Law School

Book Review: The Nonsense Factory, by Bruce Cannon Gibney

The Nonsense Factory by Bruce Cannon Gibney is a scathing critique of the American Legal System. A venture capitalist and former big firm litigator, Gibney knows his subject.

There is a lot to criticize in the legal system starting with law school, and Gibney touches on most of it. His criticism of law schools is pointed, but in a funny way:

American law schools have settled for the worst of all worlds–an abstracted research faculty presiding over an outmoded trade school. The results have not been good….Many students flub the bar exam and will never practice law, while the rest require years of expertise before they can produce competent work on their own….American law schools, then, are something of a bust.

Many students, even from relatively good schools. fail the bar exam–a test for which law school does not really prepare them…Naturally, people who should fail do fail. But some people who should pass also fail….

What is consequential is that the bottom half of law schools routinely admit battalions of students who will not thrive…

new lawyers face troubling levels of unemployment.

Gibney does not stop with law schools. He also criticizes the lack of formal judicial training:

one federal appointee, lacking trial experience, was confounded by routine oral motions, scurrying back to chambers to research basic questions that a trained judge could handle automatically; another recently appointed judge in California has been known to solicit advice from colleagues via text message in open court.

There is a chapter on mandatory arbitration, which Gibney criticizes as catastrophic for employees and consumers. But he does a good job explaining not all arbitration is bad:

arbitration arose to serve specific purposes and remains a fair and useful mechanism for the kinds of disputes that occasioned its invention.

It’s clear Gibney worked in a big law firm when he discusses hourly rates and legal fees:

Clients might accept the risk of minor imperfections, but lawyers won’t and can’t. For junior lawyers, a mere typo can be a source of profound embarrassment, while a substantive mistake is seen as a potentially career-ending disaster….Opponents will gleefully exploit any blunder, and law’s adversarial culture is so deeply entrenched that even senior partners revel in exposing mistakes made by their own teams, however trivial.

Unfortunately, this is 100% true. I also suspect it has spilled into the judiciary as lawyers who worked in this culture became judges.

Much more than when I began practicing in the early 90’s, litigation has become an exercise in dodging trap doors that allow cases to be decided on issues other than the merits. While most of these trap doors–such as pre-suit notice requirements–apply to plaintiffs, many also apply to defendants. Too many cases are decided based on what happens during litigation, as opposed to the underlying dispute.

This is bad for litigants, impedes the public’s trust in the judicial system and makes practicing law miserable. And it will get worse before it gets better.

Gibney’s critique of the legal system is the best I’ve read. The only drawback is he’s light on solutions. For that, I recommend David Tunno’s Fixing the Engine of Justice, which I reviewed here.

In summary, The Nonsense Factory is an enjoyable and thought-provoking read that I highly recommend.

Twitter
Facebook
Email
LinkedIn

It’s Tough Out There for Lawyers

The bad news keeps pouring in for lawyers with these latest headlines:

From the Times article:

Mr. Acosta is just one of tens of thousands of recent law school graduates caught up in a broad transformation of the legal profession. While demand for other white-collar jobs has grown substantially since the start of the recession, law firms and corporations are finding they can make do with far fewer in-house lawyers than before, squeezing those just starting their careers.

Here in Jackson, 2016 seems to be a shake out year. Firm breakups and downsizing are going on that points to fewer lawyers and staff at the big firms. That’s going to lead to increased competition for lawyers who do personal injury, family law and other practice areas that lawyers outside big firms focus on.

These pressures will in turn lead to more anxiety and depression for lawyers who are worried about their future.

Twitter
Facebook
Email
LinkedIn

Yea, but it’s not the low pay that makes them happy

Here’s an article from the New York Times last week with the headline “Lawyers with Lowest Pay Report More Happiness.”

The article is unsurprising, even if the headline is a bit misleading. From the article:

Researchers who surveyed 6,200 lawyers about their jobs and health found that the factors most frequently associated with success in the legal field, such as high income or a partner-track job at a prestigious firm, had almost zero correlation with happiness and well-being. However, lawyers in public-service jobs who made the least money, like public defenders or Legal Aid attorneys, were most likely to report being happy.

So what’s the problem with the highest paying jobs:

The problem with the more prestigious jobs, said Mr. Krieger, is that they do not provide feelings of competence, autonomy or connection to others three pillars of self-determination theory, the psychological model of human happiness on which the study was based. Public-service jobs do.

It’s a good article that touches on issues of substance abuse and suicide by lawyers.

But I don’t think the article is news for many inside the legal profession. I don’t remember when I figured out that colleagues who went in-house or to the public sector were generally happier than those they left behind in big firms, but I’ve known it for a long time.

And it’s not the lower pay that makes the non-big firm lawyers happier. It’s the job. The lower pay is the tradeoff–not the benefit.

Unfortunately, the move becomes financially difficult for many lawyers. Most salaried employees in any field increase their lifestyle until they are spending their entire salary.

It may sound ridiculous to some people, but it’s easy. Go from an 1,800 to a 4,000 s.f. house, join a country club, put the kids in private school, get a couple of premium brand cars, go to ball games in the fall, go on a couple of nice vacations every year and boom: suddenly you feel broke.

Often, the result is that lawyers who felt wealthy making $45,000 a year fresh out of law school can’t fathom how their family can live on less than $250,000 a year. [Plug in your own numbers here–the exact figures aren’t the point].

So many lawyers end up feeling trapped in their big firm/ private practice jobs.

It’s a real issue for many lawyers.

Twitter
Facebook
Email
LinkedIn