Boaz and Fischer slid out of the courtroom forthwith. I was taking off my gown when Ruth Schwartz’s voice startled me.
“Why didn’t you stick to your instructions?” Her voice was harsh and her demeanour antagonistic.
“What on earth do you mean?” I asked angrily. Before Ruth had the time to respond, Rachel approached us.
“I’ll tell you what she means: she wanted us to lose the case. Well, Rotem did not instruct us to do so. And we should not have accepted such a brief. We are lawyers: not clowns.” Rachel was breathing hard. On occasions, I had seen her irked or annoyed. But she had never lost her temper before.
“We did not ask you to lose the case,” protested Ruth.
“Then what is this fuss all about?”
“We asked you to handle Fischer gently in the witness box.”
“we did. But Fischer was impudent. So, Ehud Morag took the cross-examination over. And he is not subject to your instructions.”
“I am told you capitalised on it.”
“We did!” replied Rachel angrily. “But then, you say you did not instruct us to lose the case. And we didn’t!” Turning to me, she added: “Your address was excellent, Eli. On behalf of Jacob Keren and Associates, I congratulate you! Well done. If Rotem takes exception, they can challenge us! Actually, Jacob Keren intends to raise the nature of these strange instructions at Rotem’s next board meeting.”
Ruth looked at Rachel narrowly: the barb had found its mark. I was by then convinced Ruth had given the instructions without the necessary internal clearance. Regardless of things to come, she was bound to face a storm.
Our immediate task, though, was to bring the matter to its close. An appeal by the plaintiff would be costly. Even if Rotem won, it might be difficult to recover the costs from an impoverished Fischer. An ex gratia payment might be the best solution.
I was about to express my sentiment, when Ruth regained her cool. In point of fact, I knew her well from a literary circle. One evening we took opposing roles in a literary trial of Franz Kafka’s Castle. It had been a pleasant and highly civilised occasion. At the end of the debate, all present conceded they found Kafka hard to understand. Both Ruth and I were given an ovation. Ever since, I regarded her a likeable person.
“Look, Eli. I am sorry I flew off the handle. I did not realise Ehud Morag stepped in. I arrived during your fine address. Can you please tell me what triggered Morag’s wrath? He hasn’t been the same man for the last two years.” Ruth’s voiced evinced embarrassment mingled with regrets.
“He did not appreciate Fischer’s demeanour. Actually, I’m still in the dark. Fischer appeared to sort of look over the Judge’s shoulder. He did it to me too. But I thought he was being awkward. Coming to think of it, he sorts of limped to the box. I asked myself what was the matter with him.”
“Boaz may be able to tell you now,” said Ruth.
For a short while the three of us kept our silence. Then, to my relief, Rachel regained her composure. She emphasised that, if the Court of Appeal disagreed with Morag’s legal analysis, the case would be sent back for a further hearing. An ex gratia payment was the best way out. She thought Fischer might be willing to accept the amount offered to him originally plus an additional sum to cover some of his costs. We concluded it would be best to leave the negotiations in Ruth’s hand.
“I’m afraid I can’t have lunch with you Eli. Uzi has to attend to a patient who developed some complications. I’ll go back home to prepare him a snack and some sandwiches. He’s got to be at the hospital at 2.30 p.m. and may not be back until late in the evening. Are you free for dinner?”
“Of course.”
“Come over to my office at 6.30p.m. I want to back at home at 9.30 p.m.”
“That should be easy. And well, thanks,” I said and was startled by the Ruth’s supportive smile.