Sunday 30 June 2013

2012 Law Grad: Case Study

"2012 Law Grad Happy to Work in His Hometown," by Jo Mathis (Washtenaw Co. Legal News)

A former colleague forwarded me this article. It is apparently second in a series of three articles profiling young lawyers and law students trying to make it in the legal profession. I couldn't find the first article in the series because the paper isn't indexed very well. However, the young attorney that is profiled seems to have a fairly typical story -- if not better than most since he actually passed the bar exam and is actually practicing -- so I thought perhaps our readers would like to leave some comments about what this young lawyer did right, wrong, and his likely career path. Overall, a great little article but not likely to be read by many pre-law students since it is in a legal newspaper so let's give it some exposure.


Here are some vitals although I would encourage you to read the full article.

Name: Jeff Alber

Hometown: Chelsea, Michigan (Outside Ann Arbor, Michigan)

Undergrad Degree: Albion College (Private) Political Science Degree

Law School: University of Detroit Mercy School of Law (Private)

Bar Passage: Passed Michigan Bar First Attempt (55% Pass Rate)

Student Loan Debt: $150,000 but parents paid it down to "only" five figures

Relationship Status: Girlfriend (thinking about law school)

Legal Career Goal: Return to his hometown of Chelsea, Michigan, to practice law preferably with local four-person established firm in town

Back up plan: Hang a shingle in town

What he is currently doing: Of counsel with desk in conference room of the local four-person Chelsea law firm

How he ended up in law school: Not clear. He was going to attend The Institute of Culinary Education in Manhattan but took the LSAT to give law school a shot instead. 

Money Quote: "'I still don't know what political science means,' he said. 'I wasn't sure what I was going to do.'"

Big Law Aspirations: None. Worked lots of small firm connections during law school. 

Money Quote: "'In law school, there's no emphasis on being a small solo practitioner or small firm lawyer in a small town. It's all, 'Oh, you're going to graduate. You're going to work for Honigman, you're going to be an associate, you're going to bust your ass and you're going to be a partner and that's the way it is.'"

Job Offers: Went on job interview when he had no work to do and was offered 65 hours a week for $35,000/year

Money Quote: "'The (office manager)....said, 'This job is long hours, there's no money, the benefits are bad, the boss is a jerk, and it's horrible. Is this something you want to do?'"

Clients: Doing contract work from local attorneys who he networked with in law school, overflow work with firm he is of counsel for and networking at local bar association

Does he like it? Seems to, at least for now. He mentioned his best friend is a sous chef. I wonder if in the back of his mind he is wishing he went to culinary school instead.

Money Quote: "'There are days I get a lot done and I do it well and I'm happy. And there are days I'm just struggling over some innate project and that's frustrating. But for the most part, I love it.'"

Does he think there are too many lawyers? He says college is overrated and he wishes he had a tangible skill that he could go anywhere with.

Egyptian Revolution and Final Days in Egypt



Posted from Cairo, Egypt - It's hard to sleep when there's a revolution going on 3 blocks away from your hotel.  With that being said, I am nearing the end of my trip.  Soon, I will be preparing for the bar exam (something I am not really excited about).  At the same time I will be working at my internship and sort of waiting until I move to California.  I really did enjoy this trip to Egypt though and I am going to miss it here a lot.  The people here are very nice and the culture is one that I find myself identifying with on many levels.  I may post more about my Egyptian adventure later on, but I did want to share what has been going on with my readers.

                                           

As far as the protests go, the U.S. embassy has urged Americans to leave Egypt and/or not travel here.  This is a troubling time for Egypt, but I must say, I have never felt unsafe on this trip.  In fact, my wife and I have been the only tourists here in many areas.  For example, on buses and trains, we have seen little to no tourists.  At some hostels, we have been almost alone.  On tours we have been with only a couple of people.  On our trek up Mt. Sinai, we were alone for a couple of hours at the summit because few others have the gonads to travel here.  Sad, isn't it?


But, with that said, we are preparing to head home:  Back to New York.  I really wish I would have just skipped the bar exam and spent the summer here.  But, that was not in the cards.  No sir.  I will soon be on the aeroplane and flyin' high, headin' home.

I have seen so much on this trip.  We spent a day in Amsterdam, then we were in Cairo a few days before spending a few days in Alexandria.  Then we headed west to Siwa for a few days and then to St. Catherine's at Sinai for a few days.  Then we slithered into Dahab for a week and a half with a day trip to Jerusalem and the Dead Sea before lunging forth to Luxor for three fun-packed nights.  In Luxor we explored the Valley of the Kings and Karnak, before a jaunt via train to Cairo just in time for the June 30th revolution.  It's been one heck of a trip, and one that I will never forget.

While in Egypt, I did some of the following:
  • Rode a camel for the first time.
  • Tried amazing new foods.
  • Crossed into Asia via land and then later back into Africa.
  • Visited the birth place and tomb of Jesus.
  • Floated in the Dead Sea.
  • Snorkeled at the Blue Hole, one of the most dangerous diving sites in the world - not once but twice!!!
  • Climbed Mt. Sinai, or "Mount Moses."
  • Went inside of the Great Pyramid.
  • Visited the Valley of the Kings, where King Tut's tomb was unearthed.
  • Visited Karnak, one of the largest temples on Earth!
  • Crossed and floated along the Nile, the world's longest river.
  • And yet, I still was able to defend the law schools!
What a summer!  And there's a lot more of these to come, as India and Peru are on my list.  And when I get that sailboat, there is no telling where the winds will take me!


Thank you for reading.  I have a lot planned for when I get back, which includes a tour of our apartment in New York (complete with pictures), plans for using my law degree, and how to be a frugal law student/graduate.  I look forward to writing more in the days to come.  

Saturday 29 June 2013

Will Vermont Law School Soon Start a Coffee Kitty?

"Vermont Law School Makes More Cuts as Class Size Drops,"  by Alicia Freese (VTDigger.org, June 27, 2013)

Money Quote: "Starting last September, VLS enacted a plan to shrink the school in response to a tuition dollar drought that left it with a $3.3 million budget gap. The school attracted national attention last winter when it cut 12 staff positions -- 10 were through voluntary buyouts and two were involuntary."

"This past spring, in a quieter move, VLS whittled down its faculty. Eight professors, of the 40 who were eligible, voluntarily moved from full-time to part-time positions. Mihaly estimated that two or three other positions were eliminated when professors departed for personal reasons."

"VLS has been pruning expenses elsewhere, too. It has cut down on cleaning services and changed the hours and offerings of its food service, among other changes. At one point, there were conversations about whether coffee would continue to be available in offices, according to one staff member."


*****

"Aloofness will cost WSU, others their franchise," by Nolan Finley (Detroit News, June 27, 2013)

Money Quote: "'There's not much market force at work in higher education,' [Outgoing Wayne State University President and former auto executive Allan Gilmore] says [explaining a 8.9 per cent tuition hike]. For example, he can't ask his professors, who make on average $117,000 a year, to increase their productivity by teaching more than two three-hour classes a week. Why? Because competing schools don't. He agreed to an eight-year contract with annual raises for professors of 2.5 percent, despite the school's crumbling finances. Why? Because other schools might lure them away. While some professors are fully engaged in instruction, research and mentoring, Gilmour admits that not all are fully occupied. And while some of his professors could leave for more prestigious positions, Gilmour says most would be hard-pressed to find a better job than the one they have at Wayne. And yet he can't make innovative changes that might save money and spare students from tuition hikes unless all the other universities Wayne competes with do the same thing, at the same time, for fear of losing his few world-class professors. Talking with Gilmour, I couldn't stop drawing comparisons to his former industry. For decades, the Big Three automakers made poor decisions in lockstep, signed the same destructive labor contracts and believed that as long as they were united in their disregard for their customers, they would be shielded from competition. When the competition came, it brought innovation and customer-focused thinking to the industry, and nearly destroyed the Big Three. Higher education risks the same fate. Students can't keep taking on an average of $27,000 in debt to get jobs that start at little more than that, or no job at all."

Great article start to finish.


