Just a quick post today. I'm due in court for yet another ridiculous motion filed by my ex-husband. Technically, I don't have to go today, but I want the judge to see me there in the courtroom, and keep it personal for him. I don't know that that makes any difference, but it does for me.
Plus, I had an appointment over by the courthouse today anyway.
Which means that this morning I took especial care in choosing my outfit. There's a whole science behind what lawyers wear in court, and I think there must be similar studies about what plaintiffs and defendants should wear.
I've almost always gone for dress pants, worn with either a blazer or a sweater set. I did wear a severe navy dress to a pre-trial hearing last year, but that was an emergency custody petition and I felt the need to look particularly conservative and feminine.
Seriously, I'm obsessing over what I wear to court? Yes, yes I am. Should I wear pearls or a gold necklace? Boots or pumps or flats? Hair up or down, straight or curled? Big purse? Little purse? Briefcase? Leather folder?
I've done this more times than I can count.
And, if I didn't know it before, I would have learned it by now: A good pair of well made, well fitting black pants in a medium weight wool are worth every penny, even (especially) when pennies are precious.
Divorce court fashion. It's a thing. For the record, I'm wearing tan pants and a turquoise sweater set, with tan loafers. I'm put together but not too formal. I take this seriously enough to be tidy, but don't think this motion is important enough to dress up for.
I know, I know. Still, one has to think about this kind of minutiae. I'll read the Wall Street Journal later to compensate. Or something.
Filed under: Uncategorized