I'm reading this book by Scott Turow "One L" in which he recounts his first year of Harvard law school. I'm reading it because I am (hopefully) going to be starting my first year in the Fall. My questions to all the JD's out there: What was your first year of law school like? Did the Socratic method freak you out? Did the case briefs have you in tangles? Did you think you weren't gonna make it? When did you KNOW that you had made the right decision to come and that you would want to do this as a career? Were the students at the law school you went to more competitive or cooperative? Any advise for the future One L's?
i read this book at the midpoint of my first year of law school, during Christmas break...i found it to be largely unrealistic, with hints of truth, from my experience. i didn't like law school much, frankly. i enjoyed making some new friends...but the pretension drove me nuts. "learned?" come on! socratic method freaked everyone out a little bit...i can remember a girl being asked to stand up...not having an answer...and the professor telling her she could not sit down until she gave some sort of answer. she started crying. i was sitting right next to her. very uncomfortable. but by the 2nd semester, i began to take it less seriously...when i'd get called on if i didn't know, i'd joke about it (see Chandler Bing). it made the professors mad on a couple of occasions, but the class was laughing so they kinda went with it. if you have an intense fear of public speaking, i could see how it might freak you out...but i've been doing that for as long as i can remember, so i was ok with it. i had little doubt i'd make it. not cocky about that...but geez, there are a lot of idiots out there who have "attorney at law" by their name. i didn't know i made the right decision until i started practicing...i was firmly convinced in my first year that i hadn't...that to be a lawyer i'd have to sacrifice my family...and i was never willing to do that. it took me out practicing to realize i didn't have to. mostly cooperative students...we heard horror stories about competitive students, but everyone was pretty cooperative that i met. keep perspective. you're not defined by a degree you hang on a wall or a certificate you earn from the state. nor are you defined by your career. no one on their death bed ever says, "man, i wish i would have spent more time at the office." the practice of law is a service business...just like plumbers. there is no magic to it. economics still apply.
Read it years ago. Thought it was ok, but paled in comparison with his fiction masterpiece, Presumed Innocent.
Once Dean Zamora at UH called on me and I had no clue what the hell he was talking about because a) I had not prepared or read anything, b) I was late, c) I was not paying attention. But he pronounced my name kind of in a funny way (foreign name). So I just pretended I had not heard it and kept staring at the book in front of me. He didn't know whose name he had just called either, so he didn't know it was me. But of course all my friends were staring at me, so I knew it was kind of embarrassing. I think he called the name two more times, then gave up and asked someone else. Finally, I looked up and my friends burst out laughing, it was embarrassing! Anyway, it didn't really matter at all. Yeah, like me, for example .
Mr. Max...Here is a dime. Go call your mother and tell her there is serious doubts about your ever becoming a lawyer...
1. sucked 2. not that much 3. no 4. no 5. uhhh, uhhh, uhhh, it's ok when I get my yearly bonus check, I guess 6. Very competitive, but that was a self selecting thing bc of the school 7. Do whatever you did to get there; there's no set formula for success. If you've been studying the same way for years, then there's no need to radically alter it just because you think one way is the "law school" way.
Not really. It was often suggested, as I have a certain natural ability in that regard, but I never seriously considered it. For one thing, when I was younger, I was quite competitive, and felt that I could easily become swept up in the desire to win, and lose sight of my ideals as they applied to the law were I to make it my career. Another point was that I have an ability to remain fairly detached and objective, even in arguments that involve myself, but that this can come across to people who know me as somewhat emotionally reclusive or overly intellectual at times. Not a big problem, and I;m fine with where I am at present, but a legal career would probably emphasize those apsects of my character to a degree I wouldn't enjoy. And thirdly, as I would only have been interested in criminal law, there would have been no way to maintin my principles were I put into the inevitable position of defending those I knew to be guilty. I also have so little faith in the inpartiality of the police that I wouldn't have wanted to become part of the process of convicting innocent people who simply hadn't the means to defend themselves properly. But the earliest objection I had came about when I was in my early teesns, when I became disenchanted with the shortcomings of the adversarial legal system, and the fallacies dependant upon assumptions of same. That no single party in a legal dispute has an interest in justice, that the assumption that justice s what will come about from the two sides grinding together under the law, as enforced by a judge is flawed in the extreme. If I were to have become a superior advocate, I would necessarily weight the grinding in the favour of whomever I represented, or in case of the reverse, the reverse would be true. That my abilities would be commesurately rewarded with higher earnings, and as such be available to higher paying clients further distances the proceedings from anything to do with actual justice. Sorry for the essay, but you asked for it.
Thanks. And I had thought you applied, but got rejected because you exceeded the word limit for the essays . JUST KIDDING.
