself to a specific substantive area of law at this point in my career. I’ll find my niche down the road. I would think that V&E would prefer that their new associates be open-minded enough to try different things.

I would also add that there are intangible factors to be considered. I left a lucrative job in my mid-thirties, working hard to score in the top 1% nationwide on the LSAT so I could go to an elite law school. (I was the oldest guy in my class.) When I was a computer programmer, I was a one-man consulting firm, saving my employer (the state of Louisiana) millions of dollars in costs and making the lives of thousands of people (the system’s users) easier. Often, I would go to bed at night, half dreaming, half awake, obsessing over a thorny problem that I encountered. When the creative inspiration would come in the morning, those were the greatest thrills of my life. I know what its like to work 80-hour weeks for months on end. I know what’s it like to be considered the expert of last resort – the guy they call in the middle of the night when the data gets corrupted and no one else can figure out what to do. I take my work SERIOUSLY and I take great pride in what I do. I would submit that these are the qualities that can make me a “franchise player” at V&E.

I recognize that the chance that you will reconsider and extend me an offer are very slim. (Lawyers tend to be extremely risk-averse and unwilling to do things differently than they’ve done before.) But please give this request some serious consideration. I suggest that you begin by talking with some of the folks who have worked with me.

Finally, if you are not willing to change your verdict on me, would you please do the favor of giving me some honest feedback about why you were not impressed enough with me to make an offer? Is it my age? (I’m 39, but I’m healthier than most 25-year-olds.) Is it that I’m losing my hair? (I am willing to undergo transplants!) Is it the fact that I wore a pink shirt to my interview? (My wife picked it out.) Is it the fact that I took the Louisiana bar exam before taking the Texas bar exam? (I took the Louisiana exam because I wanted to get licensed in my home state, and I wanted to get it out of the way first because I had to learn all that civil code stuff.) Is it because I have spent most of my life in Louisiana? (Houston is only a 3-hour car ride or a 40-minute plane ride from Baton Rouge.) Is it because I have a minor speech impediment (a “lacerated S”)? Is it because I am introverted? Do I come across as arrogant? Too timid? Is it because I’m not committed to a specific substantive area of litigation?

You judged me as a qualified candidate based on my paper credentials, as evidenced by your willingness to expend the resources to bring me in for an interview. I assure you that I am a much better lawyer than even my paper credentials suggest! Please give me another look. It would be a shame if V&E and me are deprived of a mutually profitable relationship because I failed to present myself well in person on May 8.


George Luce

Whoa umm can we say NUTZZZZ!!!!!

Online dating gone bad

This is absolutely hilarious and the story can be found here.

When Jdate Goes Bad

Here is the story:

6/4/2006 – Dinnertime

So Joanne meets Darren on, and they set up a date for June
4th at the China Grill in NYC. They go out to dinner and Joanne offers
to split the bill, but Darren insists on paying.

6/19/2006 – Evening

Darren leaves a message on Joanne’s home answering machine telling her
that since she didn’t want a second date that she should split the
of the dinner with him, and follows up with this email:


From: Darren Sherman < :
: < Cc: :
: < Date: Jun 20, 2006 9:32 AM Subject: Re: Darren To: Darren Sherman < : VM 1now.

6/20/2006 – 10:22 AM
After waiting an entire 19 minutes, Darren decides his argument would
be better served if he forwarded Joanne a snippet from his Amex bill:

From: Darren Sherman < : VM-02.WAV now.

6/20/2006 – 2:38 PM

After receiving this barrage of communications, Joanne decides to fire
off an email to Darren to end this once and for all:

: VM-03.WAV now.
6/20/2006 – 3:12 PM

After waiting a grueling 28 minutes, the stalker king calls Joanne’s
cellphone once again and leaves yet another voicemail. Apparently
feeling that the boss/summons method may not serve his demented needs,
Darren tells Joanne he just called the GM of the China Grill and asked
them to call her to split the bill. He reiterates the threat of a
summons, and continues on with his same demented harassment. “Put your
money where your mouth is. Do the right thing”. J You can listen to
this voicemail by listening to VM-04.WAV now.
6/20/2006 – 3:33 PM

Apparently Mr. SickAndTwisted did call the China Grill, as Joanne
found this voicemail on her cellphone. He obviously told the GM there
was a “discrepancy in the bill” and they “meant to split it”. You can
listen to it by listening to VM-05.WAV now.

This is where the events end. Joanne called back the China Grill and
they apologized for even getting involved and offered to buy her a
drink next time she’s in there.