*****


Money Quote: "Task Force chair Randall T. Shepard, retired chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court, said after Monday's meeting that the discussion reflected an 'earnest concern' among task force members over the costs of a legal education and an 'earnest interest' in trying to identify steps that schools and the legal profession can take that might reverse that long-term trend....But there appears to be no consensus as to what, if anything, the task force can say or do that would help control the costs of a legal education or lessen the impact that U.S. News and World Report's annual law school rankings have had on law school admissions and the broader legal culture."

See article above about Big 3 Auto industry.


*****

"At Law School Graduations, Scant Talk About Job Market,"  by Grace Tatter and Claire Zillman (The AmLaw Daily)

Money Quote: "What do you say to an audience of would-be lawyers who just spent thousands of dollars -- much, if not all, of it borrowed -- to earn a degree that only two-thirds of them will even use in their first post-graduation job?...What we found was plenty of sage advice, but little blunt talk. Several of those who didn't dance awkwardly around the subject or punt on it altogether chose to joke about graduates' job prospects and debt obligations. It's unclear how well those wisecracks played."

Those Raman Noodle jokes will even be less funny when the student loans start coming due.

*****

"Art School is a Tragic Rip Off,"  by Kate Seamons (Newser, June 27, 2013)

Money Quote: "Move over, law school: There's a new worthless degree in town...."

Artist Noah Bradley lays out a $10,000 art education and tells students to skip the $246K Rhode Island School of Design route. He explains you can't support yourself as an artist with a $3K a month student loan payment for 10 years. That might work for artists, but lawyers have no choice but to go the expensive route to pursue a career as an attorney.

Law school is a tragic rip off too. Art students knew they would be eating Raman noodles most of their lives when they went that route. It's a shock for the newly minted lawyers.

Friday 28 June 2013

Guest Post: To the Class of 2016: Most of You Will Be Forgotten and NO ONE Will Feel Sorry For You

This post is republished here at its author's request.  The original can be seen here.


This post is meant for the graduating class of 2016. In a few months, law school classes will begin. Some of you are pondering whether law school will be the right choice for your personal future. Others plan to matriculate and have already paid their seat deposit and the security deposit for housing. But before you pay the tuition bill and commit yourself to three years of law school, there is something you should know.

I started blogging for two reasons. First, it was to lend another voice to many forgotten attorneys and others trying to spread a message: Goingto law school and becoming a lawyer does not guarantee a financially comfortable life nor an exciting career.

In fact, chances are good that you are going to be financially screwed for a very long time if you have taken out large student loans. Many law school graduates will have a difficult time finding an entry level position and even if they find one, the job might not be secure. It is now common knowledge that most average and even some top law schools have been lying about their post-graduate employment statistics. Schools known to be regional powerhouses are now being exposed as trap schools as their reputations relied heavily on unemployed graduates keeping their mouth shut due to social pressure. Finally, low-ranked schools have become the new “lawyer jokes” among practitioners, law students and even some law school professors and administrators.

This message has received mainstream media attention since 2007. There are many articles, blogs and websites that tell you not to go to law school unless you meet a very narrow criteria. And even if you do go, you should drop out after one semester or one year if you do not achieve a certain class rank or if you receive no job offers after participating in the school’s OCI.



This message is no longer being dismissed as the bitter ramblings of the stupid and lazy. It has been shared and confirmed by many who have lived it and suffered for many years but kept it a secret among their family and friends. It has been analyzed and confirmed by disinterested third-parties. It has even been acknowledged by a growing number of academics whose salary depends on discrediting the message and shaming those who spread it.

And now I will explain the second reason why I started blogging. While I am sympathetic to many recent unemployed and disillusioned law school graduates and practicing lawyers, I believe there comes a point in time where those who choose to ignore the above message and fail deserve no sympathy and should suffer the consequences of their actions. It is now time that we put the fear of God into the minds of idealistic lawyer wannabes.

Presently, I have to believe that everyone planning to go to law school this fall know the risks involved. You are knowingly  putting your financial future at risk if you borrow anywhere between $100,000 to over $200,000 on top of your undergrad debt to go to law school. I have to believe that you are knowinglymaking a decision to enter a profession where there is a small chance of making the coveted $160,000 per year salary and a large chance of working at a small law firm at $30K-$70K per year or just being unemployed. I have to believe that you know that student loan debt will be almost impossible to discharge in bankruptcy during your young, productive and fun-filled years. I also have to believe that you are knowingly putting yourself in a position where you will pay at least $1,000 per month in student loan payments for a minimum of 10 years.

But some of you are not going to listen. You still think people like us are bitter losers. You think we’re trying to limit competition and entry into the profession. You’re probably thinking that now is the best time to go because there are fewer applicants, better chances of admission and larger tuition discount offers. You’re betting that the economy will improve in 2016 when Barack Obama is elected to his third term in office. You think you will be ok because you study harder, pray longer and you went through a lot of shit in your life and survived. And the WORST excuse is, “What else am I going to do?”

So if you really want to go despite the many warnings out there, then go. But know this: IF YOU FAIL THE LAW SCHOOL GAME, YOU DESERVE YOUR SHITTY FATE AND I WILL DO NOTHING TO HELP YOU.

If you graduate law school and find yourself in unmanageable debt for possibly the rest of your life, I have no sympathy for you. You deserve to live like an indentured servant for the rest of your life. Go cry to mommy who probably co-signed your student loans and will have to cash out her retirement to pay it.

If you don’t get a job after graduation, I don’t give a shit. Don’t come to me for a job because I’m not hiring you. If I need help, I’ll look for a college graduate or a contract attorney.

If you decide to start your own law firm, don’t come to me for help. I will not mentor anyone from the Class of 2016 nor refer you clients unless there is something in it for me.

If a client tells me that you fucked up his case, no matter how small, I will not hesitate to tell the client to go after you. I will tell the client to file a complaint with the State Bar, file a malpractice claim against you in small claims court or consult with a malpractice attorney. Especially if I see you driving a luxury car or living the “lawyer lifestyle” because you can surely afford to defend a malpractice claim.

Thursday 27 June 2013

Let's Play Pretend: The Washington and Lee Practicum Fiasco.

Washington & Lee University School of Law (W&L) in Lexington, Virginia, has received much favorable publicity for its "experiential" third year curriculum. At W&L, the 3L year consists primarily of role-playing games, or in the more polished characterization of W&L law Professor James Moliterno, "elaborate simulation courses that we call practicums." (video at 1:15-1:18) Indiana University Law Professor William Henderson, a sometimes-law-school-critic, praised W&L's innovations so effusively that you would think that the Gem of the Slaveocracy had left every other law school choking on its dust and fumes. He said: "To use a simple metaphor, W&L is tooling around in a Model-T while the rest of us rely on horse and buggy."

Unfortunately, employers aren’t going along for the ride. The majority of W&L Law grads from the Class of 2012 failed to obtain full-time bar-required jobs within nine months of graduation. Indeed, if you rank schools by the percentage of the Class of '12 that obtained bar-required, full-time, long-term (one year or more, including clerkships) jobs that are non-solo and non-school-funded, W&L ranks in 119th, a shockingly bad outcome for a school that US News deems the 26th best.

Deborah Merritt recently published an important blog post at the Law School CafĂ©, which was excerpted at Tax Prof Blog, noting W&L’s disappointing results and proposing four possible explanations: (1) the connection between practical training and jobs is much smaller than practitioners assert; (2) employers may care less about practical training than they claim; (3) employers may care about experience, but want to see that experience in the area for which they’re hiring; and (4) the students may have developed higher or more specialized career ambitions than their peers at other schools.

My own explanation for W&L's failure is more straightforward: W&L’s version of experiential education is bullshit, and the practicing bar is not buying it. I strongly favor clinics and externships. But "elaborate simulations"? Building courses around role-play?

