Sparring Partners

“The two clients who got the twenty-five thousand in cash were Odell Grove and Jerrol Baker. Ask Harry Rex to check on them. Baker was stoned on meth when he signed the settlement agreement, so he could be dead, or in prison again. I don’t expect any trouble out of them.”

Mack’s crimes involve stealing settlement money from clients who were injured at their worksite. In this passage, Mack implies that he was able to manipulate these clients into accepting less than they were owed because of their addiction and legal issues. Mack’s intentional abuse of the legal system is essential to the novella’s subtle criticism of the system.

“She sat her lemonade down on a side table, closed her eyes, and breathed deeply. She was a pitiful sight, and Dean and Stephanie ached for her. She knew she was dying, and now this. The past ten years had been hell.”

This passage is indicative of Grisham’s narrative flexibility: Here, the omniscient third-person narrator moves from inhabiting Drew Pettigrew in the first two sentences to his sister-in-law, Lisa, in the second two. By shifting from character to character throughout the novella, Grisham exposes the reader to a variety of perspectives on the action. In this instance, the devastating effects of Mack’s actions on his family are revealed for the first time.

“Lisa became discontented with me and my career. I was trying to establish a law practice, which, as I learned, is hard to do in a small town like this. Look around the square, there are so many lawyers. Lisa wanted a lot more.”

In this passage, Mack attempts to justify his disappearance to his daughter Margot. Mack attributes his dissatisfaction in life to his wife, Lisa, and to his inability to establish a legal practice. This is one of the most difficult scenes in the novella, as Mack criticizes his dying wife in front of their child.

“The current chef was on his way out the door, though he didn’t know it yet. Marco had him in his sights. The chef was stealing food out the back door, and when Marco had enough proof he would have a chat with the owner.”

This passage is indicative of Mack’s hypocrisy and lack of self-awareness. Mack, living in hiding and working at a cheap bar as “Marco,” conducts an investigation into theft by a coworker even as FBI agents are investigating his own theft. This hypocrisy is compounded by the fact that Mack is still in possession of hundreds of thousands in stolen money, whereas the coworker he accuses is likely working-class and struggling financially—and is pocketing much smaller sums.

“Both had known Mack for years, though they were not close friends, and they were reluctant to get involved in a case that would send a fellow lawyer to jail. It was apparent that the victims, the clients who were bilked, had no knowledge of Mack’s wrongdoing until the FBI told them about it.”

Throughout the novella, Grisham is subtly critical of the alliance between lawyers: Here, two prosecutors debate not investigating Mack’s crimes because he is a fellow lawyer. The implication in the second sentence is that, had the FBI not intervened, Mack would have gotten away with his crimes.

“Their father’s disappearance, coupled with their parents’ divorce, had forced Margot to mature and distrust the motives of almost everyone. She guarded her emotions and feelings and rarely offered friendship. She had made the decision to leave home and return only when necessary, and she would soon lose contact with the girls she had grown up with.”

This passage demonstrates the devastating effects of Mack’s disappearance on his family, especially his oldest daughter, Margot. Although Mack sees Margot as a tough, mature young woman, this passage suggests that the hard exterior he sees is a defensive response to his abandonment of their family.

“Harry Rex said, ‘As your lawyer, I advise you to turn yourself in and face the music. I cannot advice you to flee the country.’

‘Jake, as a friend?’

‘Flee the country. Nothing good will happen if you stay here. Go back to Costa Rica and live the good life.’”

In the final scene of the novella, Grisham’s protagonist Jake encourages his friend to flee the country, abandoning his children in the wake of their mother’s death. The juxtaposition between Harry Rex’s advice, given as Mack’s lawyer, and Jake’s advice, given as a friend, is indicative of Grisham’s complicated relationship to the law.

“In fourteen years, Cody had filed, on his own and with no lawyer, a total of five lawsuits. Books, television, food, exercise, and he’d won them all but air conditioning and proper heat.”

