The Art of Lawyering

saosmash

@Roz Yeah it was the worst and most grueling part of the whole thing. Bar prep was brutal. Never worked harder before or since.

Ganymede

@saosmash

As with most things, I didn’t find preparation particularly difficult. Stressful, sure; difficult, no. Mind, I was pretty privileged having a quiet place of my own and the ability to buy old exams.

I advise 3Ls to get as many exams as possible, and undergo daily drills. Hammer out 100 questions a day at least. Do it and you can find the patterns in how the questions are asked.
Key in the answers based on your outlines. And so on.

Also, be advised that I have a reputation as being a robot for a reason, and not just because of my diesel physique.

saosmash

@Ganymede I did Barbri. I think the thing that made it grueling for me was how much time I spent doing it and how intensely I did it. My memory of that period is basically just a fugue of practice, practice, wrist pain, practice, but I was absolutely terrified of not passing the bar the first time and having to do it again.

Although the actual bar exam I found not particularly hard, except for the one question that had issues in it that weren't in any of Barbri's outline, wherein I was remembering stuff from a 2L course in employment law I JUST HAPPENED to take. There were a lot of pissed off test-takers in the hallway afterwards about that.

Rinel

@Derp said in The Art of Lawyering:

(Louisiana does not use the MBE. I don't remember what they use, but it's not the MBE. @Rinel?)

Louisiana has a unique bar exam consisting of nine separate tests spread out over 3 days:

Monday: 3 separate tests covering unique aspects of the Civil Code (Persons, Family Law, Property, Successions, Trusts, Obligations, Sale, Lease, Conflict of Laws, &c.)

Wednesday: Louisiana Civil Procedure. Torts. Business Entities (they stopped testing negotiable instruments the year after I took it).

Friday: Constitutional Law. Criminal Law & Evidence. Federal Civil Procedure.

In total, it's 21 hours of testing, and by the time I walked out of the door on Friday I literally could not tell you what the questions I had just answered were.

Ominous

@nyctophiliac said in The Art of Lawyering:

Had to google PI.

It doesn't mean Private Investigator. It means Personal Injury.

Sounds far less fun than my initial assumption. My heart, it breaks.

It's got a reputation as being where the money is at, because PI attorneys work on contingency taking 1/3 of whatever their client gets as payment.

Anyway, you ever seen in the movies where there's this firm of lawyers who are like "if you win this case we will make you a partner" -> Can someone explain that? Does that actually happen?

Being a partner means your name is part of the firm. "Smith, Jackson, & Goldstein" for instance would indicate that the partners are attorneys whose last names are Smith, Jackson, and Goldstein. Partners own the firm, do they make the big decisions, get the best cases, and make the most money.

Rinel

@Ominous said in The Art of Lawyering:

Partners own the firm, do they make the big decisions, get the best cases, and make the most money.

Only the first two parts of this are universally true. Getting the best cases and making the most money may (does) happen in large, established firms, but when money is tight in new firms it's the partners who take the hit.

Ganymede

@nyctophiliac said in The Art of Lawyering:

Anyway, you ever seen in the movies where there's this firm of lawyers who are like "if you win this case we will make you a partner" -> Can someone explain that? Does that actually happen?

It probably happens, but it shouldn't. Partners are essentially business partners, so you only want to bring someone on if: (1) they are productive and contributing members of the firm already; and (2) they fit into the firm's culture. Winning a case may bring a lot of money into the firm, but bringing in one good payout isn't a partner-worthy accolade. In my case, I was made partner because I have been productive over a long period of time, even if my individual accounts don't bring in mountains of money.

What is the bar exam - it's like a licensing test right? Does it cost money to take? Does it last a certain length of time, are there strings attached?

You have the gist of it. It does cost money to take, and generally lasts 3 days for many. There's no string attached to taking it, but you may not be able to take it if you cannot get past requirements for a particular jurisdiction's bar association.

What can actually cause you to be disbarred (that's the term right?)? Could to retry the exam later if disbarred?

You can be barred for many reasons, and each jurisdiction has its own crusade every year. In Ohio, the crusade relates to accounting and insurance notices. If you are disbarred, you usually must receive permission to join the bar association again, but you generally do not have to take the bar exam again in that situation.

Derp

@Ominous said in The Art of Lawyering:

Being a partner means your name is part of the firm. "Smith, Jackson, & Goldstein" for instance would indicate that the partners are attorneys whose last names are Smith, Jackson, and Goldstein.

This part is actually not universally true. Those are called 'name partners'. It's usually one of the name partners that acts as the managing partner, the ceo of the firm, so to speak. Then you have senior partners, who may or may not be bought into the firm, but do not have their name on the firm, and junior partners, the (usually) lowest tier of actual partner. Partnership is weird.

Derp

@Rinel

Why you gotta be rebels, with your weird bar exam business and your parishes instead of counties?

Rinel

@Ganymede

Louisiana's most common reason for sanction is, by far, conversion of client funds in the IOLTA.

ETA: In Louisiana, if you're suspended for over a year, you have to take the bar exam again. Year and a day suspensions are very common for that reason.

