One of the joys (I use the term sarcastically) of being a lawyer is screening prospective clients. There are different ways firms do this. Some use paralegals, some use associates--some have complicated forms and checklists and others are more informal. Or, you could be as lucky as my firm, and not need new clients at all, because you have more than enough (and probably too much) business from existing clients and former clients. Well, that is not entirely true. I still screen a lot of call-ins looking for a good pro bono case or perhaps a personal injury case that is worth exploring.
With that introduction, here is what I have learned about many people. They usually wait too long to call a lawyer. They don't want to spend money on a lawyer and think they can handle it themselves or it will just go away. Common example: credit card debt that has been reduced to a judgment (usually default because the debtor never answers the complaint). When they get a writ of garnishment and their paychecks suddenly take a dive is usually the first time I hear from them. At that point, in most cases, it is probably too late.
Another favorite is deals among friends and family. They love each other/are best friends, so there is no need for a contract for that $150,000 that they are investing in the new business. And in most cases, that business is a sure deal--a moneymaker. There is absolutely no way a typewriter store will fail! So, when that typewriter store does fail, and someone is out $150,000, well then they come to the lawyers. And, oh boy, is that a mess! It is good business for lawyers (messy cases cost more), but clients hate it (messy cases cost more).
This is one of the first things you realize as a lawyer--people will wait until the last minute to call you and when they finally do it is either past the point of no return or so messy it will probably cost more to fix than it does to just walk away. I wonder why we can't convince people it is better to talk to lawyers sooner.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Thursday, June 7, 2007
You don't know crap
All these recent graduates, bar exam study groups, and the associated glee has made me nostalgic. Perhaps that is why I have lately been obsessed with blogging about how explicably (because it is far from inexplicable) naive and yet cocky all of these noobs are. Law school inflates what usually are already inflated egos. I am not sure who thinks they know more: a lawyer or a teenager? I think a lawyer probably does more damage with that misconception. Of course, this will all change for most noobs when they actually get into practice and get schnookered for the first time. They will screw something up, not realize there is a rule of civil procedure for that, or just make a strategic mis-calculation. It will ground them in reality, sort of. But there are a special few who don't get it--they will still think they are the second coming of Johnny Cochran. They will try to tell veteran attorneys what to do, or take on tasks far beyond their level of competency. In short, they think they know everything. These are the most dangerous new lawyers. They are the 87 year old women in 1982 Chrysler New Yorkers speeding down the highway listening to a Tony Bennet cassette while their cat sits in the back seat. They have no sense of their lack of capacity to do what they are doing and that makes them dangerous. Now keeping with the old lady analogy, most noob lawyers get a driver or don't drive at all. But not the chosen few. Not the dangerous noobs. No, they think they know it all. They think they know how to write the best, they think they have their fingers on the pulse of judges and juries, they think they can give advice to older and wiser attorneys. And they are wrong. WRONG!
Here is a quick test as to whether or not you are actually one of these dangerous noobs. If, in the last month, you thought that you knew more about something than anyone who has been practicing law for at least 2 years or more, you are a dangerous noob. If you have, on your own initiative, used any of your work for showing someone else how something should be done, you are a dangerous noob. So here is advice (as if you will take it!): shut up. No one cares what you think, even if someone tells you they care. You are not entitled to an opinion yet, even if someone tells you that you are. You are not as smart as you think you are, even if you did well in school. And, most important of all, you are halfway down the road of ruining your legal career because it is most likely the case that word has got out that you are full of yourself and not as smart as you think you are.
Of course, you can change this all now. You can reverse the effects of being a dangerous noob and just be a noob if you take a few drastic steps. First, get a haircut. Second, get rid of 80% of the books you have in your office. You only need a legal dictionary, a regular dictionary, a book on style, a book on grammar and usage, and Bluebook. You need nothing else. Third, go to Vegas and invest in a hooker. You are too high on yourself and maybe if you had something to regret, you would be a bit more humble in your life. Fourth, buy all of Eminem's CDs and listen to nothing else until you like them. Finally, every time you feel inclined to read a book on how to be a better lawyer or on a particular aspect of being a lawyer (trial procedure, writing briefs, etc.), go exercise instead or get another hooker. Those books won't make you a better lawyer. They will make you worse, because they warp the reality of the law. And the only thing you need to worry about now is the reality of your profession, not the "reality" you have invented in your mind.
Here is a quick test as to whether or not you are actually one of these dangerous noobs. If, in the last month, you thought that you knew more about something than anyone who has been practicing law for at least 2 years or more, you are a dangerous noob. If you have, on your own initiative, used any of your work for showing someone else how something should be done, you are a dangerous noob. So here is advice (as if you will take it!): shut up. No one cares what you think, even if someone tells you they care. You are not entitled to an opinion yet, even if someone tells you that you are. You are not as smart as you think you are, even if you did well in school. And, most important of all, you are halfway down the road of ruining your legal career because it is most likely the case that word has got out that you are full of yourself and not as smart as you think you are.
