Legal Careers

I love hearing from applicants with whom I crossed paths in years past. Here's an update I just received from a soon-to-be JD. It's a great reminder not to tack on graduate degrees willy-nilly, but to think hard about how a more general degree (like an MBA)  stacks up against more specialized ones.

In my last email I told you that I was considering getting a MBA because of my interest in working for the Justice Department or the SEC. I am no longer considering pursuing a MBA because I found a graduate program that is more suitable to my career interest. After [X Law School], I am going to get a Masters in Forensic Accounting at Georgia Southern. I want to tell you about this program in case any of your clients have an interest in pursuing white collar prosecution. Georgia Southern is one of three universities in the country that offer a Masters in Forensic Accounting (Cornell University and Washington University are the others).

What makes Georgia Southern good for me (aside from location) is that Georgia Southern agreed to waive the GMAT requirement because I have demonstrated that I can handle a graduate workload. After completing the Masters in Forensic Accounting, I will be able to sit for the CPA; the school uses the Becker model (I am not sure who or what that is, but I hear it's effective) to teach the CPA. I will also take the CFE [Certified Fraud Examiner] exam after I finish the program. I hope this information helps.

I'd love to hear from others who are choosing (or have chosen) among general and specialized degrees. What makes the most sense for you? Please share your thoughts.

I am often asked "How much would I make as a public interest lawyer?" There are many types of public interest law (see my blog posting from February 2009); accordingly, there is a wide range of salaries, depending on the type of work, employer, and location.

Most federal agencies use the "General Schedule," or GS Pay Scale, which has "grades" and "steps" to cover salary ranges. Happily, there are significant cost-of-living increases for some metropolitan areas. Federal banking regulator positions, with agencies including the Securities and Exchange Commission, pay on a higher scale. Raises allow many federal attorneys to earn six figures within three years of their start dates.

Entry level salaries for positions with state government (including assistant district attorney and assistant attorney general jobs), public defender offices, and non-profit organizations vary considerably, from $34,000 to over $90,000. For more information, see the research about public sector salaries compiled by NALP, the Association for Legal Career Professionals.

 

Nicole Vikan is a graduate of NYU Law School. She spent her first law school summer at a large law firm, and her second summer in the Homicide Investigation Unit at the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. She returned to the District Attorney's Office after graduation and spent five years as a criminal prosecutor, handling cases such as robbery and assault. Nicole then joined Fordham Law School's Career Planning Center, where she advised students seeking employment in the private and public sectors. She is currently a career counselor at Georgetown Law Center's Office of Public Interest and Community Service. As part of the Ivey Consulting team, Nicole works with law school applicants and people exploring legal careers.

Are law schools and business schools, as well as applicants, obsessed with interdisciplinary education? In my experience, yes, and I have cautioned against what Judge Easterbrook called "Cyberspace and the Law of the Horse" ("put together two fields about which you know very little and get the worst of both words"). Getting interdisciplinary education right is hard.

Now Jeff Lipshaw, a professor at Suffolk Law School and all-around smart guy, has published a paper arguing that interdisciplinarity isn't enough anyway, because someone has to make the judgment call about what goes into that intersection, and how to solve those complexities:

The relationship of pure and mixed business and legal judgment can be modeled in a Venn diagram. The question is who is capable of making judgments in the overlap. Businesspeople are not competent to assess the legal implications, and not inclined merely to trust the decision to lawyers. Lawyers, on the other hand, are usually successors to a particular method of organizing the world, and members of a closed discipline. By nature of the very concept of a judgment, it must occur privately in a single conscious mind, no matter how the judgment is ultimately communicated, shared, or adopted by others. The implication for lawyering and legal education is that some of the old canards about leaving business judgment to the business people must fall away....

Business judgment depends far more on the argument from merit, versus legal judgment, which depends far more on the argument from authority, and a particular kind of authority at that. What, then, does it means to be an expert in the overlap of the diagram? We need to define a new professional discipline: the field of metadisciplinarity. Being a metadisciplinarian takes one to a higher order skill than mere interdisciplinarity: it means being an expert in the making of interdisciplinary judgments.... 

Read more here.

For more casual readers, I asked Jeff how this all boils down, and here's what he said:

There's a skill in deciding things you don't know much about.  Unfortunately, it's not a skill taught much in law school, nor anywhere in academia where strong disciplines govern.

