Civil Defense Thoughts

I'm not quite sure yet whether this is going to be a blawg or a blog. With the legal issues involved working for a giant law office it may turn into just a blog with the occasional war story from the trenches of civil defense lawyers. We'll see. It may also be an outlet for me to get my thoughts out on virtual paper.

The good news is that I work with wonderful people. The bad news is that I'm not sure I'm quite on the right side of most of the cases I work on and haven't been able to rationalize my way there as of yet - I know that everyone deserves representation and that good lawyers can advise their clients on how to comply with the law and be "good" corporations that treat their employees fairly etc. I'm just not sure how many clients actually listen to such advice - hence the need for litigation departments. That said, I love working with lawyers, with people who use logic and communication (ideally) to settle disputes rather than the alternatives. My heart just tends to lead me towards counseling individuals rather than helping capitalism in its merry march along towards betterment for all.

Another problem as a relatively new lawyer is coming to terms with the billable vs. non-billable systems of payment for service. I'm not sure contingency fees are the answer and I suspect that ultimately the billable hour, or in many cases the billable minute, is not a good solution for clients. The system doesn't reward efficiency unless the lawyers at the top of the hierarchy are sharp enough to see that efficiency and optimal work product are worth rewarding regardless of the number of hours billed. I like the idea from the not so recent past of "fees for services rendered" - most transactions or litigation can be broken down into rough estimates of what things might cost and a flexible contract could underscore that. Good firms or lawyers with a knack for business would do well under this system while those lawyers who consistently underestimate the time something takes might not do so well or indeed might fail completely - but that system seems more meritocratic than does the one that rewards late nights, weekends, burnout and diminishing returns at the clients' expense.

I'm not saying that all law firms do this and in fact the one I work for is quite conscientious about not overbilling and if anything underbills clients. They legal system as well as the feeder schools could really use some reformation to bring law back to what may turn out to be a halcyon myth of days gone by - the days when law was a helping profession rather than a straight business and where service and collegiality along with sharp legal analysis were valued currency.

I knew what I was getting into going to work for a big law firm after graduation but the student loan debts and the prestige factors all prevailed just as Duncan Kennedy's prescient "Law School as Training for Hierarchy" (Harvard L. Rev.) predicted that it would. The rich get richer in law school just as they do in the real world and ultimately those riches lead to what are considered the "plum" jobs although I look at my friends making a third as much as I do working for the PD or the DA and who are "gasp" having fun at work, and wonder who was the sucker really?

Enough on that for the day - a shining new week of corporate law practice beckons. What excitement does tomorrow hold? Document review? An exciting memorandum that won't be used? Letters to clients or courts that won't be sent? Only the partners know.....