View Full Version : Litigation Career
Roguish Lawyer
12-31-2004, 12:12
This was split off the SEALs lawsuit thread to keep it pristine.
I think that any law related to that kind of thing would be pre-1984 (like 1940's era for the basis), but it might be an interesting couple of hours. I've got a student subscription that goes live on January 3rd. I'm sure it's limited as to how broad it is, but $30 for 1 year of unlimited use can't be a bad thing :D
But I'm sure NDD would appreciate a few paragraphs of Lawyer-Speak in his thread :D
I am confused. If you are in law school, you are going to get a free subscription because they want you to get addicted to on-line research so you will waste your clients' money on unnecessary on-line research once you start practicing. Who is charging you $30?
Law-student-speak is much better than lawyer-speak, trust me on that one. ;)
Bravo1-3
12-31-2004, 12:45
RL,I haven't started school yet. I'm interning as a Paralegal and have to take a Legal Research class at WSU... they get the money. It's been very enlightening for me so far: I have learned that I should stay away from litigation, and that opposing counsel doesn't like it when they hear you in the hallway referring to them as "That 'Penny Saver' Ad Lawyer". :D
I get 1 hour per week for school research on Wests and Lexis at the office, and I have to pay for anything over that myself... this will definitely make my life easier.
Didn't mean to jack this thread
Roguish Lawyer
12-31-2004, 13:17
I have learned that I should stay away from litigation
Why? :munchin
Bravo1-3
12-31-2004, 14:07
Why? :munchin
Several Reasons:
1. Both clients are lying, or at least not telling the whole truth.
2. Pre-Trial between parties is an almost continuous stream of e-mail/phone/mail tag. The only time you get to catch up is at depositions when you're talking to the other sides Paralegal while the Attorneys are taking a leak. "Did you get this?" "I'm still waiting on your answer for XXXXXXX" etc... It's a lot like swimming upstream in either a riverbed that is dry one minute, raging the next, and dry again.
3. I have an ingrained hostility for people who look right in my eyes and either are evasive or openly dishonest. I maintain my composure on the outside, but inside I am fighting to keep myself from doing some impromptu unlicensed oral surgery on the skell in question. The partner that I generally work for has informed me that my poker face is almost perfect, but I clench my teeth or bite the inside of my lip when I'm doing it.
4. You can have everything right, your client could actually have suffered legitimate, real harm due to the other sides deliberate negligence, and you can have a jury (composed of people who were too dumb stupid to get out of Jury Duty) still not find for you. :D Same thing applies in Criminal cases, but I'll never work in that field.
5. In a lot of cases, it IS about who has the most money. Fortunately, it hasn't happened to me yet, but I've seen other firms withdraw from cases where a plaintiff (no call on legitimacy) simply couldn't pay to move any farther forward, and the potential outcome was insufficient to continue representing them. I understand the reasoning behind it, and I don't blame them since they're not exactly "Legal Aid" firms, but it does rub me the wrong way.
6. "Sue first, ask questions later" Penny-Saver Ad law firms that generate their own cases then find plaintiffs to represent. We're representing a landlord right now in a case in which 3 of the 5 plaintiffs admitted at deposition that they had no idea that they were "harmed" until the opposing counsel told them they were (yes, there's going to be a complaint filed with the Bar Association on that. I'm going to enjoy helping draft it).
7. It's depressing, subjective and hostile (not just adversarial)
Most of these issues invole my failure to set up a complete "Ethical/Moral Wall", but I'm something of an old dog, and I see it that as a new trick.
Roguish Lawyer
12-31-2004, 14:12
You are working principally on personal injury cases?
Bravo1-3
12-31-2004, 15:04
With the parents firm it's PI and Family Law. With the sons firm (same building, other side of the building, it's Bankruptcy, Workers Comp, and the occassional curve ball "favor for a friend" that has nothing to do with any of those listed above, usually something having to do with Real Estate, requests for modification of orders or vacation of judgements and collections... I hate collections, but I'm actually pretty good at it, must be that barely concealed hostility thing :D
Roguish Lawyer
12-31-2004, 15:06
With the parents firm it's PI and Family Law. With the sons firm (same building, other side of the building, it's Bankruptcy, Workers Comp, and the occassional curve ball "favor for a friend" that has nothing to do with any of those listed above, usually something having to do with Real Estate, requests for modification of orders or vacation of judgements and collections... I hate collections, but I'm actually pretty good at it, must be that barely concealed hostility thing :D
I would be careful about jumping to conclusions based upon your limited experience to date. The world is a big place.
