release

Dianna Abdala has a case: no contract for employment. If the potential employer made her a job offer, for example, if she accepted, relocated incurred expenses related to moving, no case, no legal liability on the part of the employer or employee until an employment contract is signed. Sorry Dianna is right about the contract, tacky and not so nice but she is legally right about the contract issue. Research the case law folks.

I’m with you. In fact, I’d go further. One thing often omitted from this story, but which can be found at, for instance

http://www.masslawyersweekly.com/break021506.cfm

is that the hirer was actually the first to go back on his word, dropping his salary offer to a lowball after the first interview. And she did say she’d need to think it over. So, yeah, she should have given him more notice, and used less pretentious language. But his posing as the aggrieved and betrayed party seems silly. (He would have had to format a computer for whoever takes the job anyway. And how much would that “stationary” [sic] have set him back?) And then look at his response to her admittedly dumb “should have got the contract in writing” email. I think she saw it as a blackball threat by a very petty individual, and considering what he did with the emails, she would appear to have been right. “Bla bla bla” little man doesn’t seem all that inappropriate to me. Of course they should both have dropped it much sooner.

I agree with your assessment totally. The girl’s a brat, no doubt about that, but Korman sank to her level. What actually bothers me even more, is that (evidently - from my internet research) Korman offered her one salary and then reniged offering her a lower salary so that he could hire an additional associate. Now, this girl obviously should have chosen her words more wisely in declniing his offer, but I’d have been pissed off too if someone offered me one salary, then offered a lower one, then lecture ME on how unprofessional I was being for refusing the job. Equal culpability here as far as I’m concerned. You know, the two probably deserve each other.

Abdala just spoke on Nancy and Mike in the mornings and she’s not brat at all. That’s what everyone has portrayed her as because she wouldn’t bow down to this less than respected lawyer in Boston. Call up a few choice lawyers in Boston and hear what they have to say about this shark.
Apparently, he manipulated her e-mail to misspell “sow” but he forgot to edit his own e-mail when he misspelled “stationary” for “stationery”.
Here are the real e-mails. you can find them at ABC News Nightline.
——-Original Message——-
From: Dianna Abdala
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 9:23 PM
To: William A. Korman
Subject: Thank you

Dear Attorney Korman,

At this time, I am writing to inform you that I will not be accepting your offer.

After careful consideration, I have come to the conclusion that the pay you are offering would neither fulfill me nor support the lifestyle I am living in light of the work I would be doing for you. I have decided instead to work for myself, and reap 100% of the benefits that I sow.

Thank you for the interviews.

Dianna L. Abdala, Esq.

——-Original Message——-
From: William A. Korman
To: Dianna Abdala
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 12:15 PM
Subject: RE: Thank you

Dianna —

Given that you had two interviews, were offered and accepted the job (indeed, you had a definite start date), I am surprised that you chose an e-mail and a 9:30 PM voicemail message to convey this information to me. It smacks of immaturity and is quite unprofessional. Indeed, I did rely upon your acceptance by ordering stationary and business cards with your name, reformatting a computer and setting up both internal and external e-mails for you here at the office. While I do not quarrel with your reasoning, I am extremely disappointed in the way this played out. I sincerely wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors.

Will Korman

——-Original Message——-
From: Dianna Abdala
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 4:01 PM
To: William A. Korman
Subject: Re: Thank you

A real lawyer would have put the contract into writing and not exercised any such reliance until he did so.

Again, thank you.

——-Original Message——-
From: William A. Korman
To: Dianna Abdala
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 4:18 PM
Subject: RE: Thank you

Thank you for the refresher course on contracts. This is not a bar exam question. You need to realize that this is a very small legal community, especially the criminal defense bar. Do you really want to start pissing off more experienced lawyers at this early stage of your career?

——-Original Message——-
From: Dianna Abdala
To: William A. Korman
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: Thank you

bla bla bla

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=1635684

I have to agree with you that she is totally immature. I would probably have taken the job and if she has said something like that, she would have sold you out to get ahead so you are better off without her. I think the majority of Americans would agree that handling it the way she did was cowardly.

They interviewed both parties on CNN. Its obvious why the guy wanted her working for him… she was freakin’ HOT! I would love to see that girl on my defense squad, SMOKIN’! I wonder if the jury would be more sympathetic to the defendant with a hottie defending him. And the Korman guy looked like a total douchebag. He reminded me of my high school band director, a fat A-hole, whose shirts all had yellow stains under the armpits because he never stopped sweating. The Korman guy looks like the quintessential FAT BASTARD.

I applaud her, she did the right thing, and brand new lawyers everywhere are applauding her. Everyone knows that experienced lawyers abuse new associates and treat them like slaves.
1) He offered her one salary, and then lowered it with the claim that he needed to hire two people. Sleazy.
2) As an experienced lawyer he should know:
a) Put it in writing and have it signed by both parties. Thats what you tell your clients, right?
b) Don’t forward email between you and another party, especially if it is a contentious exchange and tell them FORWARD TO WHOMEVER YOU WANT.
Why should she have to stand for his crap?
Good on you Diannna

So they’re both fools - and I might add his knowledge of English is no better than hers: he ordered stationery, not stationary. But I say ‘on him’ - young lawyers (and I am one) are largely a pernicious, arrogant breed glorying in their own misguided self-importance. As one of my lecturers once said: It doesn’t take a lot brains to be a lawyer - just the ability to read a hell of a lot of words. Most situations, and this one’s a prime example, are best resolved without any reference to law, contracts or courts - it’s misguided young lawyers and their greedy older counterparts that have fostered this idea that everyone should jump straight to the law. What ever happened to sorting things out yourself and taking responsibility for your own successes and failures? In my eyes, if you need to mention the law you’ve demonstrated that, for some reaosn, you’re unable to deal with a situation well yourself.

Wow, imagine how her Dad must feel. Imagine if that was your kid acting like such a spoiled little shit. She’s officially the “Paris Hilton” of the legal community. Hopefully, there is some karmatic justice and her trust fund dries up and she ends up begging for money and eating at soup kitchens. If she ever begged me for money, I’d say, “bla, bla, bla.”

She has basically further embarrassed an entire generation of “echo-boomers.” The children of baby-boomers are labeled as spoiled and having an unearned sense of entitlement. Those two things describe her perfectly. Her new business card should read, “Dianna Abdala, aspiring internet porn star.” She’s rich white trash.