My green-carpeted office and desk had just enough chairs and were just big enough for the two attorneys and five principals in the Bridgeport convenience store deal. We had straightened things out with the fuel distributor and the fire suppression system vendor. My client’s SNAP, UST, lottery, tobacco, and milk retail licenses were ready. Now we just had to get blue ink on paper.
I had printed two stacks of documents — not too thick, because the deal was not really complex. We had a bill of sale, a lease assignment and assumption, a fuel distribution assignment and assumption, consents from the landlord and fuel distributor, and a resolution of the Seller LLC permitting its members to sign the documents on its behalf. That’s it.
The one hiccup was that ALL the clients showed up two hours late. That gave me and opposite counsel a good chance to chat about our practices and the practice in general. We had at least one common attorney acquaintance, whom we both thought well of. His practice was all transactional, whereas mine is predominantly litigation.
Overall, I find litigation less stressful than transactions. There are lots of deadlines and moving parts and surprises in litigation, but the flow of work is pretty much under my control. While clients direct the strategy and certainly direct negotiations, their motives generally are easy to understand and predict. On the other hand, In transactions, much of the flow is dictated by unpredictable impulses of my own client and their counterparty; it’s harder to schedule things or plan ahead. See, e.g., the clients showing up two hours late to this closing.