Roguish Lawyer
12-31-2004, 15:19
Didn't mean to jack this thread
It's OK, I fixed it. :lifter
Yeah, we get free Lexis/Nexis and Westlaw, but the school restricted access the first semester b/c they wanted us to learn how to find stuff in the books. So we had to play the whole missing/hidden books game in the library.
I'm leaning away from litigation too, but that's just b/c I don't express myself well orally. I can get my point across much better as a writer, with the ability to edit. :) But you're right RL, I'm just a 1st semester-under-his-belt night school guy with a lot to learn.
First week of school during orientation the Dean runs a session. We go over an appellate case of a woman convicted of heroin distribution. Well, the Dean was counsel handling her appeal, so of course the question was would you defend a convicted drug dealer. The learning for me was that you can knock the system all you want, until it's your ass in the sling and you need a lawyer. Everyone has to go by their own moral compass, but as long as it's within ethical bounds I believe in the system we have.
Roguish Lawyer
12-31-2004, 16:02
I'm just a 1st semester-under-his-belt night school guy with a lot to learn.
That's OK. NDD would like your thoughts in the Gitmo thread, please. :munchin
OK, I'm gonna look up some stuff on Mon. and read some of these gov't memos first. Man, I'm gonna need a big chew to get through those.
Is this a setup? Reminds me of a saying we have, roughly translated as, "walking into the mouth of the tiger....." :)
alphamale
12-31-2004, 21:38
Of the 4 lawyers who returned home late that night when I had scheduled Christmas Tree decorating festivities, the one with the best answer, "Where are the bulbs?" was a litigator.
Somehow I've become surrounded by lawyers. My bestist buddy Bryce, my bf, my roommate, their friends who come over to play poker.
Perhaps this is why I value firearms skills more :D .
(In a moment of seriousness, I started appreciating things legal in business school when we looked at societies where contracts can't be enforced and there is no basis on which to conduct business and everyone's quality of life suffers as a result.)
FrontSight
Airbornelawyer
01-03-2005, 18:15
I'm leaning away from litigation too, but that's just b/c I don't express myself well orally. I can get my point across much better as a writer, with the ability to edit. :) But you're right RL, I'm just a 1st semester-under-his-belt night school guy with a lot to learn.You think we ain't gots ta talk real good an' purty-like?
BTW, junior associates in the litigation departments of big firms tend to spend a lot of time on document review and legal research. They work their way up to drafting motions and the like, and eventually get to depositions. Arguing before a jury is a long way off.
Roguish Lawyer
01-03-2005, 18:22
BTW, junior associates in the litigation departments of big firms tend to spend a lot of time on document review and legal research. They work their way up to drafting motions and the like, and eventually get to depositions. Arguing before a jury is a long way off.
This is generally true, but there are exceptions. Luck has a lot to do with it.
BTW, do corporate associates ever have to review any documents? :munchin LOL
Airbornelawyer
01-03-2005, 18:50
This is generally true, but there are exceptions. Luck has a lot to do with it.
BTW, do corporate associates ever have to review any documents? :munchin LOLTransactional lawyers don't do document review, we do "due diligence." ;)
The point is, when law students compare and contrast litigators and transactional lawyers, they generally characterize the fields as vsvo did, i.e., in terms of speaking versus writing skills. But the reality often is that there is more to compare than to contrast. Junior lawyers - both transactional and litigation - generally do a lot of legal research and document review, and eventually work up to basic document preparation. Developing your "people skills" - especially the ability to present yourself orally - matter for both types.
If you choose transactional law because you prefer research and writing to speaking and arguing, and fail to develop the latter, you will find your career prospects endangered by your 3rd or 4th year, as the powers that be start to more seriously evaluate how you will deal with and develop clients, and whether you have the skills to negotiate deals.
