It was the wrong thread

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

Someone on my blog is wondering if now is a good time to go to law school. Anecdotally, my boss's kid, a third year at South Texas, got a letter from the firm he clerked with telling him that they're not hiring anyone next year.

Other than that, I don't really have my finger on the pulse of how young associates and law students are holding up.

My general position on law school is "avoid like the plauge" but this person seems a) determined and b) doesn't really have an interest in big firms/salaries.

I don't think it's a good time to go right now because it's what everybody does in a down economy. Supply, demand, etc...

And if he's just getting out of college, he absolutely should not go. Nobody should run into grad school straight out of college, IMO. You know all those "wind up doll" types you've had to work with over the years? The kids who seemed programmed to just get As, go to a good college, go to law or b-school and then run at whatever limited area they work in afterward with laser-like intensity? The ones who can do technical stuff perfectly but really, really can't think out of the box on any bigger picture issue? I think that's what happens when you go to grad school before you work.

If he's a student, tell him he needs to work at something before he goes to any grad school. I think everyone should do that. Rounds people out the way they need to be, IMO. Makes them better at the human aspects of the job, which become more and more important in later years.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I don't think it's a good time to go right now because it's what everybody does in a down economy. Supply, demand, etc...

And if he's just getting out of college, he absolutely should not go. Nobody should run into grad school straight out of college, IMO. You know all those "wind up doll" types you've had to work with over the years? The kids who seemed programmed to just get As, go to a good college, go to law or b-school and then run at whatever limited area they work in afterward with laser-like intensity? The ones who can do technical stuff perfectly but really, really can't think out of the box on any bigger picture issue? I think that's what happens when you go to grad school before you work.

If he's a student, tell him he needs to work at something before he goes to any grad school. I think everyone should do that. Rounds people out the way they need to be, IMO. Makes them better at the human aspects of the job, which become more and more important in later years.

"Thinking outside the box" isn't going to be a problem with this one. She's been out of school for years and she currently works in theater production plus day job.

I get the impression that she wants to stay in the arts, but outside of entertainment law and cool-but-esoteric property law involving ownership disputes over artifacts, I don't know too many arts-law jobs that aren't shoe-string not-for-profit work. The arts organizations around here get legal help from the Texas Accountants and Lawyers for the Arts or pro-bono from big law firms.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by bold_n_brazen

I know very few lawyers who actually like what they do for a living. So my advice would be to think long and hard about what it is this person really wants to DO. And then try to figure out if lawyers actually do those things.

I love my job, but I recognize I'm in the minority.

My daughter is going into a major (film production) that might not be a sure-thing as to jobs. I advised (and she actually listened) that a good back stop would be to take Mandarin or Arabic classes at school. Those skills alone, or tied into another major will be in demand.

Mandarin tied into law will be a sure job. the kid could go to law school semi-part time and take intensive language.

[1436]

I'm not sure how you stay "in the arts" without doing "entertainment law" - that just translates to "I want to work for non-profits" which is a horrible way to pay off LS debt.

As you mention, the main problem is that there are so many attorneys who do this work as pro bono. How can a non-profit justify paying her when others do it for free.

There have to be other things she could do to get paying work with non-profits.

[ltl/fb]

Don't get me wrong, I love living here in beautiful Southern California, but damn am I glad I don't practice at all, and that if I did it would be federal, not state, law.

Depublishing cases? You people have a Sup Ct that removes cases from being published after they actually have been published, and then refuses to review them on appeal? That is just crazy.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by ltl/fb

Don't get me wrong, I love living here in beautiful Southern California, but damn am I glad I don't practice at all, and that if I did it would be federal, not state, law.

Depublishing cases? You people have a Sup Ct that removes cases from being published after they actually have been published, and then refuses to review them on appeal? That is just crazy.

2. I cannot defend the practice, except to say that the Cal. Sup. Ct. has a jurisdictional workload nearly as large as the SCOTUS, a constitutional mandate to hear 100% of death penalty cases and issue substantial evidence opinions on all of them, and no luxury to allow circuit splits to fester and somehow resolve themselves. I don't like depublication, but I understand it.

[ltl/fb]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

2. I cannot defend the practice, except to say that the Cal. Sup. Ct. has a jurisdictional workload nearly as large as the SCOTUS, a constitutional mandate to hear 100% of death penalty cases and issue substantial evidence opinions on all of them, and no luxury to allow circuit splits to fester and somehow resolve themselves. I don't like depublication, but I understand it.

I think CA needs to be split in half.

Or, abolish the death penalty and thereby get rid of that portion of the caseload.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by ltl/fb

I think CA needs to be split in half.

Or, abolish the death penalty and thereby get rid of that portion of the caseload.

If you can persuade even a single one of the 70% of Californians who favor capital punishment that the Supreme Court's habit of depublishing cases compels a change, you are a better lawyer than I by far.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Change in headcount of lawyers at AmLaw 50 firms, from 1984 to 2006.

Sorry about them margins.

[Penske_Account]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Change in headcount of lawyers at AmLaw 50 firms, from 1984 to 2006.

BIG MAP

Sorry about them margins.

Follow the money?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Change in headcount of lawyers at AmLaw 50 firms, from 1984 to 2006.

Does that attribute all lawyers at a firm to their "home" office?

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)

Does that attribute all lawyers at a firm to their "home" office?

Better question: Was there a single census day in 2004? If not, paigow, Gatti, RT, Ty, Slave and potentially innumerable others may have been double-counted. Shit, I'll bet fully half of those are Penske socks.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

Better question: Was there a single census day in 2004? If not, paigow, Gatti, RT, Ty, Slave and potentially innumerable others may have been double-counted. Shit, I'll bet fully half of those are Penske socks.

There are that many LT posters who moved between AmLaw 50 firms?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Sweet name that only a lawyer could appreciate:

Learned Foote

Perhaps his middle name is "Bare"

[1436]

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)

Sweet name that only a lawyer could appreciate:

Learned Foote

Perhaps his middle name is "Bare"

Don't you worry that Hank will be mad at you for making fun of his* son's name.

*By "his son" I mean the son his wife gave birth to and he chose the name of, whether fathered by him or not.