Your point is correct - getting the second degree doesn't help much.  You also have to jump across the divide to make good business/legal judgments, whether you have the second degree or not, just as doubling down in academic disciplines doesn't do much except co-opt you in both orthodoxies!

Those of you who work or teach in one or the other discipline, or at the intersection of both, we'd love to hear your thoughts. Please share.

In a previous post we discussed the general rules to follow when assessing when and how to disclose a criminal issue in your background. Even with those rules in mind, however, you might find yourself struggling with how to answer a "disclosure" question on an application (whether law school, business school, etc.) because you aren't familiar with the terminology.

Criminal disclosure questions often include terms that may seem familiar to you, but have specific meaning in the context of an application (e.g., arrest, charge, adjudication, conviction, "no contest," expunge, etc.).

When you are being asked to disclose information as part of your application, it is your responsibility to know which terms apply to your situation and whether disclosure is required. You may feel comfortable remaining blissfully ignorant now (after all, if you don't know what the terms mean, how can you be held accountable if you make a mistake?), but as we discussed in the previous post the repercussions of a "mistake" in your disclosure can be far reaching.

The best way to guarantee that you are fully informed before answering a disclosure question is to speak to an attorney who practices criminal law in the jurisdiction where your incident took place. Then, and only then, can you be certain how to classify your situation before answering the application question. The descriptions below should not in any way be taken as legal advice. Instead, they provide a general overview of the terminology you might find on applications, a basic glossary to consider before you seek further assistance in addressing your concerns.

 

Was I Charged with a Crime?

Applications may ask if you have ever been "arrested, cited, or charged with any criminal violation." Generally speaking, a charge is a formal accusation of a crime. A charge is usually brought by way of some "charging document." Charging documents include criminal complaints, indictments, or an information. It is not essential that you know the definitions of complaint, indictment or information. The important thing to determine is whether one of these documents was ever filed accusing you of a crime.

The best way to determine this is to order any paperwork related to your criminal case. In most states you have a right to order your criminal record (it may cost you a little bit of money and it's possible that you will have to appear in person to receive the copy). You can also request copies of the court file (sometimes called a "docket") relating to your case. This can sometimes become more complicated if the incident took place when you were a minor. Once you have gathered all of the paperwork you can consult with an attorney to see if there is a charging document accusing you of a crime.

For the vast majority of applicants, the information and indictment will be inapplicable. That is, few applicants will have been charged with a crime by an information or indicted by a grand jury for a criminal offense. If this happened to you, chances are that you are well aware of the circumstances of your case.

For most applicants who have a criminal disclosure issue, the criminal charge will come by way of a "complaint." A complaint is a document that someone files accusing you -- literally "complaining" -- that you have violated the law in some way. Police officers usually apply for complaints, thus you may see a police report filed among court papers in your case or attached to an application for a criminal complaint.

But civilians may also apply for a criminal complaint. This is important to remember because it is possible that you were "charged" with a crime even if you were never arrested.

If you were charged with a crime, it is possible that you were "arraigned" on the charge. An arraignment is a formal proceeding in court where the charges are read aloud (or presented to you in hand), you enter a plea of guilty or not guilty, and bail (if applicable) is argued. You may also be appointed an attorney or asked to hire one yourself. If you recall going through this process in front of a judge or magistrate then chances are you were charged with a crime.

It is also possible, however, that you were charged with a crime but did not have to appear in court. In some jurisdictions, a person can have an attorney appear on his or her behalf to respond to a criminal charge. Thus even if you never appeared in court to enter a plea or to have charges read to you, you may have been charged with a crime.

 

FAQ about Being Charged With a Crime:

1. Can I be charged with a crime without being arrested? → YES. The police or a civilian can accuse you of a crime and file a criminal charge against you even if you were never arrested.

2. If I receive a ticket from a police officer is that a criminal charge? → MAYBE. Police can give you a ticket for some offenses and then file documents afterward that accuse you of a criminal offense. It is important to request all paperwork related to your incident in order to determine what happened. For example, you may be pulled over and given a citation from a police officer and then later have charges filed against you relating to your driving in that case.

