Besides a non-story about Brendan Johnson’s law
голова болит ÑÐµÐºÑ firm getting a measley $100,000 for losing him and another non-story about the American Cancer Society being able to argue in court against the bar owner smokey-smokey pants crybabies, there isn’t much going on.
However, I have been writing some new bar humor toons for a possible project, here is a sample;
“The bartender just made me the perfect martini.”
“Gin? Vodka? Straight up? Extra dry?”
“FREE.”
I gotta agree that this thing about Johnson’s golden parachute is no big deal. It’s the normal course of things. Jeez. However, since when do YOU consider $100,000 to be “measley”? Aren’t you the one who rails against people making bunches of money? Or is $99,000 the cutoff for you?
What!!!!! The firm gains to loose millions in revenue from one of their partners leaving. $100,000 is nothing, in fact it is charitable at best.
The article says the $100k includes “$70,000 for the return of his capital account and a partner distribution of $30,000 calculated by service date up to departure.”
So is that suggesting the $70k is a return on his original investment into the firm? Thus he is really only receiving a $30k payout which is his portion of the proceeds of the firm (not including his salary or any other financial benefits).
I guess I fail to see the issue here. If this was the Fed paying the lawfirm $100k then I’d probably be upset, but this is just like a business owner selling out to his partner and walking away. L3wis has it right… this is a non-story.
If anything, they should be praised for their fiscal responsibility to the public. I will have to say though, the RCJ’s story is fair and just states the fact, but we know others will twist the story.