Consider Law 301P, the "Higher Education Practicum," which is described in W&L's course catalogue in these terms:
"The course will employ context based and integrative learning techniques as the educational format. Students will work in teams to represent students, faculty members, university trustees, university administrators, alumni student organizations, public interest groups, and other parties in a variety of hypothetical problems and exercises requiring strategic thinking, critical analysis of legal principles, and understanding of the cultural, political, and social traditions of American colleges and universities."
Moliterno elaborates: "In the higher education practicum, for example, the students will meet with somebody playing the role of the University President. They may meet with someone playing the role of a disgruntled trustee of the University. They may meet with community members who are concerned about activities at the University." (video at 3:33-3:50)  A student participant describes the role-playing fun:
""We want to sue! And we want to sue now! We need that $7 million donation! You are our lawyers, we need to do something," exclaimed the College’s President. I looked to my two colleagues. We all had that same look on our face: how were we supposed to tell the College President that suing the donor was a bad idea[?]. . .But all the cases in the world couldn’t prepare us for the look on the President’s face. I cleared my throat and delivered the news. I didn’t rely on the case law or complicated legal analysis. Instead, I told the President that taking this case to court would cost the College millions in litigation, it would upset donors and alumni, and it would kill the College’s reputation. . . He sat back, looking confused."
Doesn't the fluent academese of the course description alone trigger one's skepticism? How does "understanding the cultural, political, and social traditions of American colleges and universities" lead to true practice-readiness? Is it likely that the "variety of hypothetical problems and exercises" i.e., the role-playing scenario played out by clueless kids pretending to be lawyers, is anything more than a farcical simplification and distortion of actual legal practice? Will a real live employer be impressed that a 3L persuaded a fictional University President that suing a fictional donor would damage its fictional reputation?

Professor Moliterno, whose CV boasts of his "Leadership Role in 3L Experiential Education Curriculum," has evidently not practiced law since 1982, and has been a full-time legal academic ever since (earning a cool $289,377 in 2011). So Moliterno is not exactly speaking from personal experience when he yaps about "the mastery of the complex mental processes of sophisticated lawyers" and about "adopt[ing] the analytical practices of sophisticated lawyers." (See this post, comment by Jim Moliterno, at Jun 21, 2013 8:41:45 PM).

Practicum. This is not simply a mock trial-- where it is, indeed, possible to construct a reasonable facsimile of the real thing for training purposes. This is mock everything. As I read the course description of the Higher Education Practicum, my gut reaction, no kidding, is that I would rather take a law school course in 19th century German philosophers.

Wednesday 26 June 2013

Possibly Dumbest Pre-Law Student Ever?


Money Quote: "St. Peter's senior Rosanna Hernandez, 21, appeared at [the side of U.S. Rep. Donald Payne Jr., D-Newark] at today's event. Hernandez, who studies political science, said she's been taking out loans since her sophomore year in college, and she anticipates another four years of loans when she attends law school. She doesn't know how much her student loan debt is. 'I want to know at the end, because I know it's going to be scary,' she said. Hernandez said she didn't contemplate skipping law school to avoid more debt. 'It's going to be an investment in my future,' she said."

Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. OMG. How freaking dumb.


*****



"ABA Proposal Alarms Law School Diversity Advocates,"  by Karen Sloan (National Law Journal

Money Quote: "A proposal to tighten the American Bar Association's bar passage requirement for law schools hasn't gone over well with some advocates for diversity in the legal profession."

Equal Opportunity Scamdom.


*****

"Forever in Debt: Who has student loan debt and who's worried? Published by Urban Institute

57% of people with student loan debt are afraid they will be unable to pay it off.

*****


All of the Above - Survivor Bias, Hard Work, Luck, and Cost


According to these guys, I'm practically guaranteed to get into "BigAdventure"!  All I need to do is "work hard" at burgling.  Now, if I could just figure out this promissory note...

We've all seen them - the expose of "successful" law graduates on every law school's website and premotional materials. For sake of argument, I'll use everybody's favorite punching bag, Cooley:


Well, there you go. The scambloggers should just stop whining - out of 17,000 graduates, with more on the way, here are 20 shining examples of what a JD can do for you - private practioners, judges, JAG, senior corporate counsel, directors of non-profits...the list goes on and on, so shut up already. Clearly, some say, there is a one-to-one correspondence between the latter and the former, and anyone who says otherwise just isn't willing to work hard enough. End of discussion.

The question few want to talk about is what about the other 16,980? The 99.9% left over, how are they doing? And how can anyone tell, more importantly? The law schools hide behind the false-positive of "no bad news is good news," while the scamblogs point to graduation data and economic data, along with personal anecdotes of themselves or others close to them, to paint the opposite narrative of how backing, connections, pedigree, and location location location (i.e. "luck") matters just as much or more than anything else.

But what does it mean to "work hard"? What does it mean to be "lucky"?



"Here's how this works: big-bucks Author Z says, here are the 10 steps you need to take to become as successful as me. The list always mentions perseverance, being nice to your readers, writing 1,000 words a day and so on.



The 99.9% of writers/authors who make less than $10,000 a year from their writing (and the 99% who make less than $1,000) take this list as a script or program that if followed, will yield great success. But the 99% follow the script and do the 10 things and discover they are still unknown and not making any money.

The point is that nobody asks the 99% who fail to make it big what they did, or try to analyze what they did that prevented their success.
...
The conclusion is that luck is the ultimate factor in these signal-noise levels of success,
and being in the right place at the right time with the right product/idea can't be replicated by following a script or list of tips."
(emphasis in original)





Clearly, there is more to the picture than just "working hard." It is a necessary, but not sufficient, prerequisite. Being in the right place (via connections) at the right time (good economics, few competitors) certainly matters. At the same time:


 
"It might seem disheartening, the fact that successful people probably owe more to luck than anything else, but only if you see luck as some sort of magic...[a]ccording to psychologist Richard Wiseman, luck – bad or good – is just what you call the results of a human beings consciously interacting with chance, and some people are better at interacting with chance than others...

Wiseman speculated that what we call luck is actually a pattern of behaviors that coincide with a style of understanding and interacting with the events and people you encounter throughout life. Unlucky people are narrowly focused, he observed. They crave security and tend to be more anxious, and instead of wading into the sea of random chance open to what may come, they remain fixated on controlling the situation, on seeking a specific goal. As a result, they miss out on the thousands of opportunities that may float by. Lucky people tend to constantly change routines and seek out new experiences. Wiseman saw that the people who considered themselves lucky, and who then did actually demonstrate luck was on their side over the course of a decade, tended to place themselves into situations where anything could happen more often and thus exposed themselves to more random chance than did unlucky people. The lucky try more things, and fail more often, but when they fail they shrug it off and try something else. Occasionally, things work out."
(emphasis added)



Interesting points. So, what are we to take from all this? People who want to go to law school should be willing to (1) "work hard", (2) be open to a wide variety of experience and be willing to fail, economically, and (3) be able to ride out the storm (for a decade or so) until things actually take off. The battery has to juice the system until the engine can turn over, you know.



Step one, check. Step two, check...wait, be willing to fail? With no backing?  Step three...wait, what? Ride out the storm for a decade? Maybe more? When sticker price for law school is $150k or so? Occasionally, things work out? 

Here is the fundamental problem with law school, and why it is currently a scam in 2013 if not in the 2000s or the 1990s. Yes, you need to work hard. Yes, you need to try a lot of different things until something catches, as opposed to the often-vetted strawman of sitting in your mom's basement eating cheesy poofs, waiting for a job to magically appear. But why do people actually "fail," exactly...? I submit that it's because the large majority can't service 21st century student loan payments for long enough in this economy, while they are trying to do twelve different things for years on end, in order to get their legal career to become viable and sustainable.


If law school, adjusted for 1970s tuition rates was $30k today for that bright, sparkly JD, then (1) it would be much easier (though not simple) to service this debt on a relative basis, and (2) one could be more open to trying a variety of things because they would not immediately need BigLaw compensation structures to service their debt, day one, right now. But the degree is not that inexpensive, adjusted for inflation. It is more like $40k per year. Funny, it now costs you the price of four dusty 40-year-old JD degrees to get that same dusty 40-year-old JD degree today. Talk about progress. Wait, didn't the law school employment stats claim a median salary of $135k per year, and a 98% legal job placement rate...?

Oh, but IBR and PAYE, I hear some ScamDeans and law school apologists say.  With these programs, your student loan debts will be managable, so you have no excuse.  First of all, the very fact that IBR and similar programs exist indicates the system is broken.  These programs have grown from an incidental gap-measure for a few to a planned strategy to be utilized on purpose for many.  Second of all, these programs can end any day, and the tax implications of the "forgiven" debt is not clear.  Third of all, IBR does not help those with private student loans, and may not help people with federal loans, depending on the math and individual circumstances.  Fourth of all, what about the American Taxpayer(tm)?  Many who screech about "free bailouts for L00z3rs" can't surely endorse wide-spread use of programs like IBR at the same time for fun and law school profit...or can they?  Self-interest and personal bias trumps cognative dissonance every time.

