The Two Princes[1]
Welcome to Column 26!
We begin by addressing the elephant in the room. You may have heard that neither of us was immediately interested in the Res Gestae’s offer to write this recurring legal advice column. Such rumors are only partly correct. In fact, once we became aware of the Editorial Board’s propensity for sub rosa largesse, we promptly “sign[ed] on the dotted line.”[2] We can only hope that you will enjoy reading our counsel twice as much as we enjoyed contriving it for you.
Understanding that Column 26 will be a “centerpeice [sic] of the Res Gestae from this point forward,”[3] we are compelled to introduce ourselves. After all, skeptical readers should generally decline advice from authors unknown. (A.A.)[4]
Our combined experience, which is far too complex to detail here, includes certain legal education, practice, scholarship, and speaking engagements.[5] We share a platinum subscription to the American Bar Alliance (ABA) Journal, and we routinely submit correspondence to partners of elite Magic Triangle firms.[6] Across space and time, we have rubbed elbows with great legal minds and proudly stood ad versa against even greater legal minds.
The curious among you may wonder why persons so accomplished would elect to remain anonymous.[7] Stated simply: Two Princes do not a circuit court make. (I.e., fame does not appeal to us.) We derive satisfaction, rather, from the practice itself. Indeed, we are content to spend our days plowing the doctrinal field and mowing the juridical lawn, sowing seeds of genuine scholarship.[8]
Our steadfast commitment to the craft has paid dividends, to be sure. We have sired a vast jurisprudential progeny, and our educative seeds have blossomed into a most paradisiacal cerebral garden.[9] Still, we are not without our misgivings.
It is axiomatic that “critics observe how the strong Prince stumbles, like diffident gardeners looking enviously upon the brave poppy which dares to rise above the rest.”[10] Thus, we have long taken the high road, effortlessly dismissing those who doubt our good work. But the clock is no longer on our side. Spurned colleagues and bitter lovers have cast a green haze upon the proverbial path ahead, clouding our proverbial sight and cuffing our proverbial hands. We wish to impart our various concepts before it is too late.
This principled position—in combination with the prima facie allure of a goose so golden as the Res Gestae—is what brings us to you today.
Dear Reader, as you prepare to enter into the legal field, we admonish you with crimson hearts: Beware the Luddites. (A.A.) These people will deny your tenure applications. They will refuse to publish your Articles. They will mistake your innovation for “dishonesty” and your intellectual piggybacking for “piracy.” They will place you under proverbial arrest for your unauthorized use of another’s work—even though you clearly will “hath mixed [your] labour with” it.[11]
Why, you ask? Oh, Reader. Sweet, sweet, Reader. Don Henley said it best: “People love . . . when you lose.”[12]
But all of this is neither here nor there. Fortunately, we are here. And we are also there—for you, should you have any pressing questions.
Consider this your formal invitation to place us in reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact with your best shot.[13] Submit your inquiries to Column 26, the darling of post-realist legal netizen journalism. You will receive one hundred percent good advice.[14] We guarantee it![15]
In the meantime, the Res Gestae’s Editorial Board has provided us with our first submission.
Question:
Dear Two Princes:
I am 23 years old and a healthy 5’8”. As a second-year law student, I have recently begun to explore the intricacies of Rule 26 discovery. I feel lost about effectively handling initial disclosures in practice.
How can I approach this process to ensure that I “discover” what truly matters in my legal education (and beyond)? Please help. Quickly!
Yearningly yours,
Powerless in Procedure
P.S.—Burn this letter after reading it.
Answer:[16]
Poor Powerless:
As an initial matter, we suspect that you are wondering if we were able to “discover” your pun. The answer is no. Although your quotation marks greatly aided our search, we regret to inform you that we do not even know ‘er your pun.[17]
If, however, you wish to uncover what “truly matters,” then you will have to strip away your own flesh and blood. (A.A.) For what “truly matters,” Powerless, has been within you all along:[18] Rule 26 governs self-discovery.
Yes, Powerless, it is that simple. And it is also far more complex than you will ever know.
Providentially, you have played into our learned hands. We are no strangers to procedural esoterica.[19]
It has been said that Rule 26 is “drier than Casa Dominick’s in the offseason.”[20] As is often the case, however, a pool of wet realist water lies beneath the desiccated formalist topsoil.