Of course, you can change this all now. You can reverse the effects of being a dangerous noob and just be a noob if you take a few drastic steps. First, get a haircut. Second, get rid of 80% of the books you have in your office. You only need a legal dictionary, a regular dictionary, a book on style, a book on grammar and usage, and Bluebook. You need nothing else. Third, go to Vegas and invest in a hooker. You are too high on yourself and maybe if you had something to regret, you would be a bit more humble in your life. Fourth, buy all of Eminem's CDs and listen to nothing else until you like them. Finally, every time you feel inclined to read a book on how to be a better lawyer or on a particular aspect of being a lawyer (trial procedure, writing briefs, etc.), go exercise instead or get another hooker. Those books won't make you a better lawyer. They will make you worse, because they warp the reality of the law. And the only thing you need to worry about now is the reality of your profession, not the "reality" you have invented in your mind.
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
The Bar Exam (a.k.a Intro. to Malpractice)
In law school they tell you this: "Never give legal advice off the cuff. Meet the client, get the facts, and ask questions. Then, hit the books (or if you are lucky enough make an associate hit the books while you bill for "research conferences"). Yes, you should NEVER EVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES try to give legal advice or opinion off the top of your head. Even if you think you know it. You should check. One misremembered rule of law and you may have committed malpractice."
Then, the bar exam. The bar exam is designed for you to do exactly what you are not supposed to do as a lawyer, i.e., go hog ass wild with legal ramblings off the top of your head. Yes, they don't want you to rely on statutes, cases, rules and regulations. Why, that would be downright silly! Your bar exam is based on how well you can remember some laws and apply them to a witty fact pattern that made the test author giggle when he wrote it (oh, I know I feel so much better about taking an exam with a 40% failure rate when the test question incorporates characters from my favorite TV show).
But the bar exam really doesn't test you on how well you can research and figure out the law. Let's face it, that is what your first few years of practice is. I say first few years because after a while, you really aren't contained by the law anymore. Seasoned lawyers just kinda make the law up--the real law is for associates and law students, not veteran lawyers. Back to the bar exam. Why don't they test on the stuff what really matters? The important test is how well you can figure out what the law is, not how well you remember what the law is. Indeed, I think they should give you some questions and then lock you in a law library and give you 24 hours to answer the questions. Yes indeed, that is the real test of how you will work out as a lawyer. Asking you to remember things off the top of your head, and not rely on research....well, that is just plain malpractice.
As I said in my earlier blog, the only reason you take the bar exam is because lawyer before you took it and by gosh they are not going to deny you the experience. It is a rite of passage, but it is not useful in any way. It is downright annoying actually. Much like law school, the bar exam has nothing to do with how well you practice law or how good you will be as a lawyer. It is nothing more than psychological hazing.
Then, the bar exam. The bar exam is designed for you to do exactly what you are not supposed to do as a lawyer, i.e., go hog ass wild with legal ramblings off the top of your head. Yes, they don't want you to rely on statutes, cases, rules and regulations. Why, that would be downright silly! Your bar exam is based on how well you can remember some laws and apply them to a witty fact pattern that made the test author giggle when he wrote it (oh, I know I feel so much better about taking an exam with a 40% failure rate when the test question incorporates characters from my favorite TV show).
But the bar exam really doesn't test you on how well you can research and figure out the law. Let's face it, that is what your first few years of practice is. I say first few years because after a while, you really aren't contained by the law anymore. Seasoned lawyers just kinda make the law up--the real law is for associates and law students, not veteran lawyers. Back to the bar exam. Why don't they test on the stuff what really matters? The important test is how well you can figure out what the law is, not how well you remember what the law is. Indeed, I think they should give you some questions and then lock you in a law library and give you 24 hours to answer the questions. Yes indeed, that is the real test of how you will work out as a lawyer. Asking you to remember things off the top of your head, and not rely on research....well, that is just plain malpractice.
As I said in my earlier blog, the only reason you take the bar exam is because lawyer before you took it and by gosh they are not going to deny you the experience. It is a rite of passage, but it is not useful in any way. It is downright annoying actually. Much like law school, the bar exam has nothing to do with how well you practice law or how good you will be as a lawyer. It is nothing more than psychological hazing.