MacB -- interesting..i was very interested in criminal law, and certainly did best in those classes. but like you, i couldn't pick a side. i'm not comfortable on either, for the very same reasons...and my disdain for the death penalty. the idea of the legal system is that if you make your best argument, and i make my best argument...then...POOF...the truth wll emerge. i'm very skeptical about that...aren't we all? but my job does give me a chance to counsel people through difficult times...to deal with anger...even in the context of just commercial litigation, where i spend most of my time. i like that part.
Yeah. I am so opposed to the death penalty that that might have been a route I considered, DP advocate, were it not for the emotional devastation it would have wrought on me as a person. As in many things, I have complaints about the status quo without being able to offer a viable alternative when it comes to the legal system. I donlt feel that this discounts my ability to see what's wrong, but it prevents me from really doing anything about it. I am glad that there is benefot for you in the profession. I wasn't saying that my issues would be endemic; merely that my own personality traits would make me prone to those lapses. ( Not that competitive any more, thank God, but the others still apply.)
If I had done criminal law, I would want to be on the district attorney side. Most of those who get indicted are crooks and deserve a tough penalty. (Note: I am against the death penalty, though).
I'm not even sure how much I agree with that. yeah, 'most' is probably accurate,probably, but to what degree does 'most' forgive all those who aren't? Although it happens, I actually believe that it's rare for cops to frame people they know to be innocent. What happens on a regular basis, however, is for cops to decide who they 'like' for a crime, and then tailor the evidence to ensure that suspect's conviction. I could never be party to that process.
This is a very interesting thread. I am facinated with the law profession. My mom and I were talking about this just this last weekend. She is more interested in it than I am and she always had the desire to become a lawyer. She is retired, at age 52, and I told her that she should persue this dream. Is this very realistic at her age?
There was this guy that graduated with ex-RM95's Girl at Baylor who was 67 or 68, I believe. I'm not sure how many career opportunities she'd find after graduting, but it's definitely doable.
Why not? Studies show that one profession careers are seriously on the decline...people will increasingly have at least two professions over the course of ther lives. Given even a moderate career expectancy, depending upon her current academic credentials ( does she have a degree, for example?) you are looking at a minumum career of @ 10 years, well worth the effort if she's interested.
YES!! absolutely!! there was a man who was clearly in his late 50's or early 60's who was in my section my first year. similar story...said he always wanted to do it...but never did...and didn't want to die regretting it.
I read One L over the Christmas holidays of my first year. I found it very interesting. A more acute appreciation for some of the aspects of the book can only be obtained if you have gone through law school yourself. I've always been very competitive, so the base adversarial nature of the profession fits my personality. Whether it was playing college baseball or working out or academics, I've always enjoyed being as well-rounded as one could possibly be -- spherical, so to speak. Going into my first year, I wasn't sure what to expect. I ended my first semester in the top 10% and my first year in the top 15%. The Socratic Method freaks everybody out initially. Nothing new there. It really is bearable, however. If you, like myself, love public speaking, then you will be downright intoxicated at the prospect of extemporaneous give and take with a professor in front of 100 of your classmates. If you aren't real big on public speaking, it's still not that bad. There's only one way to become really versed at briefing cases -- that is to BRIEF CASES. Obviously, the more you do it the better (and faster!) you will get. You'll be blowing through cases in no time. I didn't pursue criminal law initially. I clerked for a civil district judge for a year and a half, then clerked for a civil defense firm during my last semester. I thought I would find myself practicing civil trial law. Did that happen? Absolutely not. I'm now an Assistant District Attorney and absolutely love it! I'm so blessed to be working with tremendously talented people. I do the case intake (accept/reject), determine the recommendation, conduct the plea negotiations, then try the ones we can't reach agreements on. I'm also getting to work closely with law enforcement -- executing warrants, crime scenes, autopsies, etc.... It's vastly different from what my initial legal career path was, but I love coming to work each day. It's never mundane or monotonous, and there is a certain level of job satisfaction that I just didn't get when the biggest thrill of my day was drafting Requests for Production or pouring over Motions for Summary Judgments. Advice for future One L's? If law is something you have a passion for, and law school is where you want to be, it can be one of the most rewarding, exhilirating times of your life. Read, read, read. Try to step back and see the big picture. Don't simply focus on the 18th Century case dealing with the law of 'capture' -- step back and figure out why that case is in your casebook, and what it represents, and how case law has morphed since then. Too often we get caught up in minutia when all we need is a little perspective to connect the intellectual dots for us. Good luck.
She doesnt have a college degree but because of her work experience and the extensive training she has through SBC (formerly Southwestern Bell) I believe she has some way of obtaining credits. I really wish she would do this or something similar. I think she would really enjoy it.