Roguish Lawyer
01-03-2005, 18:56
Transactional lawyers don't do document review, we do "due diligence." ;)
The point is, when law students compare and contrast litigators and transactional lawyers, they generally characterize the fields as vsvo did, i.e., in terms of speaking versus writing skills. But the reality often is that there is more to compare than to contrast. Junior lawyers - both transactional and litigation - generally do a lot of legal research and document review, and eventually work up to basic document preparation. Developing your "people skills" - especially the ability to present yourself orally - matter for both types.
If you choose transactional law because you prefer research and writing to speaking and arguing, and fail to develop the latter, you will find your career prospects endangered by your 3rd or 4th year, as the powers that be start to more seriously evaluate how you will deal with and develop clients, and whether you have the skills to negotiate deals.
Of course, these comments apply principally to working at large corporate law firms, not small firms or even relatively large firms in smaller cities.
Airbornelawyer
01-03-2005, 19:01
Of course, these comments apply principally to working at large corporate law firms, not small firms or even relatively large firms in smaller cities.
True. Most litigator friends of mine who've left the firm have gone to smaller firms precisely because they were tired of document review and never developing their written skills - drafting motions and the like - much less trial skills. Generally, they have been happy with the change and have gotten more opportunities to do more substantive work.
Roguish Lawyer
01-03-2005, 19:06
True. Most litigator friends of mine who've left the firm have gone to smaller firms precisely because they were tired of document review and never developing their written skills - drafting motions and the like - much less trial skills. Generally, they have been happy with the change and have gotten more opportunities to do more substantive work.
There can be opportunities for junior litigation associates in large firms to do lots of writing and other things, but it depends on the firm you select, who you end up working with, and whether you demonstrate that you are ready to do the work.
By the end of my second year, I took and defended about 30 depositions, argued a 12(b)(6) motion in federal court, argued a summary judgment motion in state court, and did a bunch of other stuff. But I was in the right place at the right time and got lucky.
AL & RL, given his interests, might he not consider joining a litigation practice, but focusing on appellate work eventually?
Bravo1-3, I would carefully consider your decision to pursue transactional work as an attorney. Consider the following points:
1. The deal business is tough. Getting deals closed can induce brain damage. You'll be the one player in the room with no upside on the transaction you're working to close. Associates at private equity firms and investment banks receive heartier financial incentives than their counterparts at law firms. If you don't love the game, that can get old quickly. Better to realize it now and correct course early.
2. If you do love the game, you should be an investment banker, a finance-focused management consultant, or a corporate development manager at a corporation. These people have a much more robust role, including conceiving of the transaction, developing the supporting economic rationale and business model/execution plan, securing the necessary capital, negotiation (depends on the specific situation), and post-merger integration or value capture.
I've worked on or sourced dozens of deals in all three of these roles, and have never, ever seen an attorney be used for anything besides routine due diligence, tax and transaction structure counsel, or work involving the issuance of securities or perhaps some ERISA-type issues occasionally.
3. Even if you do love the game, a deal is just a deal. Remember that. If you feel drawn to the law (as I did once upon a time) for some of the nobler reasons, you may end up dissatisfied.
I hope that I'm not stepping on anyone's toes here, but this has been my experience, FWIW.
Roguish Lawyer
01-03-2005, 20:26
Yep, deal lawyers are just tools. LMAO
Thank you for your insights and advice guys. You're right AL, I made a generalization which I'm not qualified to make regarding transaction and litigation work and I apologize.
I went straight into consulting out of b-school, working on finance process reengineering and performance measurement. During that time I worked closely with client teams and presented to senior management. I also had opportunities to participate in the sales process. Last year I helped start a business and currently run it full-time. In this role I also have to go on sales calls to build the business. What I meant to say is that presenting is something that doesn't come naturally to me, I have to continually work and hone it. I'm much more comfortable researching and writing.
I originally decided to pursue a legal education b/c I thought it would make me a better entrepreneur. But now that I'm in school I'm becoming more interested in the law. But I have a lot to learn, I haven't even finished my substantive law classes yet. I have no idea what will happen after four years, but I'm trying to keep an open mind.