Friends, this is what no law school will tell you. There are thousands and thousands who fall by the wayside for whatever reason, and there are no studies on them. Some of it is due to good old-fashioned numbers and competition based upon JD-overproduction. Some of it is due to lack of proper monetary capitalization. Some of it is due to life-circumstance - health issues, familial obligations, and the like. Perhaps some of the failures are indeed actually "deserved", as adjudicated by those who sit on Mount Olympus and hand out judgments based on moral character.

But no one honestly picks apart what happened and why, because you often can't get at the real data - the actual outcomes, over time, of thousands upon thousands of graduates. As such, the complaints of many get white-washed with "not working hard" and "entitlement" and "cheesy poofs." Law schools, at best, are silent on the issue, and instead trot out a handful of success stories that likely have little to do with the actual institution itself, along with "ten easy steps" that have people waste time and energy on survival bias. At worst, the law schools let shame do their dirty work for them. Scamblogs, with what scraps of information they can come up with, get further dismissed as the fevered rantings of entitled losers.

Misapprending and misusing survivor bias, and accusing thousands of laziness at the same time, is an appealing explanation to the plight of the law graduate. It's easier. It's tidy. It requires no "hard work" on the part of the accusor. And it's as equally-wrong a mindset as saying all complainers are in mom's basement watching TV.

The likely closer-to-reality phenomenon is that "you make your own luck," per Wiseman. The difficulty with that model is that with the economic barriers to entry that exist today, few can actually afford to hang in there long enough to be "lucky".

Regardless of where you fall on this issue, law school should be less expensive, period. Also, fewer students, rather than more students, should be admitted - preferably, the ones who are "more open to possibility" per Wiseman. If one is concerned about social-justice "access" to law school (as if it requires more than a pulse these days, given declining enrollment), then put your money where your mouth is and award real scholarships, not bait-and-switch scholarships designed to lure students in yet be taken away later due to section-stacking and statistical analysis of grading curves (who said lawyers were bad at math?).  It's more fun to spend that money on buildings instead of scholarships, anyway, so as to attract more lemmings into the fold.

Based on current LSAC data, the students appear to be getting the message much sooner than the law schools themselves - thus the rumble to the exits at the chagrin of ScamDeans everywhere. A student should not be relegated to failure because they don't have $150k plus interest in their pockets, or non-dischargable loans, to tide them over the next decade while they try to make their own luck.

Be warned, 0Ls. 20 success stories do not compensate for thousands of swept-under-the-rug, angrily-dismissed-by-the-establishment, also-rans. Remember, LawProf subsidized mortgages for expensive brownstones, with forgiven interest, just don't grow on trees. It's gotta come from somewhere. And that "somewhere" is your pocketbook and your future.
 

Tuesday 25 June 2013

"The New Normal": A Warm Welcome to Our 60 New Readers from Weil Gotshal


"Law Firms Hiring!"  by JD Journal (June 25, 2013)

Money Quote: "Law school graduates can expect better returns, better job opportunities, and overall more hiring by larger firms."

Wait for it.

*****

"Large Firms in a Hiring Mood Again," by Karen Sloan (National Law Journal, June 24, 2013)

Money Quote: "The country's largest law firms are wading deeper into the new associate hiring pool -- a welcome development after years of recruiting declines."

Wait for it.


*****

"Mass Layoffs at a Top-Flight Law Firm,"  by Peter Lattman (New York Times DealBook, June 24, 2013)

Money Quote: "'While we have been able to avoid these actions in the past, and it is very painful from a human perspective, the management committee believes that these actions are essential now to enable our firm to continue to excel and retain its historic profitability in the new normal,' Barry M. Wolf, Weil's executive partner, wrote in a firmwide e-mail."

"The 'new normal,' in the view of Weil's management and echoed by legal industry experts, is that the market for high-end legal services is continuing to shrink. Dan DiPietro, chairman of the law firm group at Citi Private Bank, said he believed that the profession could experience a wave of job cuts. He said that there were too many lawyers at the country's largest firms, estimating the excess capacity at as much as 10 percent of the lawyer population."

Boom. So much for "Law Firms Hiring!"

*****


Money Quote: "It comes down to this: firm leaders know that regardless of how they treat young lawyers, numerous replacements wait for their turns in the increasingly fragile big-law barrel. Meanwhile, the profession's existential crisis continues as intergenerational antagonisms fester. Except for the relatively few partners at the top, this can't end well."

No, this is not going to end up well. Expect an uptick in our readership soon. Very soon.

*****

"UC (University of Cincinnati) Trustees to Cut Out-of-State Tuition for Law School," by WKRC Cincinnati

Money Quote: "University of Cincinnati trustees are expected to approve a big cut tomorrow in out-of-state tuition for the College of Law. It's an effort to attract more students from around the country. Tuition will be more than 30-percent lower, almost 29-thousand dollars less per year. Applications to law schools in Ohio have declined 27-percent since 2008. There are only nine law students at UC currently paying out-of-state tuition."

I'd be fairly pissed if I were a recent out-of-state UC Law grad. Just sayin.

*****



Money Quote: "Many prospective law students want to get rich. They cannot be blamed. There is the consideration of high salaries down this career path. However, not every lawyer will find his or herself making a $500,000 salary within a year of graduating. Many lawyers enjoy median incomes, and this fact should definitely be appreciated. Salary alone and its lovely prospects should never be the only reason one joins a field."

I can think of quite a few more questions to ask myself.

*****

"Feds Flag 126K in Student Loan Fraud Crackdown," by Newser [linking to Wall Street Journal (paywall)]

Money Quote: "'What we find are very poor students academically that are borrowing to the max, getting the maximum in their Pell grant and just going from school to school,' says a financial aid director at Maryland's Anne Arundel Community College. Adds another: 'We have individuals that told me, 'I spent all this money on graduate school. I can't get a job. I can't afford to live, I need the money.' It's not so much about the education, it's the money.'"

These students obviously should have enrolled in POV 575 Lawyers in Poverty to assist with their transition into poverty living.

*****

"So Now You're a Harvard Lawyer -- Now What?" by Jeffrey Toobin (Commencement Speech Edited by LawFuel Editors)

Money Quote: "2013 is not the greatest time in history to graduate from law school. The legal economy is changing, and it's hard to think it's getting better. There are no guarantees anymore, not even for Harvard lawyers."

Especially for Harvard lawyers at Weil Gotshal.

New Course Offering: POV 575 (Lawyers in Poverty)

POV 575
LAWYERS IN POVERTY (4 CR)
OVERVIEW AND CLASS SYLLABUS

A. DESCRIPTION

This course is designed for graduating 3L students who wish to have hands-on practical training in poverty level survival techniques.

Please note: This course is NOT concerned with lawyers practicing in the area of legal assistance to low income persons (as such legal employment is nothing more than a myth perpetrated by law schools which you should have figured out by now!) Rather, this course will prepare YOU to enter poverty as a newly minted attorney.

Studies have shown that young attorneys have a difficult time adjusting to their new reality living at or near the poverty level. This course will begin with an historical overview of the lower social classes (which you are now entering despite having a Esq. at the end of your name) and proceed to an in-depth survey of the literature of the economic classification of poverty. It will also provide practical real-life lessons to students who will be navigating down to this social strata.

This course is designed for imminently graduating law students wishing to receive both theoretical and practical training in their post-graduate career. The course falls within our law school mission to provide "practice ready" training to our students. NOTE: Students earlier in their law school training will not be permitted to enroll in this course offering.


B. PRIOR EXPERIENCE UNNECESSARY

This class will assume no prior experience living at or near the poverty level. We appreciate that our law students have led comfortable middle and upper class lifestyles to this point. Please note that student lifestyles do NOT constitute poverty existence. Your existence up to this point has been either paid for by your parents or subsidized by your student loans. Living in luxury student complexes with saunas, rock walls and smoothie bars and an on-campus meal card will not be affordable in your post-graduate life. The purpose of this course is to expose and prepare our students to what they can expect in their post-graduate life and how it differs from their pre-JD lifestyle.

