v. Goliath: The Trials of David Boies

by Karen Donovan

In a society ever more obsessed with legal drama, David Boies, the star of a thousand press conferences, stands head and shoulders above the rest. The most prominent trial lawyer in the United States, Boies was catapulted to international prominence when he represented Al Gore before the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore, in the aftermath of the 2000 presidential election. But well before the word “chad” entered our lexicon, Boies had participated in a string of headline-making cases, representing the Justice Department against Microsoft, CBS against General Westmoreland, and Napster against the recording industry. Brash, reckless, and prideful, he is also charming, charismatic, unerringly articulate in the courtroom, and supremely comfortable in the public eye. He is the epitome of the celebrity attorney and a peerless practitioner of the art of law.

Legal journalist Karen Donovan, herself a lawyer, had unprecedented access to Boies for nearly two years, accompanying him on his high-profile cases and recording the workings of his brilliant yet erratic mind. She gives us a scintillating chronicle of the legal dramas in which Boies has played a crucial role. And drawing on extensive interviews with his
former colleagues, she provides insightful analyses of his strategies, his skills, his effectiveness, his penchant for personal renown, and his flaws.

The story of a singularly gifted lawyer——his ambition, judgment, and sense of justice——v. Goliath is also an illuminating
examination of a profession that, increasingly, confuses ideals and celebrity.

Genres: Law

384 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2005

Reviews

[Johnny · Rating 3 out of 5]

I started reading v. Goliath: The Trials of David Boies to learn about the antitrust action against Microsoft. I quickly discovered that the book was, as the subtitle indicated, more about the legal journey of David Boies. The author had originally intended to explore the Microsoft case in depth, but found the personality, style, and litigation history of Boies to be more fascinating. It is an interesting “career biography” (if you will), though even with the biographer’s perspective of clear admiration, I found myself agreeing with one of the famous attorney’s enemies. He said, “David is the best unprepared lawyer I’ve ever met. He does things on the fly. He pulls it off most of the tie; in the courtroom, you would never know how thin his knowledge is.” (p. 191)two ends against the middle and he made misrepresentations to both sides to get a result.

Maybe it would be even more accurate to consider the frustration of a defeated defense lawyer in the Christies-Sotheby’s price-fixing case. He argued: “He played two ends against the middle and he made misrepresentations to both sides to get a result. One could call that good lawyering or one could call that dirty pool. It depends on your perspective. You can do that once, but you can’t do that twice.” (p. 219).

It’s amazing that someone who lost as many high profile cases as David Boies lost (American Airlines, Bush v. Gore, Napster, Pennzoil v. Texaco, etc.) should benefit from the legendary aspects of his reputation as a giant killer (hence, v. Goliath). Yet, as author Karen Donovan makes clear, his charisma, coolness under pressure, creativity and flexibility in cross-examination, and successful resolution of many cases (even he seems to fly in on a magic carpet of fortuity at just the right time to take advantage of other people’s preparation) make him a fascinating study.

Familiar names continually pop up in the narrative. Boies works with Senator Edward (Ted) Kennedy on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s legal staff, eviscerates Bill Gates in the Microsoft antitrust trial, spins his legal exploits with Larry King, is hired by Ron Klain, still an important Democratic operative, for the famous Bush v. Gore pleadings, is critiqued by Neal Katyal, now a CNN legal analyst, for his argument before the US Supreme Court in the same proceedings.. As for the latter, we also read some familiar names and a familiar attitude within the United States Supreme Court. One might think it portentous, considering the ludicrously obvious bias in the court today. Complaining that the Supremes were playing partisan politics such as hadn’t happened before in modern times, Boies suggested that they were doing so “Because you have at least three people on the Court—Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas—who have dedicated their lives to a particular judicial philosophy. That judicial philosophy is now dominant by, at most, a 5-4 majority.” (p. 312) That potential for playing politics is even worse now and has been demonstrated in a series of pro-Trump decisions over the last year.

Roughly the last fourth of the book is about Bush v. Gore. It’s interesting reading. I thought I’d followed that case (via newspaper and to a minimal extent via television) fairly closely, but I missed a line from CNN’s Bernard Shaw that I loved. Referring to a decision that flew against Bush campaign co-chairperson who should have recused herself from the dispute, Shaw asked, “Do you regard the ruling as a psychological cudgel over the head of [Florida’s] secretary of state?” [quoted on p. 269]. Unfortunately, Katharine Harris (the Bush campaign co-chairperson) opted to ignore the cudgel and dance merrily over the line, knowing that the Federalist Society’s captive Supreme Court would eventually back her up.

I was horrified to discover that Boies completely underestimated the potential impact (and final fatal decision) of the United States Supreme Court, claiming the consideration of the court was “irrelevant.” (p. 291). I already knew, but hated being reminded of, the fact that Gore himself opted to ignore Republican violations of election procedures in Seminole and Martin counties that had given Bush up to 6,000-votes (pp. 292-293). Gore didn’t think the general public would understand the intricacy of the issue. But the courts aren’t the general public!

Frankly, even when one knows the outcome of each litigation, v. Goliath is a dramatic presentation that every fan of legal machinations can appreciate. And as a fan of the musical, Guys and Dolls, I appreciated the final reference to Big Jule’s dice.

[ok a · Rating 3 out of 5]

IMHO, the prose could have been more cleaner and neutral. That said, an illuminating read detailing the cases tackled by the "best unprepared lawyer".

[Karen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Unevenly paced, but overall interesting.

[Conor · Rating 5 out of 5]

It is hard to believe that a profile of one of America's top lawyers could be so engrossing, but Karen Donovan has written a superb book on David Boies. This biography of Boies reads like a novel and really gives one a window into his life and approach to the law. I found it to be, as one reviewer put it, "unputdownable." I highly recommend this book for lawyers and non-lawyers alike!

[Zeb Snyder]

This book is a very good companion to Boies's autobiography, or vice versa. Boies is an unrelentingly interesting lawyer, and this book provides a view of what his kind of practice looks like up close.

[Alinsson mullins · Rating 2 out of 5]

I nearly had to skim this book, not because of lack of interest in the subject, but because it was poorly written. It does a good job noting the historical context, but is lacking in substance and clarity.

[Nate · Rating 1 out of 5]

So much potential, but the author's got a weird first-person style and is a bit too in love with her subject. I gave up on reading it mid-way.