NousDefionsDoc
01-03-2005, 21:35
How cool is to have a job where you argue with people for money? LOL
Roguish Lawyer
01-04-2005, 12:29
How cool is to have a job where you argue with people for money? LOL
Not as cool as getting paid to blow things up and shoot people in the face. :munchin
Not as cool as getting paid to blow things up and shoot people in the face. :munchin
Now that, is down right barbaric. Technology has evolved....now they get to keep their faces.
I just want their eyes...LMAO! :eek: ;)
Apparently I have disqualified myself from participating in Moot Court. To what extent would that impact my application if I were to apply to a large litigation firm down the road? Based on your comments I understand most junior associates at large firms start out doing the same work, whether it's at a litigation or transactional firm.
Roguish Lawyer
01-18-2005, 16:44
Apparently I have disqualified myself from participating in Moot Court. To what extent would that impact my application if I were to apply to a large litigation firm down the road? Based on your comments I understand most junior associates at large firms start out doing the same work, whether it's at a litigation or transactional firm.
No impact at all if you want to do transactional work, and very little if you do litigation. It is a nice thing to do if you want to be a litigator, but in my opinion it is much better to do law review.
Thanks RL. I plan to compete in the writing competition for law review later this spring.
Roguish Lawyer
01-19-2005, 12:27
Thanks RL. I plan to compete in the writing competition for law review later this spring.
Good. It is the most important test you will take in law school. Do your very best.
Jack Moroney (RIP)
01-19-2005, 15:04
Not as cool as getting paid to blow things up and shoot people in the face. :munchin
Actually it used to be that you could have it all. When I first entered the military, military lawyers were a rare event for courts-martial. Trial and Defense Counsel were appointed on orders from the ranks. As a second LT I got appointed as the Trial Counsel for some pretty hideous stuff, the first of which was a case of sodomy. Now this shit bird was guilty as hell but I could not muster the evidence I needed for proof of his guilt and he hired a civilian shyster to represent him as defense counsel. I was able to prove assault, but not sodomy. The shitbird got off with a light sentence of forfiture of pay and a reduction in grade but stayed in the army. His parting shot at me was that given the chance he would gladly stick it to me also and hope that he would someday get the opportunity. Well, as luck would have it, I took over a company and he was transferred into my unit. Now I was a little bit of a weird duck for a mechanized company commander and thought that it was important to be able to do more than ride around in damn tracks and kill folks at long range and that we needed to be able to close with and kill the commies and so I re-introduced hand to hand combat three days a week and bayonet training the other three days (that was back in the days we actually trained 6 days a week, long weekends were none existant, we could boil water in our steel pots and had entrenching tools that actually worked). Well shitbird shows up for his first day and as this was a new experience for these treadheads, I asked for volunteers from the unit for the intial demonstration for the days training. Shitbird comes sauntering into the ring seeing this as his chance to clean my clock. I fully expected him not to cooperate and as expected he was going to do whatever he could to counter whatever I was going to demonstrate. To make a long story short, he got the crap beaten out of him, became a very mellow-fellow and actually cleaned up his act. Now while this is not blowing him up nor shooting him in the face, the same satisfaction was gained after failing as a litigator and succeeding to sort of even the score with a different type of justice.
Jack Moroney-combative litigator (retired)
LOL. Great story Colonel.
I received clarification that evening students have to wait until the spring of their second year to compete for law review. So I won't get my shot until next spring.
I had an interesting conversation with my classmates last night. We were looking at a published ranking listing the abysmal bar passage rate for our school. Having been trained by ps.com and The Reaper, I said I didn't give a sh*t what the rate is because I intended to pass the bar. They looked at me in momentary confusion, then enlightenment, ... then resumed arguing the implications of the ranking.
Roguish Lawyer
01-28-2005, 18:48
I received clarification that evening students have to wait until the spring of their second year to compete for law review. So I won't get my shot until next spring.
I had an interesting conversation with my classmates last night. We were looking at a published ranking listing the abysmal bar passage rate for our school. Having been trained by ps.com and The Reaper, I said I didn't give a sh*t what the rate is because I intended to pass the bar. They looked at me in momentary confusion, then enlightenment, ... then resumed arguing the implications of the ranking.
I don't think bar passage rates are that important. There are law schools that teach the bar exam rather than how to think, which improves bar passage rates but produces bad lawyers.