Former 1L v. Soon-to-be Helicopter Parents
369 U.Va 68 (2020)
CALAMARO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which TONSETH, PICKETT, DESKINS, and LUEVANO, JJ. joins.
Before this court is a complaint filed by the Judge himself, who has seen fit to neither remove nor deny himself the distinct honor and opportunity to rule on this case. The complaint is novel in that it is filed against all PAs who have ever stood up in front of bright-eyed 1Ls and opened their mouths a single time, but the real targets of the complaint are the PAs who reserve a room and call it a “session” of any kind. This complaint is primarily for time-wasting, unnecessarily speaking too much, and foolery. Plaintiff sues for $10 billion dollars, since the Plaintiff cannot get that time back. Reasonable, one would think, given the amount of words that were said.
I. PAs waste our time, and that should be a first-degree crime.
Peer Advisors are the wonderful cheerleaders of the Law School. They truly are an enormous help to both the students and the School, and do it all for free.[1] And yet, I continue to marvel at the fact that, despite doing all of this for free, these PAs are under the impression that the things that come out of their mouths are 100% necessary. Not a single one of them during my 1L year ever turned down the opportunity to speak, even though they had less than nothing to say. Wonderful cheerleaders rarely make wonderful public speakers.
This level of time-wasting is so outrageous that it nears the level of intentionality. The cries of 1Ls, who try to stop their ears for want of silence, are continually drowned out by PAs who start their sentences with “And just to add to that,” or “Piggybacking off of that,” and, worst of all, “My experience was a little different, but...” Inevitably, they say nothing new and ultimately just tell the same story or say exactly the same thing as the other PAs. They do so while oblivious to the 1L cries and with a coldness in their heart that belies the outer sickly sweetness with which they coat their words with.[2]
There is a terrible horror that is felt by every 1L when they realize that, due to social pressure, they cannot simply get up and leave a PA meeting. These feelings of entrapment are often expressed in thoughts like, “Why am I listening to this twenty-five-year-old treat me like a high schooler even though I have more work experience?” But ultimately those thoughts give way to the cold release of acceptance.[3] One 2L recently said, “[I]t felt as though I was drowning in these pieces of advice that didn’t matter, spoken by someone who only wanted to hear the sound of his own voice. I am haunted to this day.”[4] Somehow, though, the PAs forget those feelings and simply forge ahead, wasting everyone else’s time in the process.
All of this is to say that forcing people to sit and listen to PAs “piggyback” off of one another should be a crime of the first-degree. Indeed, this court has previously looked at the filling of giant water bottles as a crime, and most recently (and erroneously in the opinion of this Justice) held that Airpods in one’s ears while walking down the hallways is a crime. Why not tackle problems that are truly worthy of the Court, such as suing PAs for talking too much, or petitioning the School for a Mandy Appreciation Day?[5] As such, I rule in the affirmative that these crimes of speaking too often are crimes worthy of capital punishment or at least social rejection.
II. Who do you think you are for speaking so much, fool?
For all PAs that waste time by telling unnecessary anecdotes, I have one question: Who do you think you are? Who do you think you are, that you would have the audacity—the audacity—to talk more than is necessary while standing in front of a classroom containing two-thirds of your section?[6] Do you know how much time you’ve wasted by wanting to get in that last anecdote, that one last story, that you think might be helpful to other people just because it seems interesting to you? I mean really? Did you really just open your mouth and say “and not to sound repetitive, but...”? What could you possibly have to add that two other people haven’t already said?
Do you really think that you are that interesting that you can belabor the same point that two other people have already made and not make your audience angry for doing so? The second you opened your mouth and said, “piggybacking off of that,” you’ve lost the room’s attention.[7] Perhaps Biblical training should be included in the PA handbook, or at least the verse in Proverbs that says, “Even a fool who keeps silent is considered wise; when he closes his lips, he is considered intelligent.”[8] Indeed, the only thing less important than a sentence that starts with word “piggybacking” is journal tryouts.
As such, I rule that PAs who talk too much are fools, and should pay me $10 billion dollars, which I will distribute in an equitable and fair manner to my fellow law students.[9] Furthermore, any PA that hits the same point that three other PAs have made already should be tried for treason, or, at the very least, socially rebuked in the form of “boos” from the crowd of 1Ls trying to escape the 11:00 a.m. meeting on a Friday. One should never abuse their bully pulpit to spew useless opinions, something this Court abhors and never does. Thus, the Court hopes that PAs will begin to speak less and looks forward to hearing that to be the case going forward.
LUK, C.J., dissenting, in which JUSTICE QUERNER joins.
Today, our esteemed Court forgets one of our most longstanding tenets, namely that “1Ls always lose.” This cannot be circumvented by skillful pleading or the joining of a Justice of this Court to the complaint. The harms at issue are harms done to 1Ls and, as such, we must treat this as case against 1Ls despite the eloquent tirade of Justice Calamaro. I respectfully dissent.
---
dac6jk@virginia.edu
cl3eh@virginia.edu
[1] The lifeblood of the academy is free labor. It is cheap, although, some say so, is its product.
[2] Much like BigLaw recruiters.
[3] Similar to the sensation of warmth your brain tricks you into having as your body freezes to death. In place. Still in the damn PA meeting.
[4] Quoted from the record and definitely not from the mind of the writer of this opinion.
[5] Mandy is a saint.
[6] Incidentally, those in attendance are the oblivious or weaker-willed two-thirds of a section, since the other third has already realized PAs have nothing to say that is life-changing or at least nothing they cannot hear second-hand.
[7] If any of you truly had it to begin with. *muffled Angry Birds sounds come from under the desk*
[8] Proverbs 17:28; See also, Fetty Wap 17:38 - Trap Queen (“Everybody hatin', we just call them fans, though”).
[9] This is simply dicta and not binding—I have no intention of distributing it.