« Warren Buffett's Five Rules For Success | Main | The Curse of the Devil Wears Prada »



this guy may have been at the top of his class but he's at the bottom of the heap when it comes to common sense.

Mike Driehorst

I dunno. Though his reasoning is way off -- and arrogant -- heck, he looks like a pretty good lawyer. Someone who would definitely ARGUE (over and over) your case for you, no matter what.

Kiersten Smith

clearly it was the pink shirt and male-pattern baldness that did him in. maybe he should wear a toupee to his next interview...


Hell, who can expect him to take no for an answer? He's not being a jerk, per se. He's simply trying again for a job he really wants.

I'd hire this guy as my lawyer any day, I think.

Maybe he had bad hygene or something. Who knows.


I am more intirgued as to how/why a qhaulity law firm would have this email getting out nad into the public?

I can tell you that if they have leaking emails regarding internal matters, I sure wouldn't hire them.

Mary Ladd

I'm sure he's stoked to know everyone's reading his begging longwinded argumentative pleas online.

Victoria Newcombe


law guy



"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."

Damnit George, it's V&E and I.



This poor guy. Whoever released this letter into the wild is a real jerk and, hey, George, idiots who lack any integrity like these joke lawyers or lawyer jokes YOU DON'T WANT TO WORK FOR ANYWAY.


Well, he has the outline of a good challenge buried here, but the tone -- among other things -- was greatly off.

Gennifer Rodgers

A quick google search for Chatman, Carliss...

From her blogger profile:
Carliss Chatman

* Age: 26
* Gender: female
* Astrological Sign: Gemini
* Zodiac Year:: Sheep
* Industry: Law
* Occupation: Lawyer
* Location: Houston : Texas : United States

About Me

I either have a strong opinion about something, or no opinion at all. I officially have the worst relationship experiences of anyone I know. I'm so sarcastic even I sometimes forget whether I was serious or not. In fact, I think most people and things that wish to be taken seriously are so misguided as to be not worth my actual honest contemplation. I've found that people prefer lies over the truth, and unfortunately I'm only capable of telling the truth or shutting up. I don't have the strength to hate, because most people who bother me are just inferior. I REALLY hate liars, and I'm obsessed with plotting revenge against people who lie to me.

Maybe she found out he lied to her?


wow, she sounds like a winner too. actually, she sounds like an idiot. poor george is probably smarter. he needs to tone it down a little, though. didn't he learn to edit in law school? how did he score so high on all those papers?


Give the guy some credit for persistence. I've dealt with plenty of wimpy lawyers before who seem afraid to flex their muscles when called upon. This letter reflects a lot of the qualities I would look for in hiring an attorney to represent me as client: Persistent, arrogant, condescending, nitpicky and loathe to accept defeat. I think he'll have very lucrative career


So, she doesn't have the strength to hate, but she hates liars? Hmm...


yikes for the lawer and yikes for the company. In this case everyone loses.

I agree that this letter, if real in any way, should not have been released. If I were "George Luce" and I found out, I'd be getting my OWN lawyer.


V&E is a very old firm in here in Houston, from back in the 1900's. I believe they do mostly defense work, and they have a certain image they like to project.

Maybe he did not fit the type.

Couldn't see how an ol' Cajun boy could hurt though.


anyone ever think that this was just bs and a hoax and wasn't true? the good news is peter, lots of people are reading your blog :)


"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."

Damnit George, it's V&E and I.


Not sure you're right. "The deprivation happened to us, to you and me." Things happened to "me," the accusative, not "I."

I think he's correct, though the sentence structre inverts the action.


I think the slurring would be the main reason, if it's true. Presentation is very important to these cocksuckers, even though they stick associates in caves for years and only later let them meet clients or visit a courtroom.


So this is what a gunner thinks of himself after he is turned down for a position...
I assume it was his personality that killed him in the interview if his grades and related work experience did not get him the job...


Obviously he doesn't work in PR.


"It would be a shame if V& E and I are deprived of a mutually profitable relationship." The whole sentence is wrong. First, it should be in the subjunctuve, exchanging the "are" for "were." Then, it needs to be pushed into a subjunctive conditional, i.e., "It would be a shame if V & E and I were to be deprived of a mutually profitable relationship." Simplifying this, "It would be a shame if WE (V & E and I) were to be deprived of a mutually profitable relationship." As additional explanation: "It would be a shame if I were to fail to call him; it would be a shame if he were to fail to call him. It would be a shame and if he and I were to fail to call him."


Come on, in this economy I can't but feel bad for the guy. You have no idea how hard it is to find a job- maybe he has no social skills, but social skills aren't exactly important for doc review.

I hope this guy gets an awesome job, and those assholes at Vinson shouldn't be forwarding this around. I feel for the guy, and those jerks probably didn't hire him because he was older.


You know, Someone should tell Ms. Chatman it is not a good idea to blast stuff like this in e-mail to people you can't trust (or period for that matter) without deleting some names or something. It would be funny if someone let some partners of this firm know about what was going on. I don't think I'd want Ms. Chatman working for me knowing that she can't keep her mouth shut or take measures to insure confidentiality.

Here are the e-mails (all at velaw.com):

rschick, sdavis (PARTNER), jdavidow, dharvin (PARTNER), epipkin, nkornegay, pmehta, grmurphy (PARTNER), jhodge, jreeder (PARTNER), cchatman (the e-mailer herself), kheld (PARTNER), clawson, jpowers, aomar. Then there are the folks that Ms. Chatman sent the e-mail to that most likely leaked it: hrumbaugh, pdennis, tlankau.

Ms. Chatman, If you are reading this... You chose the wrong people to trust. Next time take out names and such before you forward this around.

The comments to this entry are closed.