Legal Life: From Federal Fumbles to Local Letdowns: The Trouble with Trust

You know what gets me thinking? Credibility. Not just the kind that government lawyers are hemorrhaging nationally (have you read The New York Times lately?), but also the everyday, garden-variety trust in the trenches of our local bar.

Let’s zoom out for a second. Once upon a time, DOJ lawyers could walk into any courtroom and the judge would basically take their word as gospel. This was called “the presumption of regularity.” It wasn’t something you saw on a motion for summary judgment, but it was the oil that kept the gears of the legal system moving smoothly. 

“Blind deference to the government? That is no longer a thing. Trust that has been earned over generations has been lost in weeks,” said federal Magistrate Judge Zia M. Faruqui not long ago.

It’s unsettling on a national stage. But you know where credibility really hits home? In the motion practice pile sitting right on my desk. Let’s talk about the humble extension request: Why is it that, when I ask a colleague why they need two extra weeks for discovery – especially when they’re not offering to waive all objections or a similar extension to discovery they plan to serve — suddenly it’s as if I’ve accused them of treason? “I just came onto the case a few days ago,” they’ll say, or, “My dog ate my interrogatories.”

I try, really I do, to be accommodating. A reasonable extension? Absolutely, life happens. But a fortnight for a set of requests that could be hammered out before lunch? That makes me raise my eyebrow – especially when it’s supposed to be your client’s responses, not yours.

Then, a funny thing happens: Instead of graciously accepting a slight compromise, my opposing counsel transforms into the Usain Bolt of litigation. Not only do their discovery responses hit my inbox at midnight, but suddenly I’m the proud owner of their entire catalogue of interrogatories, requests for production, and they’re asking my client to admit they kidnapped Lindbergh baby. Apparently, they’re not out of time after all.

Why does it matter? Well, just like in Washington, trust at the local level is hard-won and easily lost. Once a lawyer goes into production with excuses, gets caught in a contradiction, or acts a little too slick, my presumption switches from “regularity” to “routine skepticism.” That name sticks in my mental file, right alongside some in the Department of Justice, as someone who probably needs a little more verification and a lot less deference.

So, remember, the next time you ask for extra time, maybe skip the performance art and just be straight with opposing counsel. Because in the legal world, and certainly in San Diego, you never know who’s quietly updating their mental list of attorneys they trust… and those they don’t.

Stephanie S. Germani, Esq. practices landlord-tenant law and knows her cases may not make history like Lindbergh’s, but to her clients, they’re the trial of the century.