3. If the case was dismissed when I first went to court was I still charged? → MAYBE. It's possible that you had your case dismissed when you first appeared in court either by agreeing to some minor punishment (dismissal in exchange for community service, for example) or because the attorney convinced the prosecutor or the court that the case should be dismissed. But it is possible that you were formally charged with the crime and then the charges were dismissed; this may still count as being "charged" for purposes of the application question.

4. My case was "expunged" - doesn't that mean I was never charged? → NO. Whether you were charged has little to do with the outcome of the case. Even if the matter was dismissed, expunged, or sealed, it is possible that you were still "charged" with a criminal offense. For more on this see the section below on "sealed" or "expunged" cases.

5. A spouse / family member / significant other had me arrested and then "dropped the charges" in court before anything happened. Was I charged with a crime? → MAYBE. The actions of your spouse / family member / significant other regarding the resolution of the case are irrelevant. If a charge was brought against you by an acquaintance, the police, or some other authority - even if the charges were "dropped" or the party "refused to press charges" later on - it's possible that you were still charged with a crime.

 

Was I Arrested?

For most people, a formal arrest is an event that sticks in their mind and requires no further explanation. In some cases, however, confusion, intoxication, or the complexity of a situation will leave someone uncertain as to whether he was arrested.

An arrest is a seizure - usually by police officers - that is often accompanied by a prolonged detention and/or the filing of criminal charges. The stereotypical arrest involves the use of handcuffs, verbal warnings about an individual's rights, traveling to a police station or some other detention facility, and often a post-arrest processing (booking). There are other types of detentions that may apply to law school applicants, and it's important once again to research your particular situation to figure out if you were actually arrested.

 

FAQ about Being Arrested:

1. I was never put in handcuffs - was I still arrested? → MAYBE. Police can arrest you without handcuffing you (for your safety, for health reasons, etc.) so don't assume you were not arrested just because you were not handcuffed.

2. I was handcuffed - does that mean I was arrested? → MAYBE. Police can handcuff you for a number of reasons. Just because you were handcuffed does not mean you were necessarily arrested (although you might also have been arrested).

3. I was handcuffed, brought to jail, fingerprinted, and booked - but then they dismissed the charges. That's not an arrest, is it? → MAYBE. That situation has all the hallmarks of an arrest; whether you were charged with a crime has nothing to do with whether you were arrested.

4. I was drunk and was brought to the police station overnight to sober up - is that an arrest? → MAYBE. Some law enforcement agencies will place people in what's called "protective custody," an event that involves detention by the authorities without the additional characteristics of an arrest (handcuffing, reading of rights, booking, etc.). However, in some cases police do make a formal arrest in order to place you in some form of temporary detention. If you believe you fall into this category, consult with an attorney to determine how to classify your situation.

5. I was caught by store security for stealing and then police came and took my information before releasing me. Was I arrested? → MAYBE. Store security can effect an arrest and often assist law enforcement authorities with formal arrests. If you believe you fall into this category, consult with an attorney to determine how to classify your situation.

6. I was handcuffed, brought to the police station, fingerprinted, and booked - but no one ever said "you're under arrest." Was I arrested? → MAYBE. There are no magic words that indicate an arrest. While most arrests include a police officer telling you what's happening, you can still be arrested even if no one says the word "arrest."

 

Was I Convicted or did I Plead "Nolo Contendere," "No Contest," "Admit to Sufficient Facts," or "Adjournment in Contemplation of Dismissal"?

 

Some disclosure questions will ask if you have ever been "convicted of a criminal offense." What is a conviction?

A conviction is a finding (or judgment) by a judge or jury that a person is guilty of a particular crime or charge. This judgment can come by way of a plea of guilty or a finding after a trial. If you'd stood trial as a defendant in a criminal case, it's a good bet that you had legal counsel, know the outcome of the case, and remember the details of the event.

For most applicants, the issue of criminal convictions arises if they have been charged with a criminal offense and resolved the case in some way short of going to trial or pleading and being found guilty. While some applicants may have plead guilty to a criminal offense (and therefore were "convicted" of the charge), a number of applicants have resolved a criminal matter by some other method that involves a combination of punishment and a partial admission of responsibility.