C. COURSE OBJECTIVES

1.  To introduce law students in "poverty" lifestyle economic theory so that they can wax philosophical about their post-graduate predicament.

2.  To provide practical training in living and raising a family in poverty with no credit and/or a poor credit rating and debt collectors a constant presence in their lives.

3.  To provide lessons and strategies in asking parents and other family members for "loans" that you "promise to pay back when your situation improves" through role-playing exercises.

D. COURSE TOPICS

1. How to make your food budget stretch through low cost carb alternatives such as pasta and rice. How to determine eligibility for food stamps and other government assistance.

2. How to deal with the nuts and bolts of eviction and foreclosure of yourself and family. How to constantly scan for postings on your front door. How to attempt to "buy time" with your lender. How to deal with judges (formerly Big Law partners) who look down upon attorneys who are in financial distress assuming they are "dirty lawyers." If time allows, we will also explore having your car repossessed in a public fashion such as when you pick your children up from school or at a family gathering.

3. How to deal with process servers and utility shut offs. Do you announce you are an attorney and threaten to sue? Is the defense of "there must be a mistake that bill was paid" effective? Where can you turn for assistance with turning the utilities back on?

4. What are the maximum withholdings that can be made to your Social Security check in your old age against your unpaid student loans?

5. Should you expand your contacts through social media in the hopes of picking up legal work? Should you withdraw from social media because it is too depressing to see friends move forward with their lives and plan vacations and post photos of their kids in travel soccer while you are mired in poverty and cannot afford to even watch soccer on cable television because it was shut-off for non-payment.

6. When is it "bad enough" that you should approach your family for loans? What is the best way to go about this? How to best deal with the awkwardness that results? Pretend it didn't happen or try to use it for placing your relative on a guilt trip in the hopes of scoring assistance the next time?

7. Learn how to move through your life as though you are invisible much like a 1L not making eye contact with their professors. Positive advantages of this are not being socially embarrassed by repeated economic failure. 

E. COURSE TEACHING METHODS

There are no texts or other materials to purchase for this course.

You will be required to prepare a projection of your professional income. This projection must be grounded in reality and cannot refer to any law school produced statistics which are obviously made up as noted by judges dismissing the class actions against law schools. You may interview students from prior years who are now practicing law to assist you in determining actual numbers or refer to so-called scam blogs which are accurate primary sources of information.

Once you have determined a realistic poverty level wage, you will need to determine the monthly payments on your student loans inclusive of undergraduate debt. If there are no funds left over, you may stop the budget project at this point. Those students will need to prepare a work out plan for their creditors and investigate public sources of assistance.

For those students with funds still available, you will  be required to prepare a projected budget that you can live on.

All students will be required to spend a week eating by spending only the amount allowed by their State's weekly food stamp budget (much like politicians do when they are trying to bring attention to themselves and their pet social projects in real life.)

Plan also to engage in role playing episodes where you try to negotiate settlements with creditors, explain your lack of success to your family and friends, and attempt to borrow money from relatives.

F. GRADING PLAN

This course is PASS/FAIL. Grades do not matter in the world you are about to enter. You should have figured that out by now.

G. CLASSROOM RULES OF CONDUCT

Please do not discuss course content with any 1L or 2L students. This will be grounds for automatic expulsion from the course.

H. FUTURE LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES

Although you have been told by the dean not to read the scam bloggers, now that you are graduating you should immediately subscribe to "Outside the Law School Scam" and other scam bloggers for additional post-graduation survival techniques.

Monday 24 June 2013

The Scamblogger "Wall"

The recent post from the Adjunct Law Professor hit me very close to home.  Until a couple months ago I have been an avid devourer of news relating to changes in the law schools, anything about the law school scam, the legal job market, and the higher ed bubble in general.

But as many of you know other things get in the way.  For me it was a combination of a fatigue and weariness of following the scam, law school finals approaching, and a break-up.  I just didn't feel like scouring the internet for the latest news, or even spending the necessary 15 to 30 minutes for a decent blog post on this blog (when I first saw it advertised I was so excited to contribute I was one of the first people to volunteer via e-mail).

Something else that can dampen enthusiasm is the seeming lack of progress, or slow progress, that is being made.  This is unavoidable.  The vast majority of us do not sit on ABA accreditation boards, hold law school deanships, or are employed as senior law faculty.  Neither do we occupy influential positions for student loan policy or hold a position of respect in order to shape the behavior of tens of thousands of unsuspecting prospective law students.

We can react in different ways when ourselves or others hit the inevitable "wall."  I think the worst thing that we can do is lash out at those who are hitting the wall, as in the way the Adjunct Law Professor did.  True, a certain amount of "rouse the troops" leadership is needed, but we are all adults and don't need to be berated with profanity.

Instead the inescapable needs to be acknowledged and adapted to.  Professor Campos, a favorite blogger for many, felt obligated to completely stop posting.  Instead of complaining about his decision and dwelling on it this blog was created in order to create a platform to do something similar.  The dozen or so contributors of this site theoretically lowers the burnout.

We're trying to take on an established multibillion dollar industry.  It extracts billions of dollars a year in taxpayer student loans that should not be granted.  This battle will take a long time to be concluded.  There will be other Campos's.  Hell, there will be other Antiro's, or Adjunct Law Professors, and Outside the Law School Scams.

We have to take a multi-year fight day-by-day.  Law schools have seen a double digit percent decrease in applications for each of the past three years, they are only going to be more desperate here on out.  We need to be patient, and continue to calmly point out this indisputable fact to those in the legal field and those who are thinking about entering it: "the current cost of law school is far too expensive, and far too many people are graduating from law school."


Indiana Tech's Dean Says It's Not About The Number of Jobs, It's About The Quality of the Graduates

Even with the overwhelming evidence that the legal job market is impossibly saturated, new law schools are opening. And why not? Law school administrators operate on the same principle as Subway franchisees: Our law school is a special snowflake that will learn from all the mistakes that have been made so far. It doesn’t matter that there are four other law schools in this state. So it goes with Indiana Tech’s new law school, which has come under fire for opening when there are so many other law schools in the populous state of Indiana. Wait, what? You say that Indiana is the sixteenth most populated state in the U.S.? No matter.

Indiana Tech’s administration has been furiously defending this blatant cash grab short-sighted decision. New dean Peter Alexander is “tired of explaining it”. Mr. Alexander is “adamant: It’s not about the number of job openings versus the number of law school graduates. It’s about the quality of the law school graduate.” So, the top tier traps like NYU and George Washington have been unable to come up with Peter Alexander’s secret formula to guarantee employment outcomes. First, Mr. Alexander is placing a “heavy focus on practical experience.” How does Indiana Tech propose to implement this “heavy focus on practical experience”? “During the third year of law school at Indiana Tech, the students can work up to 40 hours a week for credit in nonprofit or governmental law, what Alexander calls a “semester in practice.” That’s right: Students will pay Indiana Tech for the privilege of working full time during their third year. With all the blowback slimy attorneys experience when they advertise “observation time” for pay, it’s a surprise that scambloggers haven’t called Alexander out on this suspect plan. 

As usual, higher ed is coming up with ever more creative ways to part naive students from their money. We need to have a truly independent board overseeing law schools. Shutter the ones with bad employment outcomes and prevent useless schools like Indiana Tech from setting up shop. But it looks like this generation’s future needs to be destroyed before society gets the message.

Saturday 22 June 2013

To the class of 2016, I will be your refuge, your guiding light!


Since when did scamblogging become so hostile?  I wondered this when I read a post "To the Class of 2016: Most of You Will Be Forgotten and No One Will Feel Sorry For You."  I feel that posts like this do nothing for the "movement" and instead make those who post them seem arrogant and angry at the world.

First, I will say that the bit about Obama being elected for a third term is just silly.  Without getting all political, I don't get the hate on Obama.  For a (long) while, it was popular to love him, and everyone was on the bandwagon, and now it's popular to hate him, and everyone has jumped on that bandwagon.  Ever hear of "think for yourself?"

