Getting 'Round Tuit'—Learning How to Avoid Procrastination
Procrastination is a powerful example of the power of feeling over thought, the triumph of the drive to avoid emotional discomfort over the intellect's recognition that some task must be attended to in a timely fashion.
June 04, 2019 at 11:06 AM
5 minute read
We all know procrastination is our enemy. As lawyers, it is doubly dangerous because it is contrary to our ethical obligation to diligently represent our clients. Representation is diligent if it is thorough and done in a timely fashion. Yet many of us fail in this objective, to the point that some clients take their frustration with our inaction to the Statewide Grievance Committee, where we would find ourselves among other similarly situated indolent brothers and sisters of the bar. Diligence violations, often coupled with communications lapses, are among the most common types of cases that come before the committee.
Procrastination is a powerful example of the power of feeling over thought; the triumph of the drive to avoid emotional discomfort over the intellect's recognition that some task must be attended to in a timely fashion. It is tortuous and self-destructive, and puzzling to those who do not suffer from its spell. It plagues most of us, myself included, at one time or another. But for us lawyers, failure to manage our work can have consequences far more unpleasant than the task we are dodging.
So why do we put the files we don't want to deal with in a pile, thinking we will do something when we get 'a Round Tuit'? We all know the Round Tuit is never coming, so there in the pile the file will fester and rot. The end will probably not be pretty, and it may come with a close encounter with bar regulators.
Before putting the file in the Round Tuit pile, consider why you want to put it there in the first place. Current research shows procrastination is not a time management issue, but an emotional management issue. Procrastination is opting for momentary relief from the stress of an impending unpleasant task by distracting yourself with an activity that offers the immediate gratification of a pleasurable experience, such as another game of virtual solitaire or cleaning out your sock drawer. This dilatory behavior gives us momentary relief from whatever discomfort is attached to the dreaded task.
In the face of temptation to add to the Round Tuit pile, it may be more productive instead to sit with the situation and take some time to focus on the problem with the task at hand. There are some common barriers to progress—fear, resentment, intimidation or some other negative reaction associated with the file.
For lawyers, there are a few likely possibilities—dislike of the client, the task, or the overall case. If it's a client call you are avoiding, keep in mind that no client ever complained about getting too much information from his or her lawyer. If there is an underlying problem such as an outstanding bill, resolving the underlying problem is much more fair to you than letting resentment impede your effort, exposing you to angry phone calls or a grievance complaint about work not done. If you have to give the client bad news, process your own feelings first. Plan your delivery, then pick up the phone and get the call over with. The news is not going to improve with time, and you will feel a lot better for having gotten the job done.
If you're intimidated by the task, just start working, maybe with the easy part. A helpful mantra for me in these situations is “Don't let the perfect stand in the way of the good.” Show up to the task, give it your best effort, get it completed and chances are your work will be fine—and more importantly, it will be done.
If the case is the problem, maybe it's time to level with the client. Our clients deserve to be told the truth; it's our job to give them our objective and independent legal advice. Maybe the case looked more attractive when you agreed to take it. If the discovery process has not been kind, it may be better to have a heart-to-heart with the client and come up with a long-term strategy to deal with the problem. If it boils down to irreconcilable differences, better for you to withdraw sooner rather than later, when the client's interests could be prejudiced.
Overall, a few minutes of discomfort is preferable to months of resentment and the effort it takes to ignore that file in the Round Tuit pile, with that sinking feeling in the pit of your stomach.
Finally, the last file you want to put in the Round Tuit pile is a grievance against you. You may be angry, insulted, offended or frightened that someone has filed a grievance against you. You may fear being labeled as an imperfect lawyer. Failure to answer alone can be grounds for a probable cause finding, even if the underlying complaint is frivolous—maybe even illegible and incomprehensible. If the grievance was sent to you, no matter how meritless you believe it to be, you need to answer it. Use a lifeline—phone a friend immediately and ask for help. Blow off some steam, then get your answer out.
Face it, you're never going to get a Round Tuit. It is out gallivanting with the unicorns. Don't pay the price of waiting.
Patricia King is a former chief disciplinary counsel for Connecticut, now with Geraghty & Bonnano in New London. She can be reached at [email protected].
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllADVANCE Act Offers Conn. Opportunity to Enhance Carbon-Free Energy and Improve Reliability With Advanced Nuclear Technologies
Trending Stories
- 1Public Notices/Calendars
- 2Wednesday Newspaper
- 3Decision of the Day: Qui Tam Relators Do Not Plausibly Claim Firm Avoided Tax Obligations Through Visa Applications, Circuit Finds
- 4Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-116
- 5Big Law Firms Sheppard Mullin, Morgan Lewis and Baker Botts Add Partners in Houston
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250