Arkady Renko Posted December 24, 2004 Author Share Posted December 24, 2004 like anything- a top school will help open a lot of doors for you, but if you do really well at any school you have a shot. You couldn't pay me to go to take one of the jobs the top school students take here in NY - 80+ hour weeks etc. Make a ton of money but it's not for everyone. 176840[/snapback] Are 80 hour weeks pretty much what all law graduates end up starting up doing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyebrian Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 Apologies for those who hate off-topic posts. So I graduated from college last year and after hesitating last spring, I am thinking I may go through with law school this fall. I know there are a few people here who have gone to law school have been to law school and some who are now lawyers. If there are any folks who took a non-traditional career after law school I would be interested in hearing about them too. Basically, I am curious about advice about knowing whether law school is the right thing to do and advice about the field in general. Also any advice about the law school experience itself. Anyway, looking forward to hearing from some of you folks. Thanks. 175535[/snapback] Well, I have been a trial lawyer for almost 24 years. I defend civil cases, my clients are insurance companies. The cases run the gamut from auto accidents to complex construction litigation. It is a great life if you can handle the stress, don't need to sleep, and are willing to risk everything on your next trial. I do have some advice for you. It is an advantage to be able to steer your legal career toward a niche. By that, I mean if you have a scientific background, can speak a foreign language, or have some other special skill that will elevate you above the crowd of annual graduates. Also, if you are going to law school because you don't like to sell, keep in mind that as a lawyer you have to sell yourself every day, if not to juries, then certainly to clients and other lawyers. It is very important to maintain balance in your life. Lawfirms chew up and spit out young associates, and the pressure to compete for partnerships can take a toll on your personal life. I have not read the other posts in this thread, so some of this advice may be repeated elsewhere, but working 60-70 hours a week is no way to live life. Lawyers have a higher incidence of substance abuse and divorce than the general population. Lawyers are by nature competetive, and you have to "ease up" every now and then. Contrary to popular myth, most lawyers are honorable and professional, the profession habitually contributes positively to society in ways that never make the front page. Me and most of the lawyers I know frequently provide free (pro bono) legal services, and are involved in many charitable organizations. As I look back I can state with certainty that the positives have outweighed the negatives. Good luck with your decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soljc Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 Apologies for those who hate off-topic posts. So I graduated from college last year and after hesitating last spring, I am thinking I may go through with law school this fall. I know there are a few people here who have gone to law school have been to law school and some who are now lawyers. If there are any folks who took a non-traditional career after law school I would be interested in hearing about them too. Basically, I am curious about advice about knowing whether law school is the right thing to do and advice about the field in general. Also any advice about the law school experience itself. Anyway, looking forward to hearing from some of you folks. Thanks. 175535[/snapback] The education will surely serve you well in life, but practically speaking, unless you go to a top 20 school, or are in the top 10% of your class, it may be an economic nightmare. I've done fairly well, but I've got plenty of friends who owe $130k and are paying over $1200/month on a 30-year repayment plan. You do the math. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmac17 Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 Are 80 hour weeks pretty much what all law graduates end up starting up doing? Not necessarily. I have a friend in Buffalo 2 years out of UB probably working 65-70 hours. I know a girl in NY working 50ish. Know others who work 90 for 1/2 the year. I've done fairly well, but I've got plenty of friends who owe $130k and are paying over $1200/month on a 30-year repayment plan. You do the math. Yup. I wouldn't go to a private school (law, MBA )unless it is a very good one. That is a HUGE loan hanging over your head when you want to buy a house, a ring etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBob Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 Bill, it would depend on her goals. If she wants to work in certain areas, her pedigree will be less important. If she wants to work for a "white shoe" law firm in Manhattan practicing corporate law, she is better off taking the year off and going to one of the 14. All other things being equal and if she isn't in the former category, I'd advise her to go to the best law school possible. While there is something to be said for coming out with less debt, the pedigree in the long run is worth it IMHO. As someone without such a pedigree, I'll vouch that it is an easier path if you have such credentials. PS-I in-house and practice corporate law. I go to work every day with a sh---eating grin on my face. The best advice I have for those who take the plunge is to work hard your first year, but remember who you are and that the connections you make can be invaluable down the road. I'm proud to say I drank a considerable amount of booze, watched a ton of sports and made some really great friends. P.S. Steer her away from patent law; they are a weird lot in general.. Merry X-mas 176796[/snapback] Hey, I resemble that remark! Please be more specific. I know many patent attorneys and besides having a great deal of technical knowledge, they are not all that wierd. Actually, it really helps to have a technical or science degree to get into patent law as a litigator although not required, and it is a requisite if you are going to prepare and file patent applications. Bill, I highly recommend her taking the year off regardless! It does wonders for the attitude to take at least some time off, take a job doing something you like to do, and then going back. Virtually every kid I talked to in