Dear Recent Law School Graduate:

I am sorry it has been such a long time since I last wrote, but the life of a lawyer is not easy. It’s been almost two years since I last wrote and a lot of things have changed and a lot of things are the same.

I made partner this year, which has required more (non-billable) work. The kids are getting older: Braden is almost five and Kyan is a rambunctious two-year-old. Some days, Michelle and I battle to a draw with the kids, but for the most part, they are winning the war at home. I’ve even been able to squeeze in a few marathons since I last wrote, most recently one in New Jersey on Sunday.

But enough about me (and the potential discussion on partnership, family planning and work-life balance). Let’s talk about you.

The legal job market is still fairly tough, especially for new lawyers. Firms are looking for attorneys with some experience, but new attorneys can’t get experience without getting a job. It’s our own legal Catch-22.  There have been reports of a comeback, but that is probably of little solace if you are still looking for a job. My advice on the job search remains the same:

When it comes to the economy and available legal employment opportunities, I do not envy you. We all know that it is a tough market out there. Legal jobs are scarce and the competition is brutal, but keep your head up. The toughest legal job to find will be your first one. All you need is one offer.  I remember the stack of rejection letters that sat on my coffee table years ago. I also remember when I got my first offer (thanks Judge Murdock) and the excitement I felt to start my career. It would do a lot of attorneys good if they remembered how hard it was at the beginning. We forget sometimes, as if we never struggled in court or with a client or to find a job.

Read the rest of this entry »

Powered by Bookmarkify™

To law school that is. I saw a short article this morning about the value of a law degree in a divorce case. A judge held that a wife’s J.D. added $126,000 to her earning power. (I’m not sure about the wife’s age or experience or what kind of law she practices, but it seems the court valued her degree less than what she paid for it.)

I know I’ve written about this before, but I’m thinking about it again as I continue my job search/ hiatus. What value does my law degree have now, and what value will it have 20 years from now? I feel like it’ll all be worth it, but I must say the dream of a life without loans is a sweet one.

Most entry-level attorney jobs (besides big-firm jobs) don’t pay that much more than the starting salary at a non-lawyer job. The earning potential is more with a law degree, but if you’re smart enough, put your time into working your way up and don’t act like a jerk then you can have similar earning potential.

But it wouldn’t be the same. People are still going to law school in droves and I believe having a J.D. increases your earning capacity, even as society’s view of what it means to be a lawyer changes and even though the payoff can seem impossible now.

Most law graduates are still finding employment even if it is in a “non-lawyer” type positions, like working for their law school in some capacity. And while some may bash these positions, they sound pretty good to me; decent hours and salary while gaining legal experience. The J.D. may not be “required,” but let’s face it — it would be a hard feat to get these jobs without a law degree.

What do you think? Is law school still a good investment or is it a road to nowhere, tempting people who want to feel a sense of accomplishment but who are unprepared for the real world come graduation?

Powered by Bookmarkify™

In my first-year torts class, the professor told us during our first meeting that learning the vocabulary of a lawyer was important. He told us that someday, the potential clients who would seek us out would expect us to “sound like lawyers.” He advised us to get the pocket version of Black’s Law Dictionary, look up any word we came across that we didn’t know, check the margin and then try to use it in a sentence within the next 24 hours.

I remember thinking it was a funny thing to advise, to “sound” like a lawyer. Nonetheless, as a dutiful first-year, I took his recommendation to heart, bought my Black’s and faithfully marked up my copy over the next few years.

I had almost forgotten about his comment until I was preparing for the bar. One of the teachers I had gave the class some very strange advice: if we encountered an essay question to which we didn’t know the answer, we should isolate the area of law and just start underling and defining vocabulary words.

All of us in the class chuckled nervously and glanced at one another. He waited for that to subside.

“I’m serious,” he said after the murmurs subsided. “They want you to sound like lawyers.”

He paused a moment before adding, “The rest is up to you!”

I think often of these two instances when I am speaking with colleagues, clients and even people in other professions at networking events. It is true that attorneys are expected to “talk the talk” the same way insurance salesmen, plumbers and bartenders have specific lingo their clients expect them to know.

The real key, I think, is knowing the appropriate time and place to “sound like a lawyer.”

