I am a trial lawyer. I try cases. Not a hard concept to grasp, but apparently it is beyond the comprehension of some who try to use the term as some type of attack. Case in point. Houston Chronicle article today by Peggy Fikac which discusses the $2,000,000.00 judgment against the Republican Governors Association (RGA)for violating state law relating to donations made to Rick Perry in 2006. The RGA’s spokesperson, Mr. Schrimpf who was quoted in the article is really fond of the term trial lawyer. (As you can see I am kind of fond of it myself) He describes the suit as being brought by a “Democrat trial lawyer” and later said “Unfortunately, this junk lawsuit has gone on for four years, and to the Democratic trial lawyers’ dreams, will likely go on two or three more.” Wow it must really be tough to try and get “trial lawyer” into every sentence while still throwing in junk lawsuit and managing to avoid the issue that your organization was found to have violated Texas law. You do manage to state that you will immediately appeal. Let me help you out here. The lawyer you used during the trial of the case was (I would hope) a “trial lawyer” and now you will probably hire an “appellate lawyer” unless your trial lawyer is also your appellate lawyer. I wonder if you would have preferred using an auto mechanic to try your case, or maybe a surgeon, baker, banker or candlestick maker. It appears that your focus groups have convinced you that the term trial lawyer will cause ordinary people to suddenly lose all sense of justice and blindly ignore what your organization did in trying to buy an election. Trial lawyers try cases. We also advise clients to resolve claims and disputes, not file cases if there is not a claim and not file frivolous (you apparently know the it by the term “junk”) lawsuits or defenses. Trial lawyers understand this. Maybe you should have hired a trial lawyer, or better yet just not violated the law. Wow what a concept, then you wouldn’t have needed that evil trial lawyer.