The nature and circumstances of those resolutions varies considerably among states. Pleas can include:

• "Continuance Without a Finding" (aka CWOF or "admission to sufficient facts")
• "Nolo Contendere" (aka "no contest plea")
• "Adjournment in Contemplation of Dismissal" (aka "ACOD," "pre-trial diversion," "pre-trial probation," or "Probation before Judgment")

Each of the terms above involves a different set of circumstances and is defined by the law of the state where the incident took place. In some cases, such as a plea to "sufficient facts," the defendant must make an admission or acknowledgment before the court that he has done something wrong. In other cases, including some forms of pre-trial diversion or probation, no such admission is required.

These types of adjudications often involve a nominal punishment of some kind, including a fine, a diversion program (most often for driving offenses or incidents involving alcohol or drugs), community service, or a probationary period.

Applicants are often confused or ill-informed about what these terms mean. Because the terms vary so much among jurisdictions, you should gather the relevant documents from your case and seek legal advice about how to classify your situation.

 

FAQ about Convictions, Probation, and Pre-Trial Diversion:

1. My lawyer told me that if I admitted what happened and did community service, the case would get dismissed. Is that a conviction? → MAYBE. In most cases, if a charge was dismissed then there is not a conviction for that charge. However, in some cases a person can admit to doing something, sustain a conviction, and be placed on a period of probation, after which the case is dismissed. Depending on the jurisdiction, this can amount to a conviction. You should consult an attorney if you admitted to wrongdoing as part of your case.

2. I was given pre-trial diversion and stayed out of trouble for some period of time. I was not punished in any way (no community service, no fine, etc.). Is this considered probation? → MAYBE. Being placed on pre-trial diversion, pre-trial probation, or some period of supervision - without more, such as an admission of guilt or responsibility - is usually not considered probation. However, these pre-trial diversion programs may qualify as "probation" in the jurisdiction where the incident took place. You should read the paperwork from your case very carefully and then consult with an attorney to see if your situation qualified as "probation" in that jurisdiction.

3. I don't remember what happened in my case but I know it was eventually dismissed and my attorney said it would never appear on my record. So I was never put on probation, right? → MAYBE. Just because a case ended in dismissal does not mean that you avoided probation. In some jurisdictions, a case can be continued, deferred, or stayed for a period of time, after which the case is dismissed. However, the period during which the case was continued or stayed may qualify as a probationary period. The laws of each jurisdiction determine whether this period of adjournment or continuation was considered "probation," so once again, you should receive legal advice if you have a question about classifying your case.

 

My Case was Sealed / My Case was Expunged

Many jurisdictions have a process for "sealing" a criminal record, an act that closes the criminal record from public view unless it is sought by a court order. In other places a record can be expunged from the public rolls. This is considered more permanent than "sealing" a record, and has the effect of eliminating or eradicating the record (with a few exceptions).

Sealing or expunging a record is usually done by either (1) the passage of time or (2) a motion or request by someone made before a court or magistrate. The laws of each jurisdiction determine if, and how, records are sealed or expunged in that jurisdiction. For some jurisdictions, juvenile cases are expunged after a set period of time, such as when the defendant reaches the age of 18. In other cases, a person can move to seal his or her record after a set number of years passes from the date the case concluded.

There is great confusion surrounding the notion of sealing or expunging a record, and many people believe - incorrectly - that if their case resulted in something short of a conviction, it was automatically sealed or expunged. Unless you have a document from a court indicating that your case was sealed or expunged, you should assume that neither applies to your case. Expungement and sealing of a record is not the default status for a case that has been concluded (even if the charges were dismissed).

Even if your case was sealed or expunged, you may still have to disclose the incident on your application (and, for future lawyers, for admission to a state bar). Sealing or expunging a criminal case can prevent it from appearing on a standard criminal record check, but by applying to school you likely waive any protection of that information because you agree to be honest on your application.

 

FAQs about Sealed / Expunged Cases

 

1. My case was dismissed prior to trial in exchange for 20 hours of community service, so my case was expunged, right? → MAYBE. The outcome of a case (in terms of guilt or innocence, or the disposition of the case) has little effect on whether the case is expunged or sealed.

2. My case happened when I was a 14-year old kid, so it's sealed now because it's a juvenile case, right? → MAYBE. The sealing or expungement of juvenile records varies from state to state. Do not assume that a juvenile case is automatically sealed. Order your paperwork from the case and consult with an attorney from the jurisdiction where the case took place.

