Lawyers' Poker: 52 Lessons that Lawyers Can Learn from Card Players.

Lawyers' Poker: 52 Lessons That Lawyers Can Learn from Card Players

Steven Lubet Oxford University Press www. oup-usa.org 275 pp., $28

I started to read Lawyers' Poker skeptical of the claim that attorneys can learn from poker players, but after only a few pages, I was a convert. Steven Lubet, a law professor at Northwestern University, suggests in the introduction that "there is a deep symmetry between litigation and poker," and he proves it overwhelmingly throughout the book.

I have practiced law for more than 30 years and played poker for longer than that, but I never made the connection between the two. Lubet succeeds in doing exactly that in this well-written and very readable book. I found myself smiling because of all the fun I had reading it.

Lubet cleverly organizes the material into four chapters titled "Diamonds" (maximizing your winnings), "Clubs" (controlling the opposition), "Spades" (digging for information), and "Hearts" (ethics and character). This is the first indication that his approach is not only entertaining but also expansive.

That initial impression is affirmed in the first few pages when the author compares Clarence Darrow's strategy in the Leopold and Loeb trial to the poker player's formula for winning by "avoiding unnecessary losses, choosing your battles, and exploiting favorable opportunities." Readers need only a rudimentary understanding of the game of poker to make the connection with this and many other famous trials Lubet employs as examples.

Through simple statements of fact, Lubet makes astute observations for trial counsel and poker players alike. For example, every trial lawyer will affirm that one of his or her roles is to reduce the client's risks in litigation, and every poker player understands that success depends on assessing the odds to avoid gambling, Lubet says.

Using the case against two New York City police officers who mistakenly killed Amadou Diallo, Lubet convincingly argues that the prosecution could have avoided losing the case if they had "folded" the pursuit of a murder conviction and pursued manslaughter instead. A thoughtful calculation of the odds would have altered their strategy.

Later in the book, Lubet compares old adages that are basic mantras for success in both law and poker. Using colorful examples from both the courtroom and the poker parlor, he reduces one such adage as follows: for the attorney, "Never interrupt your opponent while he is busy destroying himself"; for the poker player, "Let the suckers bet for you." It makes for very entertaining reading.

Some of the comparisons between practicing law and playing poker are a little contrived. I thought comparing a poker player's credo of "you can't bluff a bad player and you don't want to gamble with a weak player" with the tobacco industry's initial defense strategy of trying to intimidate (bluff) potential litigants did not entirely work. But these occasional lapses don't make the advice or the courtroom accounts any less interesting, and the basic advice these comparisons impart is always sage.

After reading Lubet's book, I had a lingering admiration for both the imagination and the broad perspective that he brings to the reader, particularly if the reader is an attorney. Perhaps others have compared poker playing with litigation, but I doubt that anyone has ever made such a compelling case for their symmetry. And in the process, Lubet makes both the professional gambler and the successful litigator look good.

Any attorney who has ever tried a case or who aspires to be a litigator will want to read this book and learn more about how success at the poker table and winning in the courtroom are related. Reading Lawyers' Poker is a complete treat.

G. KENNETH BERNHARD is a principal in Cohen & Wolf in Bridgeport, Connecticut.