One of Cody’s defining characteristics is his dedication to justice, despite accepting the injustice of his own situation. Rather than filing an endless series of appeals and lawsuits on behalf of himself, Cody dedicates himself to causes that impact all of the incarcerated men alongside him.

“I’m sure there’s a rule, probably right there in black and white, says you can’t kill yourself on death row, and certainly not right before all the fun and excitement of a big execution, so they freaked out, rushed Hack to the hospital, pumped his stomach, barely saved his life, then raced him back over here in the nick of time for his execution.”

This passage is indicative of both Cody’s dark sense of humor, joking about suicide before his execution, and Grisham’s fierce opposition to the death penalty. The horrific irony of this situation—saving a life so that the state can end it—highlights the intentional violence of the death penalty.

“That’s hard to believe, Warden. I think you like this. You chose a career in corrections because you believe in punishment. And this is the ultimate, big moment. Your first execution and you are the man. How many reporters have you talked to today, Warden? How many interviews?”

Here, Cody accuses the warden of complicity in his execution, which the warden describes as an unpleasant part of his job. The reference to reporters and interviews acts as a subtle condemnation of the media, which often treat executions as sensationalist events. By juxtaposing the publicity-seeking warden with shock-hungry media, Grisham suggests that the country as a whole is responsible for acceptance of the death penalty.

“Sometimes you hate it because it’s so unfair, and sometimes you catch yourself secretly applauding it because the son of a bitch deserved to die. I mean, I’ve been here fourteen years and eight men have gone down […] One was probably innocent. The other seven, guilty as hell. I feel sorry for six of them, but the other two got what they deserved.”

In this passage, Cody shares his view on the death penalty with Miss Iris, who replies that she opposes the death penalty in all causes. Cody’s view is presented as normal, while Miss Iris is presented as an extremist. As a board member of an organization dedicated to defending people sentenced to death, Grisham is likely to align philosophically with Miss Iris, rather than Cody.

“Cody was fourteen years old, a child, an orphan, a homeless kid living in the woods, a kid no one wanted. He never pulled a trigger and he didn’t kill anyone. It’s barbaric for this state to treat him like an adult, and it’s immoral to execute him. The system failed Cody at every turn, and now the system will kill him. Congratulations to the God-fearing, gun-loving, law and order die-hards of this miserable state.”

This passage, which comes from Cody’s lawyer’s statement to the media, offers the novella’s most explicit condemnation of the practice of executing minors. The details emphasizing Cody’s vulnerability as a child also highlight his vulnerability as a ward of the state while incarcerated as an adult.

“Think about that, Marvin. Nobody in the world knew where we were and no one cared. And we damned sure didn’t care about anybody else. Total freedom out there, hiding in the woods. Those were the best days, and I was just a kid.”

On the day of his execution, Cody is 29 years old, meaning that he has spent more than half of his life incarcerated. The emphasis on freedom, anonymity, and open spaces in this passage highlights the restrictions and surveillance he is subject to while incarcerated. Although readers might not expect Cody to be sentimental about his time as an unhoused orphan, he obviously prefers that time of freedom to his current status.

“In the distance, searchlights sweep the sky and a helicopter is heard somewhere. It’s time for a killing and the air is filled with excitement.”

In the final moments before his execution, Cody asks to go out into the prison yard in order to look at the full moon. However, the tranquility Cody expected to find is interrupted by prison activity related to his execution. This passage demonstrates the all-encompassing brutality of the death penalty: Even in his last moments, Cody is not allowed peace.

“Cody, uninjured, at least physically, was locked away for the rest of his life. The crime scene photos were shown to the jurors, and they did not deliberate long before returning with a death verdict.”

This passage suggests that the jury trying Cody’s case condemned him to death as an emotional response to the extreme violence of the crime scene photos. The reference to Cody’s emotional trauma suggests that they should have taken his suffering into consideration as well as that of the Bakers.

“Each agreed, practically at gunpoint, to remain as equal partners for the next fifteen years. In the event one decided to leave, then all of his cases and clients and fees would remain within the firm. Neither could afford to walk away.”