Next is the bit about the income.  $30-$70k is a good amount of money to live a decent life.  Sure, you'll have to be frugal, but do you need half of the stuff you buy?  Seriously, do you need a huge house with all the trimmings and a fancy car that turns the heads of those you are secretly jealous of?  Do you really need to prove yourself like a cock with his feathers up and out?  Will that really make you feel better as you waste your days away as a slave to your over-inflated lifestyle?  One must grow up, both mentally and financially.  In the words of an individual who said it before me: "it's time to put on your big boy pants."  The chap was right.  Put 'em on!

Oh, and one more point.  Some of us still think you are bitter losers.  And we probably always will.  If you are complaining at 200 KPH / 120 MPH on the internet, you are going to be perceived as somewhat of a "loser."  Real men don't think WWW means World Wide Whine.

Now, for the meat of the post I will highlight some of the worst of the worst:

Warning: Content is RUDE and OFFENSIVE, and just plain MEAN!

If you graduate law school and find yourself in unmanageable debt for possibly the rest of your life, I have no sympathy for you. You deserve to live like an indentured servant for the rest of your life. Go cry to mommy who probably co-signed your student loans and will have to cash out her retirement to pay it. 
If you don’t get a job after graduation, I don’t give a poo. Don’t come to me for a job because I’m not hiring you. If I need help, I’ll look for a college graduate or a contract attorney. 
If you decide to start your own law firm, don’t come to me for help. I will not mentor anyone from the Class of 2016 nor refer you clients unless there is something in it for me. 
If a client tells me that you fluffed up his case, no matter how small, I will not hesitate to tell the client to go after you. I will tell the client to consider filing a complaint with the State Bar, file a malpractice claim against you in small claims court or consult with a malpractice attorney. Especially if I see you driving a luxury car or living the “lawyer lifestyle” because you can surely afford to defend a malpractice claim. 
If a hiring colleague were to ask me about hiring a Class of 2016 law school graduate, I will advise her to pay slave wages. It’s supply and demand. I will tell them about IBR and PAYE and how it can be used to convince/force young graduates to accept low pay and forgo raises at least 10 years. If IBR is still around in 15 to 20 years, there will be lawyers with substantial experience who will gladly work for next to nothing in order to qualify for loan forgiveness.

My comment:

Nasty and vile. These are the first two words that come to mind when reading this post. I am a member of the class of 2013. I know I am different. I am the special snowflake. And I am darn proud I went to law school. This post, at the end, is rude on many levels. Some will succeed in law, even from “fourth tier crappers,” as they are oft called from the scambloggers. To tell another person not to go because many have done bad is not good enough. Many people know the odds are against them in life, and they take a risk. Law school could be called a risk, but it’s not as big of a risk as having a child or marrying the wrong person. You learn much in law school, but how much does one learn by getting in a mortgage that makes them a slave. And $30k to $70k is not bad at all, especially with IBR. And, yes, IBR will exist for a very, very long time (if not forever in some shape or form).
Thank you for sharing your views on the matter, but you have no excuse to be mean to the students of 2016. If anything, I will provide them refuge, and I will continue the call: “if you want to go to law school — don’t you dare let anyone stop you!”

Are all law schools the same?



I was talking to someone recently about college.  She is looking to start college next year to become a teacher.  She said to me, "I really don't know which school to pick, many have programs that are so different.  It's not like law school.  They are all the same."

Now, I have talked to this person a lot about law school.  In fact, so much that we may or may not be married (I am posting a lot less here about who I am as I am a little scared about having this blog revealed to C&F).  But remember, this blog is here to help people.  I am not the bad guy.  I am a really good person whose only motive is to help people go to law school (and maybe to destroy Third Tier Reality, which is a vile little site).  So, should I have to worry about C&F finding this blog and/or who I am?

Well, I wanted to talk about law schools being the same.  Now, remember, I went to two law schools.  A 4th tier school and a 1st/2nd tier school.  I have also toured other law schools (this person went with me while I toured them) and I must say, she is right.  In the end, they were all the same.

Law schools, largely, are the same.  Many like to stroke their ego and make themselves believe that their law school is something special, or it's a "smarter" school than others.  But in reality, the schools are largely all the same.  Some have better facilities, some have a bigger library, but they all have teachers with excellent credentials (even fourth tier schools), they all teach from the SAME books, they all teach the same thing and have the same first year courses.  There are some differences in what is required to graduate, but overall, they are all the same.  The only difference is how people perceive them to be.

The Schools Are Ranked

The schools are ranked arbitrarily by U.S. News, a magazine that exists largely due to its popular ranking of colleges and universities.  The rankings are, in the end, quite worthless, yet people buy into them with fervor. Law schools, like medical schools and business schools, are all ranked in terms of some formula.  Many of these rankings can be gamed, some schools, however, will always be at the top because they are seen as elite (Harvard, for example, which is just a Western New England University with older buildings).  The real power behind the rankings is how they are perceived by the population.  One's ego is a powerful thing, and people will always compare their school and the school of their children with the rest of the world, saying "well, I got into Stahnferd" or "I drank ale while at Yale for 4 years, hic!  Yes-sir-ree!"

***

Looking back, I think I enjoyed my time at the 4th tier school more than the 1st/2nd tier school.  It was a down to earth school with some great teachers who I felt were a LOT more approachable.  Class sizes were smaller, I found that I really enjoyed the subject matter more, and I did well as a result.  The second school was larger, teachers were harder to talk to, and I felt like just a soulless individual at many times.  It's not that it was a bad school, but the ranking said NOTHING at all about how good it was.  In fact, if I was to rank them based on my experience alone, I would have given Western New England the higher marks.

Of course, that's not how it works, and everyone wants to be at the top school, just as everyone wants a house and a child, as they believe they are "supposed to" do those things.  But does that bring happiness?  Should one go to a top school because a magazine says it is a top school?  Is Columbia really that much different than Hastings?  I doubt it.  Other than the amount of students that get jobs, I don't think the school is that much better.  And more people get jobs out of Columbia because it's ranked higher and it has a name that rich parents swoon over.  It's all a big elaborate joke!

In the end, if you are choosing a law school, do not worry at all about the rankings, but go with the school YOU like the best.  If you are happy in Vermont, don't settle for anything else.  If you want to be in Western Massachusetts, Western New England is a great school.  Don't think that you are missing out on something by not going to Boston College if that is not where you want to be.  If you are content at Brooklyn, don't bother with Fordham.  In the end, I transferred schools because I wanted to be in New York.  However, after living two and a half years in New York, I know that I no longer want to be there.  If you are thinking of transferring law schools, don't do it because of a better rank.  Don't give up a scholarship just for a better number.  Stay if you are happy.  Go if you truly like the school better.

Thanks for reading.

Guest Post - A Typical Story

This piece was sent in by a reader, and it's presented without editing.  The story, however, is typical and the message it contains for incoming law students is extremely important to understand:

My story is typical of the lost generation of law students. One area where my story is different relates to my age and my pre-law experience, so I hope it will helpful for people like me who are considering law school.

I came to law after 8 years of working as an engineer. I didn’t fully do my homework prior to entering law school. I knew the intellectual challenge of law school appealed to me, I had no desire to go to business school, and I did not want to be an engineer for the rest of my career. I also thought I would easily find a job as a patent attorney with my 10 years of experience. Like many others, I relied on Chicago-Kent’s published employment statistics . As you can see from the link, there was no mention of what percentage of graduates reported finding employment; the picture was all rosy.



Needless to say, my first semester grades were a bit of a shock (solid B to B+) but I decided to stick it out. Eventually I worked my way up to the top quarter by the fall of 2008. The real problem by then was a failure to obtain any actual law experience. This was not for want of trying. In the fall of 1L I got to know local patent attorneys and applied for every on-line job posting I could find. I joined the local and national versions of the intellectual property organizations, attended their meetings and hobnobbed with the members. I targeted specific employers in the area of my technical expertise and crafted personalized cover letters and resumes based on my perceptions of their needs. I did not limit myself geographically, I tried for every externship possible, took the patent law clinic and other specialized IP courses at my school, sat for the patent bar in the summer of my 2nd year,  signed up for career fairs, etc.  About the only thing I didn’t do was get a paper published, but I drew the line at putting my name on yet another derivative non-peer reviewed paper that was mere recycling of unoriginal thoughts. I probably applied for 200-300 jobs in total.