my law school class had a better attitude after at least some time off, and a crappy one when they did not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 Bill, I highly recommend her taking the year off reagrdless! It does wonders for the atittude to take at least some time off, take a job doing something you like to do, and then going back. Virtually every kid I talked to in my law school class had a better attitude after at least some time off, and a crappy one when they did not. 176874[/snapback] Sound advice, methinks. It's probably good for college students to join the real world for at least a little while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBob Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 you have your opinion based on what you've studied, and I have my opinion based on what I've studied. You can cite examples, I can cite examples. at the end of the day they are both opinions, nothing more. I'm just thankful that 50% of those greedy and careless obgyn's have been sued for malpractice. 176428[/snapback] It is not opinion, it is a conclusion. You can actually draw those when you study enough cases, enough examples and the actual facts that surround them. Please tell me what it is you have studied that has led you to your conclusion. Also, for every case that has been filed, there is a client who has hired that lawyer and brought that lawsuit. Real easy to blame the gun rather than the guy who pulls the trigger. Oh, and please provide the statistical source for your assertion that 50% of all gynos have been sued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkady Renko Posted December 24, 2004 Author Share Posted December 24, 2004 Not necessarily. I have a friend in Buffalo 2 years out of UB probably working 65-70 hours. I know a girl in NY working 50ish. Know others who work 90 for 1/2 the year. Yup. I wouldn't go to a private school (law, MBA )unless it is a very good one. That is a HUGE loan hanging over your head when you want to buy a house, a ring etc. 176869[/snapback] I have the possibility of getting the first two years at a top 14 at 33% of tuition. But that's still serious dough and there is a real opportunity cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.Y. Orangeman Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 Hey, I resemble that remark! Please be more specific. I know many patent attorneys and besides having a great deal of technical knowledge, they are not all that wierd. Actually, it really helps to have a technical or science degree to get into patent law as a litigator although not required, and it is a requisite if you are going to prepare and file patent applications. 176874[/snapback] Hehe. Just having a little fun, Bob. I have a great amount of respect for patent attorneys. Good ones are worth their weight in gold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmac17 Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 oh, I see - you took some courses in law school so that makes you qualified to back up such statements as " corporations will virtually always opt for profits over safety and as for the 50% #, look it up, and while you are at it check out the #'s for neurosurgeons and orthopaedists. Have a look at the % of c-sections going on these days compared to 20 years ago. wonder why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tux of Borg Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 I have the possibility of getting the first two years at a top 14 at 33% of tuition. But that's still serious dough and there is a real opportunity cost. 176879[/snapback] I've been lucky... I'm finishing up my 4 year degree and owe nothing so far. In fact I'm making $1,200 a month tax free from all my scholarships. About a month a go I met a veteran who was finishing up his 27th degree! I asked him why he was still in school. He replied, "cause I make more as a student then I would on the outside". I wonder if there are any scholarships available for law school students. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBob Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 oh, I see - you took some courses in law school so that makes you qualified to back up such statements as 176925[/snapback] Well, were it not for the fact I've also represented large corporations for 14 years, perhaps only a few coures in law school wouldn't seem enough. But even those few law school courses makes me more qualified than you. and as for the 50% #, look it up, and while you are at it check out the #'s for neurosurgeons and orthopaedists. 176925[/snapback] Why should I have to look it up? If you're going to quote stats, its on you to back them up with a cite. Otherwise at best your just jerking us off. Do tell, where does the 50% number come from? Something you just heard somebody say and o it must be true? Have a look at the % of c-sections going on these days compared to 20 years ago. wonder why. 176925[/snapback] Lot's of reasons why C-sections have increased (if they in fact actually have increased significantly), not the least of which is to increase revenues. Just because something goes up doesn't mean it is attributable to a particular cause. Sounds like the insurance industry and corporate America are safe with the likes of you buying everything they're selling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 She says that she favors (at this point) "Constitutional Law." Is this bad? Imo, she views herself as a hired gun of sorts, or so it seems. Listen, thank you for your reply. She is going back up to school very soon. I want to show her this thread so she can learn from it. Merry Christmas to you and your loved ones as well. 176804[/snapback] First, Con Law is a tough "area" to practice in. ONe reason is that every area of the law is onformed by our Constitution. Others may debate this point but if she wants to focus on con law then she is better suited being a criminal defense attorney or working for a non-profit like the Center for Constitutional Rights, or the ACLU (though most of their attornyies volunteer thier time). Also, if she wants to work in a large "prestigous firm" in NYC she will stand a better chance of getting one of those jobs if she goes to a top 10 school - however she can get those jobs if she goes to UB (for example) and does very well (summa cum laude, law review, moot court board, etc). She will just have to seperate herself from "the pack" more. I went to UB knowing that I would be doing public interest work or not practicing at all (I did not practice for 3yrs after