<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: October 4 roundup	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2010/10/october-4-roundup/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2010/10/october-4-roundup/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 13:00:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Jack Olson		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2010/10/october-4-roundup/comment-page-1/#comment-103199</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jack Olson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 15:07:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=19530#comment-103199</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Several of the bill collectors quoted in the article said that the only way to meet their collections quotas and make a living was to violate collections laws.  They regretted this but they felt that personal necessity outweighed public law.  In view of the heavy burden of undischargeable debt with which new lawyers now start their careers, can we reasonably expect of them greater honesty than the much-criticized established lawyers they&#039;re competing against?  Or will they, under that financial pressure, find it even easier than the previous generation of lawyers to rationalize dishonesty such as padded bills and barratry?  If so, then the public reputation of the legal profession, now at rock bottom, will drill through the rock.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Several of the bill collectors quoted in the article said that the only way to meet their collections quotas and make a living was to violate collections laws.  They regretted this but they felt that personal necessity outweighed public law.  In view of the heavy burden of undischargeable debt with which new lawyers now start their careers, can we reasonably expect of them greater honesty than the much-criticized established lawyers they&#8217;re competing against?  Or will they, under that financial pressure, find it even easier than the previous generation of lawyers to rationalize dishonesty such as padded bills and barratry?  If so, then the public reputation of the legal profession, now at rock bottom, will drill through the rock.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Advice Goddess Blog		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2010/10/october-4-roundup/comment-page-1/#comment-103189</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Advice Goddess Blog]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 13:26:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=19530#comment-103189</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&lt;strong&gt;OJ Simpson: The Evidence That Wasn&#039;t Presented...&lt;/strong&gt;

OJ didn&#039;t get off because Johnny Cochran was *that* brilliant but because Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden were *that* incompetent......]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>OJ Simpson: The Evidence That Wasn&#8217;t Presented&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>OJ didn&#8217;t get off because Johnny Cochran was *that* brilliant but because Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden were *that* incompetent&#8230;&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
