[AAA Arbitration, New York — August 30, 2013, 10:15 AM]
Nora had the forensic exhibits in binders that were color-coded with a methodology she had explained to the panel in four sentences and then deployed in twelve. The chair arbitrator — a retired federal judge who had run commercial arbitrations for a decade and had the specific economy of attention of someone who did not need things explained twice — had asked one question after the second exhibit and had not asked another.
Don was at the plaintiff's table. Harold was not in the room — Klein Legal was the claimant in its own right on the billing dispute, not a firm representing a client, which meant the room geometry was inverted from Don's usual position. He had spent three years running strategy from behind his clients. Running strategy from the claimant's chair was a different quality of attention. His concerns were his own.
The exhibit was clear. Nora's forensic certification had established: the "Authorization confirmed" clause in the Darby internal memo — the clause that changed the document from a routine compliance check to evidence of external authorization — had been added in June 2013. The document's stated date was July 2012. The metadata was specific and unambiguous. The physical document comparison had matched the digital record. The forensic path was clean from the original exhibit through the certification filing.
Nora set down the third exhibit folder.
She closed her notebook.
The gesture was small and exact. Not performance. The specific economy of a person who has completed a task correctly and is noting the completion before moving to the next thing.
Darby's counsel was Nigel Nesbitt.
Don had known this from the scheduling conference three weeks earlier and had spent approximately eight seconds processing the fact before filing it under: this is his job and he is doing it; the back-channel relationship has not ended; it has acquired new context.
Nesbitt stood when the panel indicated he could proceed. He was in the specific mode Don had never seen him occupy before: not administrative liaison, not font-war adversary in the corridor, but litigant's counsel at an arbitration table. He was excellent at it. The precision that had characterized everything about his administrative conduct — the mug ritual, the Section 14 amendment language, the seven-word corrections of misclassified billing entries — was present in his argument in a different form. He knew exactly what he was arguing and exactly what it was worth.
"The Section 14 harmonization protocol," Nesbitt said, "requires that billing disputes be raised through the established notice mechanism before any counter-position is filed. Klein Legal's counter-position, filed May 12, 2012, preceded the required harmonization review." He had the specific flatness of someone who was not performing confidence and was not performing uncertainty. He was reading the argument at its exact weight.
Don stood.
"Mr. Chairman, may I respond."
The chair nodded.
"The Section 14 amendment establishing the thirty-day harmonization protocol was adopted in October 2012, six months after Klein Legal filed its counter-position. The amendment Mr. Nesbitt cites cannot be applied retroactively to a counter filed before the amendment existed." Don placed the October 2012 adoption date on the exhibit ledger. "The relevant question under pre-amendment Section 14 is whether the dispute was raised in good faith through available channels. Klein Legal's May 2012 counter was preceded by six months of billing correspondence and two formal requests for billing clarification, both of which Pearson Darby failed to respond to within their own prescribed timeline."
The chair arbitrator made a note.
Nesbitt did not pursue the argument further. He had known the retroactivity problem existed when he drafted the argument. He had made it anyway because it was the best argument available and a good advocate makes the best available argument rather than none at all.
What he said when he sat down was: nothing. He aligned his papers and waited for the panel.
The panel retired at 11:42.
Don took his phone out during the break.
Doyle had sent the text at 9:47 AM. Don had read it in the five seconds between entering the arbitration room and the panel's entrance, and had pocketed it without reaction because the arbitration room was not the place to react and the filing time was indefinitely expandable.
Vaughn met at Forstman Capital this morning. Fourth floor, private conference room, one hour twenty minutes. Left separately. Holt was on the lobby list.
Holt. Don didn't have the name yet with a face, but the Library's Divergence Diagnostic had been running background on the Luxembourg routing since Cahill's corridor question, and one of the names in the routing chain was a Luxembourg entity officer named Adrian Holt.
Vaughn. Forstman. Holt.
Don put the phone in his pocket.
He walked to the water table at the side of the room and poured a cup. The arbitration panel was deliberating. Nora was at the table reviewing her notes. The room had the specific quiet of a professional space in which important work had been done and was being evaluated by the right people.
Don noted the Vaughn-Forstman text as: filed, not yet processed, will process after the ruling.
He drank the water. He went back to his chair.
The ruling came at 12:54 PM.
The panel found for Klein Legal on both the merits (the altered document made the Section 7(c) claim untenable) and the retroactivity question (Section 14's amendment could not be applied to a counter filed before the amendment's effective date). The Darby claim was dismissed with prejudice. The billing floor Klein Legal had established in May 2012 was confirmed and would remain operative for the life of the co-counsel agreement.
[+12 LP. Darby arbitration win. Moderate-to-high complexity. Counter-party: institutional firm.]
The LP hit with the specific warmth of an earned case win. Not purchased. Earned. The Library's debt (2 LP outstanding) auto-repaid from the generation event. Net reserve: 11.2 LP. The highest the Library had run since April.
Nora, when the ruling was read, made one small and entirely contained acknowledgment: she wrote the outcome on the front of her forensic notebook. Then she closed the notebook.
Don looked at Nesbitt across the table.
Nesbitt was packing his papers with the efficiency of a man completing a professional task that had not gone his way. He looked up when Don looked at him.
The look had two registers simultaneously. The first was: the back-channel relationship has been preserved. The second was: it has acquired new context. They had faced each other across an arbitration table. They had seen each other work. The specific shared knowledge of two practitioners who know what the other is like in a room.
Neither of them said anything.
The room dispersed.
Don pocketed his phone and went to find Nora. She was already in the corridor, briefcase in hand.
"Good work," he said.
"The metadata was clear," she said. "The forensic path held." She paused. "Is there a next thing."
"There is always a next thing."
She nodded. They walked out together into the August afternoon.
Don took out his phone. He called Harold.
"We won," he said.
"I know," Harold said. He had been waiting for the call. "The billing floor holds?"
"With prejudice."
A pause. The Harold pause that meant he was processing and would not express more than the situation required. "Good. I'll update the Greystone file."
Don put the phone away.
The Vaughn-Forstman text was still in his pocket, waiting to be processed. He would process it tomorrow.
He flagged a cab south.
✦ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ✦
Read A LOT more chapters for free at unwrittenrealm.com
✦ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ✦
TL;DR — Patreon has the chapters ahead.
Silver / $6 / 15 or more chap ahead
Gold / $9 / 20 or more chap ahead
Platinum / $15 / 25 or more chap ahead, no weekly wait
That's it. patreon.com/fanficwriter1
If reviews aren't your thing, no pressure — they do help though.