Naysayers regard this pool with contempt. They traduce the pool, deriding its “interpretive jiggery-pokery.”[21] Pay them no mind. (A.A.) Remember that one Prince’s “cup of sweet waters” is another Prince’s “cup of salt tears.”[22] (A.A.) And, as you gaze upon the pool, like Narcissus gazing upon the pool, consider that you may know more than you think. (A.A.)
Then, and only then, will you know the true meaning of Rule 26.
C’est law vie,
The Two Princes
[1] The authors assume this appellation from a place of humility. We would like to thank [NAME?] for helpful comments and our numerous research assistants for intrepid fact-checking. All errors are theirs.
[2] Gerry Rafferty, Sign on the Dotted Line, on Can I Have My Money Back? (Transatlantic Blue Thumb 1971).
[3] Email from the Two Princes to Res Gestae Leadership (Feb. 19, 2025) (on file with authors).
[4] “Advice Alert.” This signal is one of many we have submitted for inclusion in an upcoming edition of The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation.
[5] For many years, we presented weekly as unadvertised speakers-in-residence with the Michelin-reviewed restaurant, Spoons. (Spoonsis comfortably nestled behind the ground-level gift shop at the Holiday Inn & Suites Boca Raton-West.)
[6] Unlike Magic Circle firms, these firms actually have a point—or three! (We extend our gratitude to Chris Langdell, who kindly supplied this joke.)
[7] Perhaps naively, we trust that at least some readers have overcome the University’s sustained campaign to stifle intellectual progress.
[8] Have you ever wondered why Don Fuller’s brother is named “Lon”?
[9] At trial, Karl Llewellyn (a self-described “jurisprinceling”) compared our corpus to the Hanging Gardens of Babylon: “Let’s be clear—no jury should be ‘hung’ when it comes to [the Two Princes’] conviction.”
[10] Cf. Theodore Roosevelt, Citizenship in a Republic (Apr. 23, 1910).
[11] John Locke, Labor Theory of Property, Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_property (last visited sometime in 1689).
[12] Like the great Don Fuller (who was, coincidentally, named after Don Henley), this song needs no introduction. We know that you will all recognize this lyric from Mr. Henley’s hit single, “Dirty Laundry.”
[13] Not literally. (A.A.) Although Pat Benatar did not expressly state as much, she was speaking figuratively. It is important for you to know this. Should you heed Ms. Benatar’s command literally, you will assault us, and we will not hesitate to sue you. Disclosure: We represented Ms. Benatar in a high-stakes, off-the-record, lawsuit-style proceeding. While we cannot disclose the terms of the resulting settlement, we canreveal that we (i.e., the Two Princes) are joint owners of a mid-level timeshare in Boca Raton-West.
[14] See Hawkins v. McGee, 84 N.H. 114, 146 A. 641 (1929) [hereinafter “Hairy Hand Case”].
[15] See Leonard v. Pepsico, Inc., 88 F. Supp. 2d 116 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) (holding that no reasonable person would have believed that Pepsico was giving away a jet).
[16] Disclaimer: This is legal advice. You are now our client. Kindly provide your fax number so that we may send you an invoice. (Disclaimer: This is a formal offer. Pursuant to forthcoming landmark Mailbox Rule jurisprudence, our publication is functionally equivalent to your acceptance. But see Julie Leichtman, Contracts Quick Tip: The Mailbox Rule, Quimbee, https://www.quimbee.com/resources/contracts-quick-tip-the-mailbox-rule (last visited Feb. 27, 2025).)
[17] President Gerald Ford held this classic in such high regard that he once famously called it “the People’s Joke.”
[18] Francis P. Church, Yes, Virginia, There Is a Santa Claus, N.Y. Sun (1897).
[19] See, e.g., Two Princes, Compelling Discovery: How to Go Deep and Go Far, 2 Princeton L.J. 145 (1984); Two Princes, Collateral Estoppelganger: Who am I? And Who are You? And What are we Doing Here?, 2 Princeton L.J. 146 (1984) (working paper).
[20] The Tom Brady Episode, Dudes on Dudes with Gronk and Jules, iHeartPodcasts (unreleased).
[21] King v. Burwell, 135 S. Ct. 2480, 2500 (2015) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
[22] Oscar Wilde, The Disciple, in The Fortnightly Review (1894).