Monday, June 4, 2007
Dear Graduates
Congratulations. You just spent 3 years struggling through law school. You learned all about the elements of a tort and the nuance of consideration. You even journeyed into the vast jungle that is bankruptcy law. And you paid handsomely. Your eyesight. Your lovelife. Your liver. All not what they were when you started. Oh, and your net worth. You now are worth negative $xxx,xxx.xx. Before you were only worth negative $xx,xxx.xx or, if you were lucky, negative $x,xxx.xx. Ah, it feels so good to have graduated. And now you have the skills to be a lawyer. You had those classes on dealing with clients, trying cases, discovery matters, sending out bills, managing your secretaries and paralegals, screening prospective clients, and negotiating complex transactions. Yes, the basics of practicing law. You are well positioned to go forth and sue.
Of course, I am just kidding. You aren't ready at all. You think you are. I know you think you are because you don't let a single chance to tell someone you are a lawyer pass you by. For example:
Of course, I am just kidding. You aren't ready at all. You think you are. I know you think you are because you don't let a single chance to tell someone you are a lawyer pass you by. For example:
- You are at the checkout line at Kroger's and the bagger asks you if you want paper or plastic. Your response: "Ahh, that reminds me of the case _____________(insert meaningless case you read in law school that has no application in the jurisdiction you are practicing in now) in which a plastics company was sued by its employee for wrongful termination under Title VII (prior to its amendment, which, again, has no application to the current state of the law). You see, I am a lawyer, so I will take plastic. Ha ha (you toss your head back and flick your hair)."
- You intentionally try to speed and roll through stop signs so you can be pulled over and put the 4th Amendment to the test, hoping to catch the cop trying to unreasonably detain you only to then yell "Ah ha you fool, I am a lawyer and I will have none of this abridgment of my rights!." He then shoots you.
- You spent $100 at your graduation on law school clothes, and now that is all you wear in public on the weekends.
- You blog about your life and wisdom and try to impart your wisdom (through your experiences) to others through that blog.
- You take every chance you get to lecture someone on why the McDonald's coffee spill case really wasn't that outrageous considering the totality of the circumstances.
- You use phrases like "totality of the circumstances."
- You go to McDonald's and order coffee at the drive-thru then joke with the high schooler who hands you the coffee: "Careful there kid. Wouldn't want to spill that on me. I'm a lawyer. I'd sue ya. He he he."
Fact is, you aren't a lawyer yet. You have a piece of paper on your wall that says how well you suck up, brown nose, and back stab (i.e., diploma) and how well you jump through hoops for people who only make you jump through hoops because they had to, even though they now realize it was meaningless (i..e, bar exam and bar license). That doesn't make you a lawyer. The only reason they gave you these pieces of paper is because after the three years you just went through, they want you to have something to show for it. Sure they can get away with making doctors and Ph.D.s wait longer for a degree and license, but not with law students. No, law students are only law students because we weren't smart enough to get into med school or a Ph.D. program. They need more rewards and encouragement and quicker turnaround. So they gave us a diploma and a law license a few years earlier then they should. The problem is, they don't bother telling us that when it comes to the law we are about as cognizant as a dog watching the nightly news with Brian Williams. We have no frickin clue.
Yes, dear recent graduate, your law school career was meaningless and the bar exam was a joke. All that time and here are the only skills you have:
- You now can hear the term "assignor" and "assignee" and not giggle.
- You can look up a case on Lexis or Westlaw for senior partners who want "that one case that says there is no such thing as intentional negligence" because they are still haven't bothered learning all about the internets and electronic e-mails.
- You can operate on half of the sleep you could before law school because you stayed up studying things like ancillary claims and pendant party jurisdiction in law school (Oh, by the way, no one cares about those things in the real world except professors and a few judges. Lawyers really don't bother with such nonsense).
- You know the Bluebook forward and backword, and can correctly cite a legislative session note from 1974 (because we all know you have to cite those every day in your briefs).
- You have successfully managed to spend a large sum of money on something that really isn't worth that much (law school) and convince yourself it was of value, which comes in handy for you as a lawyer when you have to ask your client to do the same thing. Now that is a good skill you have.
Oh yes, that is about the extent of the skills you have as a fresh graduate from law school. What you don't have, well, that is another for my next blog.
Fred out...
That does it....
That does it. I read all these lunatic rantings of law students and hot shot associates in all these big firms who bleed debt and strive to please partners who smell of mahogany and scotch. Seriously, they just don't get it. So, Fred must spring into action. Fred (that's me but this is not my real name) must break the silence and spread truthism wherever it needs spread. Who am I? Well, Fred is a real lawyer who did very well in school but realized very early on that law school is a game--a big game. Even more, much of the practice of law is a big game. And, it is not rewarding at all, unless you have some fun and take it in context. So, this begins the great journey into blogging by Fred--the greatest lawyer of all time ever.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