I can tell you from experience it isn’t at home when you might be, say, discussing kids’ carpool arrangements or their weekend sports schedule with your wife. It also isn’t when you’re explaining what you do to a class of preschoolers or kindergarteners during a career day. It isn’t even really at networking events when asked to explain what you do. In those instances, your elevator pitch has to be accessible to everyone listening, not just the other attorneys in the group.

In fact, it seems that most often, this “sounding like a lawyer” business is a performance for a client, opposing counsel or a judge, each expecting the jargon and ready to counter with their own.

The more difficult task is figuring out how not to sound like a lawyer, and, as you might be able to tell, I’m still learning.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

In my last post, I encapsulated the 2011 debate regarding the maintenance of minorities within law firms. It was a grim picture with depressing numbers.

After the recession in 2008, it appeared law firms planned to overhaul longstanding systems, such as lockstep and summer associate programs. However, as we find ourselves on the doorstep of 2012, diversity programs have not seemed to be successful in increasing the diversity numbers within law firms.

This is not an issue specific to law firms, though. The percentage of minority lawyers compared to the overall lawyer population has hovered around 10 percent for almost a decade. In a conference hosted by the Society of American Law Teachers (SALT), the consensus by law deans, admissions officers and pre-law counselors is counselors and admissions officers need to do a better job of identifying promising minority applicants, guiding them through the often intimidating application process and ensuring they graduate.

More pipeline programs need to be developed as part of the solution so pre-law advising can bridge the racial gap at law schools by supporting minority students in their efforts to gain admission to law schools. While most law school applicants kill themselves trying to gain acceptance into institutions at the top of the U.S. News & World Report rankings, these pipeline programs can also help minority students identify other law schools that could be more in tune with their professional goals post-graduation.

Read the rest of this entry »

Powered by Bookmarkify™

I had a great clinic experience in law school. I participated in a consumer protection clinic which was both extremely relevant and something that I’m very interested in. But I have heard varying opinions about clinics.

On the one hand, students have the opportunity to gain a great deal from clinic work by making connections, networking and gaining practical experience to jump-start their careers.

Of course, not every student lands a job through a clinic, and not all employers take clinical experience into account in the hiring process. Questions about the motives of clinic work are often raised; some view student attorneys in the same vein as research assistants, working on projects that advance a professor’s political agenda or research project.

And, as we’ve learned recently in Maryland, issues also arise when law schools receiving state funding file law suits that are considered by many to be against the better interests of the state. The University of Maryland Environmental Law Clinic has drawn criticism about a lawsuit it filed against Perdue Farms and a chicken farming-family on the Eastern Shore, alleging violations of environmental regulations and polluting of the Chesapeake Bay.

Gov. Martin O’Malley came out recently against the litigation, calling it a waste of taxpayer money. The Hudson family, one of the defendants, has called the allegations false and warns it will lose its farm and livelihood should the law school prevail.

Proponents of the lawsuit say that it champions the causes of those people that can’t afford lawyers. But is any law school clinic representing the Hudsons?

What do you think about this case and the academic freedom currently given to law school clinics? Should the lawsuits filed by clinics receive greater scrutiny or is the Hudson’s plight just an unfortunate — but legitimate — outcome of our justice system?

Powered by Bookmarkify™

It looks like the lender who provided me with the financial opportunity to complete law school has been squeezed out of the game.

Access Group Inc. said last month it would no longer lend to new students and is laying off most of its staff, according to the National Law Journal. In its early years, Access provided student loans to 75-to-80 percent of law students, and recently was still providing approximately $850 million in loans to 25,000-to-30,000 law students.

But Access — as well as numerous other student loan lenders — have fallen victim to the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, which made the U.S. Department of Education the sole provider of federally-guaranteed student loans.

In 2006, the government created Graduate PLUS loans, which allow students to borrow the full amount of the costs of their graduate education with federally-guaranteed loans. With the ever-tightening restrictions in private lending after 2008, this provides only one outlet for post-baccalaureate students to pursue graduate school using student loans to fund their education.

Doesn’t seem like too big of a deal, right? After all, it’s not like the government is eliminating the ability to borrow any money for graduate school. However, when reviewing my own, very lengthy Access account statement, I noticed that the interest rate on my Graduate PLUS loans is the worst out of all the different loan types (Subsidized Stafford, Unsubsidized Stafford, and Private) that I used.

Read the rest of this entry »

Powered by Bookmarkify™