3. I was on probation, but my attorney said that if I didn't get into trouble again I would not have "a criminal record" - so I don't have to disclose anything at all? → MAYBE. A "criminal record" is a general team that has many meanings. You can have a "criminal record" even if you've never been convicted of a crime (but have been arrested and charged with one). Law enforcement and the courts have records of prior arrests and criminal charges, even if the person was not convicted. This would be the broadest definition of a "criminal record."

The term could also be interpreted to mean that unless a person was convicted of a crime, he has no criminal record. Under that narrower definition, you might not have a "criminal record," and you would need to get clarification on what, exactly, the application is asking for.

However, few schools will ask if you have a "criminal record." Instead, they'll be much more specific in the inquiry, asking about arrests, charges, convictions, etc. Instead of guessing about which definition is being used by the school and whether you have a "criminal record," read the instructions on the disclosure question very carefully and consult an attorney if necessary.

 

Questions? Comments? We want to hear from you!

Gregory Henning is a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Virginia Law School. After graduating from law school, he clerked for Judge R. Lanier Anderson of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and then became an Assistant District Attorney in Boston. As part of the Ivey Consulting team, Greg works with law school and public policy school applicants.

Since many law school applicants are working on their resumes for this year's admissions cycle, I decided to follow up on my June 29th article, Top Tips for Legal Resumes and Cover Letters, and provide resume DOs and DON'Ts specifically for law school applicants.

What you should DO:

• Do provide context for your experience. Put the employer or activity name first, followed by its location. Add your title and the dates and hours worked:

Dunkin Donuts, Baltimore, MD

Assistant Manager, June 2008-September 2009. 40 hrs/week.

• Do use action verbs, in the present or past tense, to describe your experience (e.g., "Summarized and organized client files").
• Do include all language skills and your level of knowledge: fluent, advanced, intermediate, or basic.
• Do demonstrated how you developed your skills and responsibilities over time. If you were promoted, indicate that:

Barnes and Noble, Minneapolis, MN

Assistant Manager, October 2007-July 2008. 40 hrs/week.

Clerk, February 2007-September 2007. 30 hrs/week.

• Do highlight college honors on their own line, but explain the criteria if they are not obvious.
• Do include your senior or honors thesis and study abroad.
• Do specify interests outside of school and work. Details matter: "Enjoy mountain biking and rock climbing" will grab a reader's attention, whereas "Enjoy outdoor activities" will not.
• Do use a clear font that is not too big or too small (e.g., Times New Roman 11 point font).
• Do be consistent with formatting spaces, commas, bolding/italicizing/capitalizing words, etc.

And some DON'Ts:

• Don't use personal pronouns, like "I" or "we."
• Don't use the present continuous tense-i.e., verbs end in "ing," such as reading, analyzing, etc.
• Don't include your LSAT score.
• Don't include your high school or your SAT score.
• Don't go over one page (unless you have been in the workforce for at least fifteen years!).

Questions? Unique situations? Ask here!

 

Nicole Vikan is a graduate of NYU Law School. She spent her first law school summer at a large law firm, and her second summer in the Homicide Investigation Unit at the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. She returned to the District Attorney's Office after graduation and spent five years as a criminal prosecutor, handling cases such as robbery and assault. Nicole then joined Fordham Law School's Career Planning Center, where she advised students seeking employment in the private and public sectors. She is currently a career counselor at Georgetown Law Center's Office of Public Interest and Community Service. As part of the Anna Ivey team, Nicole works with law school applicants and people exploring legal careers.

In the coming weeks, when the new law school year begins, 1Ls will face new campuses, courses, and classmates--and so will transfer students. Hundreds of law students try to transfer every year, sometimes for personal reasons (a partner gets a job in a different location, a family member in one's hometown becomes ill, or financial concerns warrant a move from a private to a state school) and oftentimes for strategic career-planning reasons: the students hope to graduate from higher ranked law schools that they couldn't gain admittance to as first-years. (Note that a law student may apply to transfer prior to his 2L year, but a student who spends her 3L year at another school is a visiting student and will graduate with a degree from her home school.)