One “interview highlight” during this time was an interview with a solo. She ran her practice out of a filthy junk-festooned condo and had an associate working out of the bathroom. I shit you not.  Actually, she never even showed up for the interview and I had an awkward couple of minutes sitting with my potential competition, a young man from another Chicago Toilet.

However, the worst thing was getting a verbal offer from a partner that was later rescinded. The law firm, a notorious patent mill, flew me out to Houston and I thought I nailed the interview. In the elevator on my way out the hiring partner told me the terms of the offer ($150K salary, $15K signing bonus, etc) and said a formal letter would follow. Of course when I asked them for the letter a week later it started with “we regret to inform you…”

Eventually I got so desperate that I took on patent search work. This is good work if you can get it at the PTO but where I worked it paid about the same per hour as a fry cook. I even offered to work for free but there were no takers. Finally, I started a small painting business about a year after graduation. I never made much money off it, but it helped me to imagine I was taking charge of my life in some way.

One thing I learned during my job hunt; law firms do not like to hire older entry-level attorneys, so be very careful about attending law school if you are over 30. I was in my early to mid-thirties during this time. I have now become convinced that law firms have a heavy bias against hiring older people. My grades and technical background were no worse than those of younger people who were able to find jobs. I think it boils down to law firms being uninterested in people with distractions like spouses/children, nor are they interested in people who find it unacceptable to be screamed at. They want lumps of clay to pound, not fully-formed people.

My lack of career prospects distressed me as I had foregone 3 years of engineering employment at $85K/year and I had shelled out about $100K in tuition and fees. Like many other depressed law students and recent grads, I was soon on various combinations of alcohol, anti-depressants and benzodiazepines. I found therapy to be worse than useless. One of the things that eventually lightened my depression was accepting how stupid it was to go to law school. The other was finding out that many bright, personable, qualified people were in a similar boat.

The second thing I learned during my job hunt: don’t assume you can go back to your old job if law doesn’t work out. A year after graduation I was desperate enough to start applying for engineering jobs. If you leave the law degree off your resume you will have three years of “blank” to explain. If you keep the law degree on your resume, you will, at best, be regarded with a lot of suspicion. I was pointedly told that the law degree was a major impediment to me being hired. Employers think you either made a colossal mistake in going to law school (which implicates the soundness of your judgment), or they think you’re just biding time before leaving for a legal job. Your experience also tends to get stale over time.

The third thing I learned during my job hunt: don’t assume people will let you work for free to gain experience. I applied to volunteer at all the major legal aid organizations in Chicago and was repeatedly told they were overstaffed and had no need of my services. Quote: “I get literally 10 resumes a week from unemployed attorneys hoping to volunteer in XXX field or YYY field.” The legal aid organizations have people from Northwestern and the University of Chicago coming out of their ears and have little time for Toileteers.

In the end, it took me two years to find full-time employment. I am not working as an attorney. I do not need a law degree to do my job. I make less than I would have had I stayed as an engineer and do not foresee ever making the kind of money that I would have as a third or fourth-year associate. I am out at least $370,000 in lost income and law school tuition and will probably have to delay retirement. It has already impacted my lifestyle and it may impact where my children can go to college. The cumulative stress and depression has probably impacted my eventual lifespan. I will not fully appreciate this disastrous decision for another 30 years. I hope this gives some pause to others who might be where I was 7 years ago.

Friday 21 June 2013

Law Students GONE WILD!!!


Money Quote: "'It wasn't just like one day I woke up and decided, 'Let's do this,'' [former UB Law SBA Treasurer Margaret Olyer said after pleading guilty to stealing $33,000 from the organization.] 'I can't describe in words where your head goes....Everything that I'm trying to do is trying to right this wrong and correct this mistake.'" Olyer acknowledged that she "used some of the money to feed her alcohol and prescription painkiller habits."

*****



"Law School Graduate Charged In Classmate's Gruesome Murder,"  by Kevin Koeninger (Courthouse News Service)

Money Quote: Stephen McDaniel, a recent law school graduate, upon being charged with the gruesome murder and dismemberment of a fellow member of his law school class had "told his roommate that he has no conscience and that he relishes power. McDaniel said he would establish dominance over his victim and that he wanted to feel the power of having someone's life in his hands."

*****


Money Quote: "Justin Teixeira, 24, a recent Berkeley Law graduate, and Eric Cuellar, a third year student at the school, are alleged to have chased a third law student through the [Las Vegas] Flamingo hotel's wildlife preserve. Security footage from the hotel shows the three to be intoxicated. A witness saw the three students emerging from the preserve's trees carrying the body and severed head of the bird. The bird's body was later found by hotel staff in a different part of the facility."

Interview with Con Law Author Charles Cooper

Charles’ story is a good example of the I Did Everything Right journey that so many of us have traveled. 

I asked him some questions, he wrote some thoughtful responses, and I have edited it for length (yes, this is edited).  As many of you may remember, Charles provided a glimpse of his story in Con Law: Avoiding…Or Beating…the Scam of the Century.  I thought that having a more detailed account of his story would be interesting to readers. 

Once Upon A Time

I went to law school on the east coast in the early 2000s after thinking about it for a number of years and graduated in 2004. The school, at the time, was classed as a “tier 2” school, ranked around 70-80, give or take, and would be categorized as “regional”… I think it still is, although I haven’t actually checked the most current rankings – it never moves, regardless of how much money it pumps into self-promotion and expansion.

Coming out of law school, I initially worked in a two-lawyer firm in a semi-rural setting, focusing on residential real estate closings. This was a far cry from what I had envisioned myself doing after law school, which was working in transactional biglaw in a major city (a familiar tale).  Despite having all the right credentials other than being young – I was a nontraditional student, albeit only by a few years, including being a hair’s breadth from the top 10% of the class, grading onto law review and ending up on the editorial board, winning a national writing competition, and having the paper published in the practice guide for the relevant national specialty bar association - I ended up at graduation with no job offers.  I was left scrounging around for anything I could get my hands on until a couple of weeks before I actually took the bar exam.

After two years of working for $45K with no benefits and few prospects (and $45K with no benefits, once benefits are paid for out of pocket for the wife and kids, leaves precious little, including none for paying student loans which were deferred for that entire time), I was given an extremely lucky break. I had been working on a minor commercial real estate closing for one of our clients.  One of the few benefits of working in a small law setting was that I was handling these kinds of transactions solo very early, although my competence was certainly questionable at the time. The closing itself was held at the downtown office of a medium-sized and extremely good law firm, and afterwards one of the partners approached me and asked if I would be interested in coming aboard based upon my handling of the matter we had all been working on. They had been looking for an associate to join the practice group, and I happened to be in the right place at the right time. I jumped at the chance, and this led to a pay raise of about $30K plus real benefits. Life was pretty good at that point, and I thought I was on the right track as a lawyer.

Although I didn’t particularly enjoy the residential real estate closings I had been working on for the prior two years, they did have a certain repetitiveness, predictability, simplicity and lack of conflict that suited me. Moving into a high-end commercial real estate practice as a junior(ish) associate was the other end of the spectrum; everything was always new, unpredictable, complex and full of conflict – even conflict between parties on the same side. It was as if the entire system thrived upon conflict, as more conflict equaled more work and more billable hours.

I hated waking up and realizing that I had to go to the office. I hated being at the office because it was problem after problem. I hated leaving the office because I knew that I would worry about all the calls and emails and problems that would be waiting for me the next morning. And it wasn’t just me. The stress levels of the others in the firm were equally high, and I’m sure my boss wasn’t exactly having it easy. It just seemed that constant stress was something that was accepted by everyone, a kind of nagging stress that just never went away. There were no breaks, and if there ever looked like a time when the stress levels could potentially diminish, someone almost without question stepped in to stir the pot. Associate turnover was high.