This passage describes the complex legal ties binding Rusty and Kirk Malloy, the titular sparring partners at the center of the novella. The stipulations of this contract, forced upon them by their overbearing father Bolton, lead Rusty and Kirk to criminal activity throughout the novella.

“The problem, though, and he admitted this as he drank, was that his ego wanted more, much more. He wanted to single-handedly bring St. Louis into the modern era of staggering verdicts. He, Rusty Malloy, would be the King of Torts in town and smile as lesser lawyers ran to him with their cases.”

Throughout the novella, greed acts as a powerful motivator for all members of the Malloy family. In this instance, Rusty’s selfish desire for massive financial settlements and local fame cause him to lose his client’s case. Ultimately, the Malloy brothers’ insatiability ends in prison.

“I was a twenty-five-year-old kid fresh out of law school and you gave me a job. What happened after that was hardly consensual. You were all over me from day one and left little doubt that any resistance might lead to a termination. That’s what I remember.”

This passage adds depth to the character of Diantha, who is initially depicted as a brash, humorless foil to the Malloy brothers’ antics. The fact that she remained at the firm after being coerced into a relationship with the founding partner is an indication of her resiliency. She only feels comfortable confronting Bolton after his incarceration, demonstrating how deeply the relationship affected her.

“However it became apparent that her lead lawyer, the infamous ball-squeezer Scarlett Ambrose, was out for blood and wanted another trophy victim. She wanted a nasty trial with perhaps some press coverage to further boost her oversized ego. Chrissy seemed to have been thoroughly brainwashed by her manipulative lawyer and would not negotiate.”

This passage is indicative of the casual misogyny that pervades the novella. All of the lawyers we see, especially the Malloy brothers, are greedy and manipulative. However, only Scarlett—one of the novella’s few women lawyers—is described with implications of sexual violence. Meanwhile, the assumption that Kirk’s wife, Chrissy, can be easily manipulated suggests that she is less intelligent than her husband—another sexist swipe.

“For reasons she would never fully comprehend, she casually picked up her phone as if to check messages, tapped the Voice Memos app, then tapped the Record button. She put the phone down and glanced at Rusty. […] The deft maneuver, made with no forethought or purpose, would profoundly impact the rest of her life and the lives of so many she knew well.”

This passage offers another example of how Grisham infantilizes his female characters. Whereas other characters in the novella are depicted as actively seeking committing crimes, Diantha simply stumbles into the position to play the hero. The implication that she recorded the meeting without “forethought” suggests that she is not actually smart enough to outwit the Malloy brothers.

“He was appointed by a Democratic administration. Sturgiss was a Republican. Not that it mattered. Catching a governor from either party was an idea so delicious that Doyle couldn’t believe his good fortune. The publicity would dwarf every other case already on his crowded docket and any that could possibly arrive later.”

This passage suggests that corruption in the criminal justice system extends through all branches, from lawyers, to district attorneys, and up to the governor. The fact that District Attorney Doyle is excited about the prospect of a publicity-heavy case, without knowing all of the details, suggests that his true concern is not the law but his own eventual political ambition.

“Governor Sturgiss would be investigated soon after the election. Word had come from the highest places in Washington that Sturgiss would not be charged with anything until well after the votes were counted. When and if he were charged, he would be presumed innocent and entitled to a fair trial. A quick indictment just before the election smacked of raw politics, and the Attorney General said no.”

Across the collection, Grisham depicts people at all levels of the criminal justice system acting against the rule of law. Here, he suggests that the country’s leading prosecutor, the attorney general, is going above and beyond to ensure a scandal-free trial for the governor. His actions can be contrasted to that of the prosecuting district attorney, who is excited about the case precisely because of the scandal of the governor’s involvement.

“They’re just like their father, Ben. Good folks at the core, but privileged and above the law.”

In this passage, Diantha offers her opinion of the Malloy men to a fellow lawyer. The suggestion that the Malloys are good folks despite the fact that they feel like they’re above the law indicates that Diantha does not always feel like breaking the law is a bad thing.