The Law School Admissions Council provides important advice about some of the potential downsides of transferring: students may lose scholarships; they may not be eligible for journals or moot court until their third year; they may be admitted too late to participate in all aspects of early on-campus recruiting programs; popular classes may be full; and their G.P.A.s and rankings from their original law schools are not counted at their new schools. The LSAC also states that "[s]tudents often comment on the loss of community and close friendships they made in their first year when they transfer to another law school," but I think the potential benefits of transferring outweigh this particular concern.

Ideally, you will put time and effort into your first (and only!) round of law school applications and gain admittance to a well-regarded school that works for your needs. A highly-ranked (top fifteen) law school will help you gain maximum access to federal judicial clerkships, large law firm jobs, federal attorney honors programs, academic teaching positions, and other highly competitive opportunities. Back in September 2007, Anna blogged about the importance of attending a highly ranked law school and cited her book, The Ivey Guide to Law School Admissions, where she wrote,

The top fifteen [law schools]. . .offer a level of job security that other law schools can't. . . .Once you get to the second tier and below, you need to be at or near the top of your class to end up at a top firm in your region or with a top judge in your region (the national market is a much more difficult proposition), and people in the bottom half of the class often face grim hiring prospects.

In today's legal market, where top firms are cutting back on summer associate programs or canceling them altogether (see Greg's recent post here), both your school and your grades take on even greater importance (read my recent post here). In this climate, some applicants are already considering the possibility of transferring next year. Can one start out at a lower-ranked law school and reapply as a 1L to more competitive programs?

Because law school ranking and reputation are so important for career prospects, it may be worth the time, effort, and drawbacks (as discussed above) to apply and transfer to a top school. However, you should only enroll in a law school from which you are willing to receive your JD -- transfer admissions are extremely competitive, and you cannot count on being able to leave your original law school for a more prestigious school. When you apply as a transfer, your undergraduate G.P.A. and LSAT scores are not the key factors for the admission office -- your performance as a 1L is what will determine whether and where you are admitted. Only students who perform at the very top of their classes at lower-ranked schools will be admitted to top tier programs; at Georgetown Law, competitive candidates are typically in the top 15% of their current law school class, and the likelihood that any one student will be in that top 15% is low.

So if you're planning on applying to law school for the 2010-2011 academic year, it's time to think carefully about where to apply and get started on making your applications as effective as they can be-so you won't feel a need to repeat this process again.

 

Nicole Vikan is a graduate of NYU Law School. She spent her first law school summer at a large law firm, and her second summer in the Homicide Investigation Unit at the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. She returned to the District Attorney's Office after graduation and spent five years as a criminal prosecutor, handling cases such as robbery and assault. Nicole then joined Fordham Law School's Career Planning Center, where she advised students seeking employment in the private and public sectors. She is currently a career counselor at Georgetown Law Center's Office of Public Interest and Community Service. As part of the Anna Ivey team, Nicole works with law school applicants and people exploring legal careers.

On July 17, Greg blogged about how some large law firms are delaying start dates and canceling summer programs. Large law firms typically recruit students with high grades from highly-ranked law schools. There will be fewer opportunities to make $3,000 a week at big law firms next summer, and students with weaker grades and/or from lower-ranked schools face greater challenges than in past years if they want Big Law jobs.

Rising 2Ls and members of the incoming Class of 2012 should start budgeting now for (or plan on juggling barista or bartending jobs with) unpaid public interest legal internships next summer. Though financially challenging in the short term, unpaid internships are great investments for the future. Almost all non-profit legal organizations, government agencies, and judges hire unpaid legal interns during the summer and school year. Happily, there are paid public interest opportunities as well, and some law schools provide summer funding for students who choose unpaid public interest positions.

Recognize that "unpaid" does NOT mean uncompetitive -- apply early, explain your interest and skills in a well-written cover letter, and consider a wide range of opportunities. Many law students will be clamoring for volunteer jobs with agencies like the Department of Justice or organizations such as the LatinoJustice PRLDEF (which has gotten considerable press recently thanks to former board member Sonia Sotomayor).

Also, students may find paid work at small and midsize law firms. As discussed on the WSJ Law Blog, some small and midsize law firms are hiring more attorneys (!) to help with increased workloads, as corporations take advantage of the lower prices offered by these firms.