…I hated waking up and realizing that I had to go to the office. I hated being at the office because it was problem after problem. I hated leaving the office because I knew that I would worry about all the calls and emails and problems that would be waiting for me the next morning. And it wasn’t just me. The stress levels of the others in the firm were equally high, and I’m sure my boss wasn’t exactly having it easy. It just seemed that constant stress was something that was accepted by everyone, a kind of nagging stress that just never went away. There were no breaks, and if there ever looked like a time when the stress levels could potentially diminish, someone almost without question stepped in to stir the pot. Associate turnover was high.

During the entire five years of my time in those two law firms, I cannot remember one day I actually enjoyed my work. Not one.

After the Recession

I had nothing to fall back on. I thought about trying teaching, but even that was a long shot given the economic conditions at the time where everybody and their brother wanted to seek refuge in the classroom. To cover up the shame that I was now unemployed, and to bide my time, I started my own firm (sound even more familiar?) I found an office to rent in an office-share arrangement, bought a cheap computer and printer, supplies, had cards made up, spent weeks writing announcements, letters, making calls, advertising (paid and unpaid), having files transferred to me from my old firm, arranging meetings with clients and friends, spending money on lunches, etc. After literally pounding the pavement non-stop for months, I gave up – I had not one piece of paying business. It was an absolute money-pit.

So I called up a few doc review recruiters and ended up working in a doc review mill for one of the large firms in town for a few months, making $25 per hour, no benefits, and still trying to get my own firm off the ground at the same time.  $25 per hour, no benefits, with seven years of higher education, a professional degree, and five years of decent experience as a lawyer. I was making more than that before I even set foot in college, let alone law school.

It’s worth noting that my two lucky breaks – getting the medium-law job and getting my government job – were exactly that; lucky breaks. I could not have predicted getting them, I cannot give advice on what I did right or wrong, because I just have no idea.  There was no planning, no networking, no informational interviews or LinkedIn or Facebook. Plain luck played a far bigger role than any career advisor could ever have predicted.

My debt remains higher than it was when I graduated, thanks to accrued interest and Sallie Mae’s fees for countless loan forbearances during the long lean times.

Hindsight

Did I know the risks? It would be easy to say that no, I didn’t know the risks. But I did. I just thought I knew better, or that I was a special snowflake who would succeed. What’s worse, I did succeed in law school terms and still ended up without a decent job in the end.  Lawyers I spoke to warned me off, some jokingly, some seriously, but they were successful and employed. The guide books I read were all universally upbeat and bullish about the prospects for lawyers.  The economy was reasonable. It seemed like a fair game to play at the time.

It’s just that all of this advice was dwarfed by the immense law school advertising machine; the statistics, the surveys, the salary data, the carefully-crafted language, all cleverly presented in a way designed to stir the imagination of applicants. How can one ignore average salary statistics – real numbers! – and instead believe a lawyer who tells you do avoid the profession, but who drives a new BMW and has been practicing for two decades?  The only thing I really didn’t calculate was the extraordinary, outright misinformation that law schools were publishing about the success of their graduates.  When I was applying to law schools (and even when I was first writing about law school afterwards), the idea that law schools would lie was way off anybody’s radar.

A Note for Those Few Readers Who May Remember Charles from Other Websites:

I started Nontradlaw back in 1999 as a means for people like me to discuss the ins and outs of law school, free from the buffoonery, filth, and aggression that pervaded the typical law school discussion boards back then, and which still pervades many of them today. Law applicants – can’t take them anywhere.  My role in the site was as the administrator, and although the very early versions of the site have been lost as the site changed formats, I have always taken a very hands-off role and every relevant thread that has ever been posted – except one – is still there.

I think the issue many scambloggers had with some of my posts is that I warned against taking a binary approach to the issues; to me, law school has never been an absolute scam, and it still isn’t.  I think that this is now the commonly-held wisdom; even today, dybbuk has written a post in which he acknowledges that the T13 schools all boast over 75% employment, and that the chances of getting a well-paid lawyer job from those schools is very high.  That sums up what my position has been all along – not every part of the system is a scam, and painting with a finer brush is necessary to take this debate to the next level.

Just one of the original scambloggers remains – Nando over at Third Tier Reality.  The rest (as far as I know) have all but disappeared off the face of the earth, most with no explanation as to why they decided to give up the fight.  And I’ll be the first to admit that in some of my posts on my blog, Nando was used as an example of what I thought was wrong (and still do think is wrong) with the original premise of the scamblogs.  It’s just too extreme, and it discourages open debate.  I did not write particularly favorable things about his approach to the fight, many of which I would, in hindsight, have not written – clearly, he’s a key player in the movement, he’s dedicated, he’s stood the test of time, but hindsight is 20/20. His readership seems large, and while I still don’t agree that his approach is the best way forward, it’s working for some people.  So Nando, this is my olive branch.  You’ve proven me wrong.

It’s also worth noting that while anyone can start a blog and go on the record as being part of the anti-law school movement in a matter of minutes, writing a (good) book can take years. The work on Con Law started four, almost five years ago, but was largely unseen by the general public. Writing a book tends to take place in private.  What appears to be a sudden change of heart is really just the public end result of opinions that were held for many years prior.

Repaying those Loans?

It’ll take me another twenty-eight years, but I’m making the payments on the longest payment plan, so obviously they will be done at some distant point in the future. Anyone who is making their payments regularly under a plan of defined length will pay their loans off eventually – that’s how loans work.  But I have been out of law school for almost a decade, and only recently started paying my loans properly.  Overall, I will have been under the burden of student loans for close to forty years when all is said and done

Student loans are a trap, and they have been carefully tweaked by lobbyists to be exactly that.  Large fees, penalties, mortgage-sized debt, long repayment plans, forbearances and deferrals, odd interest rates.  It’s all a means to keep students paying their loans each and every month, year after year after year.  Without regular payments from existing borrowers (and a regular supply of new borrowers), the lenders’ business model fails. It’s like Philip Morris – they need new smokers every year to stay in business, and work hard to make their products addictive while masking the dangers.

I was in a nightmare of debt from law school – credit cards racked up, huge student loans, slowly sinking. And it took a mammoth effort to pay the consumer debt (accumulated on top of student debt during law school) to get to the point at which we can now start to think about paying the student debt. With a stable income and with an almost-mindless, robotic approach to making sure that you live within your budget – a budget that includes the minimums on the student loans – it will be paid off.

But yes, for all intents and purposes, my loans will be hanging over me for the rest of my useful life, the same situation many of us are in. And that’s as good as never paying them off from a practical and psychological standpoint.  I consider myself average for student debt; making it, but barely. Some have less debt and are making payments on a more aggressive schedule. Some are beyond the point of no return, and it’s those grads who really need to speak up and get the message out that something is wrong.

…on a practical level, the general public really doesn’t like lawyers. I imagine that law graduates are at the bottom of the list for assistance, and our best bet as a movement could well be to take a seat at the wider student loan reform table, along with graduates of all disciplines, rather than trying to carve out our own path to student loan relief.

But I am starting to see changes in the way activists are organizing.  Sites like Outside the Law School Scam, for instance, where ten or so writers, all of whom (sorry – there’s no good way of saying this) would have very small, quiet, and insignificant voices if writing alone (or who would probably spend most of their time in-fighting) have come together and are generating some sensible, thoughtful, and widely read pieces on these subjects.  Standing together makes us far stronger than our component parts, especially when the tendency in the past has to be towards attacking each other over minor differences rather than attacking the major problems with the system that we all generally agree upon.

I decided to conclude with my favorite excerpt, which exemplifies the wide destructive path of the law school scam.  For many of us and our families, we saw law school as the stepping stone where a child of a lower-middle class family could step into an upper-middle class life by working hard and investing a lot of time and effort into “schooling.”  Yet, for most of us, law school actually might end up having the reverse intergenerational effect:

…not only do I not come from a wealthy family, my kids won’t either. They are now teenagers, and they probably don’t even remember a time when law school and student debt wasn’t crushing the life out of me and my wife. At this rate, law school and student debt will be the reason my grandkids won’t get the full financial attention they should either.

That’s a wrap!

If you have not already, please write a review for this book on Amazon.  Two minutes of your time can help to get this book read by more prospective law students.

Con Law: Avoiding...or Beating...the Scam of the Century (The Real Student's Guide to Law School and the Legal Profession), by Charles Cooper and Thane Messinger



Girls Generation - Korean