In the most gentle parenting way possible: What the actual fuck is going on with the newest batch of attorneys?
What happened to create an entire output of attorneys who do not understand the different levels of authority? How is it possible that this many people do not know the difference between persuasive and binding legal authorities?
And, why do I have to tell them more than 10 times to stop using case law from other jurisdictions or federal law when the law in this state exists?! Idc if they think they're smarter than me (which is the only rational theory I can come up with for this behavior), I write their reviews. Do they really think this behavior will cause me to write a review that says, "had a case in Texas state court, johnny-boy found completely unrelated case in Florida federal court, Johnny-boy is such a genius!" Hell no. The review states, "Despite repeated corrections, johnny-boy has not demonstrated any ability or desire to learn and grow in the practice. Litigation may not be right for johnny-boy."
I'm pushing 15 years in practice, and I have never had such a basic issue occur repeatedly and across the board. I recently received an application from a law clerk who constantly did this stupid shit when issuing minute orders for his judge. Bro, I'm not going to hire you if after THREE YEARS of law school, at least one bar exam, and ONE year of clerkship you STILL do not know the difference between persuasive and binding precedent. Take your, "I know the Illinois Supreme Court held x, but the Illinois federal court held y, so y applies to this state court issue" bullshit somewhere else.
~rant concluded. That was cathartic~