The one and only.

• Jurisdiction: United States
• Date: 22 March 2009
• Author: Shoot, Brian J.

There is no one remotely like Professor David D. Siegel, whether in manner of expression, breadth and depth of knowledge of New York's procedural laws, or impact upon those procedural laws. What is more, although my own personal experiences with New York litigation go back only a paltry few decades, I strongly suspect that there never has been any New York commentator remotely like the good professor.

First and foremost (for me, at least), there is the unique mode of expression: writing that does not mince words or beat around the proverbial bush, but that may well amuse even as it informs and warns.

Who else would end an article, "The lesson of the case to lawyers is that if you want out, get out fast, and look sharp about it"? (1) Who else, in speaking of notaries, might observe,

What's their real compensation, beyond the $2 per oath provided for in Exec. L. [section] 136? Do they just act as a magnet drawing in customers for some other product, a "loss leader" of a kind? If they're just performing a public service and can't yet cash in on their ticket to heaven, maybe they should be allowed to calculate the annual fair market value of their efforts and take it as a charitable deduction on their tax returns. (2) Who else would end with the following exhortation: In other words, all you petitioners and plaintiffs out there, ask not what you can do about an intrusive clerk; ask instead what an intrusive clerk can do for you. When the clerk speaketh, harken unto her words. Heeding those words now may give you a great idea for a toast the next time you're at a lawyers' libation: Three cheers for the meddlesome clerk! (3)

Through the hornbooks, the CPLR commentaries, and the myriad articles and practice notes, there is a distinct and instantly recognizable style and focus. The writing is direct, lucid, unpretentious...