law school). UB is ranked as one of the top "public interest" law schools in the country. So if this is what she would like to do, UB would be great for her. THe connections I was able to build through the school is incredible. Tell her good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunTheBall Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 It's unfair to single out Edwards when you should be calling out all scumbag politicians for 'living on the backs of others'.Especially the one in the White House 176520[/snapback] Not all scum ball politicians made their lives off the backs of doctors like John Edwards. He made his millions suing Ob/Gyns and taking 50% contingency fees using junk science that has been discredited. RunTheBall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunTheBall Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 Lot's of reasons why C-sections have increased (if they in fact actually have increased significantly), not the least of which is to increase revenues. Just because something goes up doesn't mean it is attributable to a particular cause. Bob, your bullsht flows so naturally from your mouth that I'm sure you would make a great ambulance chaser and would make an even better politician. You are the first person I've ever heard hold up the McDonalds coffee case as an example of good law practice. Bravo. You are so quick to ask everyone for stats and figures to back up statements, then just like the hyprocite lawyer you are, you make a statement like the above about c-sections. Show me reimbursement rates for c-sections Bob. Guess what? You don't get paid extra for doing a c-section. But I guess that doesn't fit into your nice lawyer argument. Just like a malpractice hack, why let the facts get into the way of a good argument to sway a jury that doesn't know better. Want some stats Bob? Here's one, every medical student is taught how to practice defensive medicine from day one. That's not for the betterment of patients, thats just to protect ourselves from scum ball hacks looking to make a buck on our backs. But that has nothing to do with the tort system in this country right? That's not the lawyers' fault, thats the fault of the medical schools. Here's another stat Bob. Every state that has caps on non-economic damages and contingency fees for ambulance chasers has lower malpractice premiums across specialitys but more importantly, the rate of increase in premiums over the past decade is less than half that of those states without caps. I guess thats just the insurance industry pulling the wool over our eyes right? Don't let the facts get in the way of the garbage you spew, Bob. That would be unlawyerly. RunTheBall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmac17 Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 What about your facts Bobs, as RTB pointed out, you haven't brought one out yet. Are you just believing everything the trial lawyers tell you? Lot's of reasons why C-sections have increased (if they in fact actually have increased significantly), not the least of which is to increase revenues. First of all, I can't believe you haven't casually heard on the news or in the paper at any point that c-sections are becoming increasingly popular. But since you need them, here are a few facts for you: In 1970, C-sections represented 5 percent of all deliveries but, by 2002, had surged to 26 percent of all deliveries. Much of it is due to the fact that docs are paranoid about being sued for malpractice - specifically if the child ends up with CP they will be blamed, so at the slightest hint of potential trouble they go for the c-section. The ACOG says that 76% of their members have been sued. (yes, I know this is their membership only, not all) and here is a nugget I found: According to 2001 Jury Verdict Research data, in just a one year period (between 1999 and 2000), the median jury award increased 43 percent. Further, median jury awards for medical liability claims grew at 7 times the rate of inflation, while settlement payouts grew at nearly 3 times the rate of inflation. Even more telling, however, is that the proportion of jury awards topping $1 million increased from 34 percent in 1996 to 52 percent in 2000. More than half of all jury awards today top $1 million, and the average jury award has increased to about $3.5 million. It is clear that the increasing proportion of multimillion-dollar jury awards is driving the boom in claims costs. the best thing you can do is talk to an obgyn, which you obviously have not done. The problem is Bob, that if you did I'm sure you'd come back and say they were just a shill for the insurance companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 Seems no one wants to answer this, but I will try again. Do lawyers ever sue other lawyers for malpractice? If so, what is considered malpractice? It appears there are lots of opinions of what malpractice is in other fields, so why not any opinions here? BTW, that statement that companies will always opt for profits over safety is bogus. Companies put a great amount of effort in making their product safe. There were cases years ago where major corporations made poor decisions but today it is recognized that it is not beneficial to the bottom line to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 Seems no one wants to answer this, but I will try again. Do lawyers ever sue other lawyers for malpractice? If so, what is considered malpractice? It appears there are lots of opinions of what malpractice is in other fields, so why not any opinions here? 177133[/snapback] The answer is yes. My firm is representing a guy who's life is ruined (I won't go into why). After the incident that caused his injury he hired one of the biggest and best plaintiff firms in the country. They screwed up the case by not suing two parties. He fired them and hired us, but the statute of limitations had run on his claim so we could not bring in the other parties. Now, the only defendant has an affirmative defense availible that would not otherwise be availble. Our client will certainly be pursuing a malpractice claim against his previous firm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 oh geez, now the ppp'ers will nibble away at this thread like a bunch of right-wing ants! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nervous Guy Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 oh geez, now the ppp'ers will nibble away at this thread like a bunch of right-wing ants! 177181[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts