Page 315 - WhyAsInY

soMe Case stuDies
for had to be described “with specificity.” The first hurdle seemed to be difficult, at least as far as this unseasoned lawyer was concerned.
It seemed to me that “probable” meant more probable than not. Thus, in my head at least, I was faced with one of those mathematical problems that my father would delight in when I was a kid. What were the odds, given the facts, that there would be a truck with a driver who was a conspirator and who was, in turn, teamed with two collectors who took that day? Would the odds be better than 50/50 as to any one of the meter men? As to every one of the meter men? Further, how do you identify quarters “with specificity”? Needless to say, I struggled to draft an affidavit that would work, the warrant was obtained, and the next day the arrests were on the front page of The New York Times (below the fold), the New York Post, and the New York Daily News. With the slightest bit of experience, I would have realized that virtually any judge would have issued the warrant and that virtually any court would have sus- tained the arrests, no matter how poorly the affidavit was drafted, but I was content, if not proud, and the general counsel of the Department of Investigation, who knew that he was next in line to be Commissioner of Marine and Aviation, promised to hire me after I graduated. Well, it was flattering, anyway.
I Wasn’t There
First semester of the third and final year came and went, with the pat- tern essentially intact. I did not attend as much as I should have,; I pressed hard when exam time came; and I nevertheless did pretty well, but I did nothing to lead the league.
In the second semester, however, in what I now consider to be a funny story, I came close to having a real problem. I took a course called Municipal Problems, which was given by Professor E. Allan Farnsworth (a Contracts professor of mine when I was a first-year), who was very smart, very involved with commercial law, and very robotic. I had
• 297 •