Derp

@Rinel

IOLTA, for those playing along at home, is "Interest on Lawyer Trust Accounts." That whole "stealing from the client" thing from earlier.

It's likely the most common reason anywhere.

Rinel

@Derp said in The Art of Lawyering:

@Rinel

Why you gotta be rebels, with your weird bar exam business and your parishes instead of counties?

Y'all make fun of us for the civil law but last I checked we have a United States CODE

boneghazi

Such interesting answers!

Now I'm curious about other things because my mind wanders!

Do lawyers have stereotypes of other kinds of lawyers?

Are all lawyers pessimistic?

Are you all amazing in social situations because of your jobs? Or do you think that it's a prerequisite?

Is there a lawyer joke you just should absolutely not ever make under any circumstances?

saosmash

@nyctophiliac said in The Art of Lawyering:

Such interesting answers!

Now I'm curious about other things because my mind wanders!

Do lawyers have stereotypes of other kinds of lawyers?

Definitely. Lots. I mean, there are stereotypes that we have just in public defense about public defenders - the jaded workhorse versus the one who drank the koolaid - so I'm sure there's others out there.

Are all lawyers pessimistic?

No. My first boss was incredibly optimistic. Unfortunately, he frequently shared his rosy view of the world with the clients, and this included a rosy view of what their payouts were likely to be. I received many crash courses in what not to do during the course of that job.

I do think most lawyers are cynics. Even the idealistic ones.

Also a surprising number of us that I have met have adult ADHD in some form.

Are you all amazing in social situations because of your jobs? Or do you think that it's a prerequisite?

Fuck no. Lol. I'm deeply socially awkward, but have learned to mask well. I've seen some other lawyers who were basically social train wrecks. Nothing about law school or lawyering teaches you to interact with other human beings, including other lawyers.

Is there a lawyer joke you just should absolutely not ever make under any circumstances?

If you're bugged by lawyer jokes you're in the wrong job.

I have a joke I use in voir dire:

"There are only three lawyer jokes ... the rest are all true stories."

I suspect the prosecutors are as sick of hearing me tell that joke as I am of hearing their canned thing about reasonable doubt, but whatever.

Rinel

@nyctophiliac said in The Art of Lawyering:

Such interesting answers!

@nyctophiliac said in The Art of Lawyering:

Do lawyers have stereotypes of other kinds of lawyers?

Probably, but I think they fade away as fields you have no interest in get forgotten and you get to know your fellow practitioners better.

@nyctophiliac said in The Art of Lawyering:

Are all lawyers pessimistic?

You should walk into courtrooms not merely hoping to win, but actively expecting to do so. I'm one of the more pessimistic lawyers I know. Most are very... driven, I guess is the right word, in a way that doesn't allow for pessimism.

@nyctophiliac said in The Art of Lawyering:

Are you all amazing in social situations because of your jobs? Or do you think that it's a prerequisite?

...have you seen the shit I post? Anyway, no, while lawyers maybe tend to be a bit more social than others, lots of us are actively not. Waiters, for example, are going to better at social stuff.

Is there a lawyer joke you just should absolutely not ever make under any circumstances?

I'm sure one exists, but I usually just roll my eyes. I will give impromptu lessons on the history of the constitution to anyone who dares utter the word "technicality" in my range of hearing.

Macha

I am curious how the Lawyers feel about Jury consultants/Trial Science? (I know Bull is overblown and not what actually happens, but it made me curious)

Derp

@saosmash said in The Art of Lawyering:

I do think most lawyers are cynics. Even the idealistic ones.

I think that this is part nature, part training. When you learn to dissect things as closely as people do in the legal profession, you lose the line between 'examination' and 'cynicism'.

Also a surprising number of us that I have met have adult ADHD in some form.

Many people have told me that I display some tells on this one, but I've never gone to get tested. Most doctors here just think you're looking for cheaper meth. It would not at all surprise me though. Based on what I read about it, I resonate with that about 127%.

Derp

@Macha said in The Art of Lawyering:

I am curious how the Lawyers feel about Jury consultants/Trial Science? (I know Bull is overblown and not what actually happens, but it made me curious)

See, the thing that you eventually learn is that all Social Science is really just behavioral psychology, with focus on certain aspects. Political Science, Economics. It's all behavioral psychology.

And we also learn that those statistics might seem bunk a lot of the time, but there is real truth in there. You have to go into this thing playing to win, and while most attorneys have pretty high ideals about facts and procedures and precedents, juries typically don't give a fuck about that, and judges can only be counted on to apply it when aware of it. Numerous (NUMEROUS) studies have been done about things like sentencing outcomes, and we've figured out that there are an incredible range of factors that determine different aspects, up to and including whether or not someone is hungry, or has to pee, or what color clothes someone is wearing.

You definitely want to go in mitigating as many factors against you as you possibly can.

Ominous

What's the difference between a lawyer and a prostitute? A prostitute stops screwing you once you're dead.

Why don't sharks eat lawyers? Professional courtesy.

What’s the difference between a lawyer and a jellyfish? One is a spineless, poisonous blob, and the other is a form of sea life.

Rinel

@Ominous

Okay I retract my earlier statement. You should never make these jokes, because they are bad jokes.