Law students hoping for exceptionally high salaries, expensive lunches, golf outings, and other hallmarks of traditional Big Law summer associate programs need to adjust their plans. But if you are willing to explore a wide range of options and work hard to find a (perhaps unpaid) job, you can enjoy a terrific summer and build solid legal skills that will impress any future legal employer.

 

Nicole Vikan is a graduate of NYU Law School. She spent her first law school summer at a large law firm, and her second summer in the Homicide Investigation Unit at the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. She returned to the District Attorney's Office after graduation and spent five years as a criminal prosecutor, handling cases such as robbery and assault. Nicole then joined Fordham Law School's Career Planning Center, where she advised students seeking employment in the private and public sectors. She is currently a career counselor at Georgetown Law Center's Office of Public Interest and Community Service. As part of the Anna Ivey team, Nicole works with law school applicants and people exploring legal careers.    

This week, thousands of law school graduates will sit for the bar exam. The test -- two days in some states, three in others -- is the culmination of the law school experience and one of the final hurdles that you need to clear before you actually get to practice law.

The test itself is a miserable experience. Cramped rooms, students cramming material in the final moments, and mental and emotional exhaustion from months of studying create an atmosphere of stress and anxiety. Going home after the first night knowing that you have to do it all over again the next day (or the next two days if you are in New York, California, or a few other states) makes for a less than restful night of sleep.

A few random bar exams tips:

Tip: Practice and study using ear plugs and then bring a set with you to the exam. It's amazing how loud the sound of a sneaker squeaking on a hardwood floor can be in a room full of a thousand people...

Tip: Avoid the nuts. You will see people in the bar exam using study guides and outlines up to the very last moments before the test begins. Avoid these people like the plague. They will stress you out and ruin your focus.

Tip: Remember that it's not about how high you score -- it's about passing. Your entire law school career (and before that, college and high school...) was focused on not just passing an exam but doing so with perfect scores. You do not need to ace the bar exam, and you need to change that mindset. That's not to say you shouldn't study, but rather than you should resist the natural instinct to panic when you don't know the answer to a question. If you know the answers to most other questions, you're going to pass.

Students often spend thousands of dollars on prep courses and devote 2 months of their lives memorizing obscure legal concepts and mnemonic devices that they will regurgitate on the bar exam. I have relatively fond memories of my time spent preparing for the exam. I remained at law school after graduation and watched the BarBri lectures on video. A number of my friends did so as well. During bar exam prep your life is on a set schedule, so we decided to schedule mental health time by playing golf a few times a week at a fantastic local course. That's one other tip: be sure to schedule mental health time. Just because the bar exam happens in July doesn't mean it should ruin your summer.

With everything going on in your life as you prepare to sit for this test, imagine if you were told -- less than a week before the exam -- that a technical error was going to prevent you from sitting for it?

That's what happened to Sara Granda, a recent graduate of UC Davis School of Law. Sara spent the last couple of months preparing to take the California bar exam. She graduated UC Davis in three years, speaks fluent Spanish, and worked at an immigration law clinic. Fairly typical of a 3rd year law school student -- except Sara Granda is a quadriplegic.

Sara Granda signed up for the California bar exam and her $600 entry fee was paid for by the California Department of Rehabilitation by check. Problem is, the state bar's website requires that payment be made by credit card. Granda apparently did her homework and checked with a representative from the state bar who told her that her application would still be processed.

Unfortunately that never happened, and Granda was notified that because of a bureaucratic snafu, she was not registered for the test. Granda has petitioned the California Supreme Court to allow her to take the test, and even has Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger speaking out for her.

So as you study during this final weekend before the exam, remember that things could be worse. You could be fighting with the mnemonic devices and random Contracts question while also having to fight to take the test.

Questions or comments? We want to hear from you! And good luck on the exam.

 

Gregory Henning is a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Virginia Law School. After graduating from law school, he clerked for Judge R. Lanier Anderson of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and then became an Assistant District Attorney in Boston. As part of the Anna Ivey team, Greg works with law school applicants. 

The Dow Jones started really tanking in October of last year along with the rest of the economy, but it felt as if the economic impact on legal careers was delayed. Whispers of cuts at top law firms grew louder in early 2009, but most firms hung on until the bitter end to announce the unthinkable: layoffs of attorneys.

