My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad



« Persuasive Writing for Lawyers | Main | Metadata Update »



How thick can an American Lawyer be?
In January 2010 US Attorney Carolyn Elefant read an article in the Law Society Gazette that clearly states "Rick Kordowski, who runs, told the Gazette..." from this Ms Elefant's addled brain changed the suffix letters from to .com and on the 28 January she put a 'Post' in her blog Myshingle.Com with her own 'spin' of defamatory content against a different website and it's author.- How can a supposedly internet wise Attorney who tells us she uploaded her own law firm's website in 1995 and states "which I handcoded myself" who is also responsible for Myshingle.Com website, since 2003, make such a 'basic' error?

Just over two months later on April 4, I sent Carolyn Elefant a email and the first line stated "I am the owner of "Solicitors from and it has come to my attention..." and signed it Brian R Gray. She is now aware of both websites and their prospective owners/Authors names. The email of April 4, made it clear she was making false allegations against me and my website (Brian Gray - Solicitors From Hell.Com).

On April 8, Ms Elefant sends me an email and I understand after four days of investigation with clear details in the Gazette and my email this 'internet wise' Attorney could not identify "" from ".com" or tell the difference between Rick Kordowski and Brian Gray.- I wrote a second email to Ms Elefant on April 9, telling her in no uncertain terms she was making false accusations and in the first paragraph made clear my name once more, which she already knew from previous email exchanges, but this was all to no avail as she could not see the problem.

Around April 24, Attorney Chuck Newton informed Ms Elefant about her horrendous mistake and what did she say in her 'Post Removal' "Despite the emails from Gray, I couldn't figure out my error..."- Now come on this is a US Attorney who is telling the www "I was a lawyer ahead of schedule..." and she comes up with the excuse "I was confused".-
What was her comment under her 'Post Removal'?
"I did not realize that I had made a mistake so I was loathe to apologize"
Doesn't that say it all?- Did anyone spot the apology????


'Solo by Choice' -or- 'Solo by Necessity'

Carolyn Elefant's gives the impression that her "Solo by Choice" was a decision she had made by her own volition. Not so, around 2002 Duncan & Allen, a D.C.-based energy law boutique, told her that she wasn't "partnership material" and gave her six months to find a new job. It appears she whinged "I know that I am a good lawyer. I was good enough for you to hire two years ago, and I'm just as good now. No matter what you think, I am a good lawyer and ... I will succeed at whatever I do". When six months passed and she still hadn't found any US law firm to employ her, Elefant decided to hang out her own shingle.

Well clearly it was not 'Solo by Choice' but 'Solo by Necessity' if she wanted to be a Lawyer, as no 'Big Law' firms in the US thought she was good enough to hold down a position as an Attorney in their establishments, she had to go it alone, I suppose that is the route most of these US Solo's have had to take when 'Big Law' kicks their arse out the door.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)



    How to Feed a Lawyer (and Other Irreverent Observations from the Legal Underground)

    Click on the book cover for details!

Search Trial Practice Tips