One of the best sources for following these developments, Above the Law, has described its coverage as a "Nationwide Layoff Watch." Not what you want to hear if you're in the market for a job.

But now the economy looks like it may be turning around a bit, the Dow had a great quarter, and interest rates haven't gone through the roof. The housing market is seeing some positive signs. The future looks bright...right?

Not so much. The delayed impact on the legal world continues, and it's starting to hit the summer associate programs for next year. Firms have begun to announce that things will not be any better a year from now, when rising 1Ls will be hoping to land a coveted summer job and (hopefully) permanent employment.

Morgan Lewis, the 12th highest grossing law firm in 2008, has canceled its summer program entirely.  Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe recently announced that it will push back the start of recruiting and delay future start dates. These are two huge firms; one can only guess how many others will follow suit in the coming months.

Some schools are trying to remain optimistic, advising students to adapt to the market by applying to a broad range of employers and "secondary markets." Sure, tough times call for a more flexible approach. But when Harvard career services officials are suggesting that students look at Milwaukee, you know things are getting ugly.

Given the lag between the impact on the US economy and the legal market, don't look for things to change anytime soon. The Class of 2011 is feeling the pressure right now, and chances are the Class of 2012 won't be seeing any real improvement.

Gregory Henning is a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Virginia Law School. After graduating from law school, he clerked for Judge R. Lanier Anderson of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and then became an Assistant District Attorney in Boston. As part of the Anna Ivey team, Greg works with law school applicants.  

I have been a career counselor at two law schools with excellent part-time programs, where classes are held in the evenings so students can work full or part-time. For some applicants, the evening division is ideal: they work during the day at jobs they enjoy, earn money to pay for law school now rather than collect debt for later, and make contacts. Other law school applicants are disappointed to receive offers of admission to part-time programs rather than day programs, and hope to transfer to the day divisions at their schools after first year.

This year, US News & World Report changed its methodology to combine admissions data for full- and part-time students when computing the infamous rankings. "In the past, we'd just used full-time," said Bob Morse, the director of data research for the magazine. "But some schools we think were gaming the system. There were some part-time programs that were set up just for US News reporting purposes." (See the WSJ Law Blog here and the Law Librarian Blog here for discussions about this change.) The practice of admitting students with somewhat lower GPA and LSAT scores into evening programs may disappear because of this change, but it's too early to tell.

If you choose a part-time program, work full-time while attending law school, and remain in the evening division for four years (rather than the three years of a full-time program), you will need to make some strategic decisions while you're a student to position yourself for your post-graduate job search. Because of your day job, you may not be able to attend many career service programs, participate in most or all clinics, or take time off for summer legal jobs. Thoughtful planning can help you make the most of your time in law school. Here are some suggestions:

• Select courses that reflect your interests and add a section titled "Relevant Coursework" to your resume
• Highlight transferable skills from your current employment in your cover letters and resume
• Be prepared to articulate your goals for prospective legal employers, so your choice to work and attend law school can be explained as a unmitigated asset
• Get involved with student groups. If a group you wish to join doesn't have opportunities for evening students, create those opportunities and become the group liaison from the evening division
• Compete for Moot Court or journals
• Consider working as a Research Assistant during the semester or summer, for a professor who will allow you to set your own hours and work independently
• Reach out to non-profits and government agencies in your community to see if they accept students as volunteers for discrete short-term projects, evening work, or weekend work. Some law schools will find and promote these opportunities
• Seek law-related projects with your current employer
• Ask your current employer for one (or two, if possible) summer sabbatical(s), when you can seek full-time legal employment

Are you considering or currently enrolled in a part-time program? Share your experience here.

Nicole Vikan is a graduate of NYU Law School. She spent her first law school summer at a large law firm, and her second summer in the Homicide Investigation Unit at the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. She returned to the District Attorney's Office after graduation and spent five years as a criminal prosecutor, handling cases such as robbery and assault. Nicole then joined Fordham Law School's Career Planning Center, where she advised students seeking employment in the private and public sectors. She is currently a career counselor at Georgetown Law Center's Office of Public Interest and Community Service. As part of the Anna Ivey team, Nicole works with law school applicants and people exploring legal careers.