Pro Bono Attorneys: Necessary and Problematic

Practicing law can be rewarding.  It's fascinating to use the law as an instrument to help your client.  Sometimes a client walks into your office that has a "golden" case.  For example, a caring a doting mother that is seeking sole legal custody of her daughter because her ex-husband is a violent, druggie psycho.  That's a case I'd jump on any day.  There are a million and one tools that will enable you to achieve the desired result.  The only thing that throws a wrench in it, is that the husband walks into court with a pro-bono attorney.  The other attorney is green and eager to learn.  The husband has all the time in the world because he's unemployed, and none of the costs associated with protracted litigation, and will torture your client until she yields.  She can't keep up with the costs.  So, in the end, despite your advice and because of your mounting legal fees--she is forced to settle.

This scenario plays out every day.  It's not fair to your client, but there's little that you can do other than stop the clock.  Legal fees are such a huge factor in what a client does, and it has nothing to do with the law and justice or what's right.  It breaks my heart, but if your client can't afford to keep fighting the good fight--you must settle.

In divorce cases, you're actually forced to exchange retainer agreements.  I imagine that this came into practice so the Court can make sure that the parties are fighting on even ground.  Unfortunately, this has become a formality and means nothing.  However, you can bet the spouse that is paying $100/hour will go farther than the spouse that is paying $400/hour.  And it has nothing to do with the merits of the case.

In debt collection court, there is an army of volunteer attorneys.  These volunteer attorneys won't put in an appearance, but they advise the debtors of their "rights," thereby strong arming the creditor's attorney into settling for pennies on the dollar.  I don't have much sympathy for creditors, of course, but I can see where the costs of collection is transferred to other debtors.  Kind of like the costs of stolen merchandise forces a store to increase the prices on all the merchandise to account for the loss.  If you owe it, you owe it.  Unless you declare bankruptcy, why should you be allowed to settle for pennies on the dollar?

This is obviously one of my pet peeves about the practice of the law.  Much of the motivation to cease moving forward comes from the amount that must be paid to the attorney to do so.  I wish I knew how to even the playing field.  My feeling is that attorneys and politicians should be eating from cans and working because of their passion.  However, with the cost of becoming an attorney today--it's become hard to take on a case for a reasonable rate because you "believe" in it.  Attorneys have fallen into two camps--those that charge an exorbitant rate to survive and those who charge nearly nothing for the experience and the hope that they will one day be able to charge an exorbitant rate.  Should we all be doing this for less?  Or are attorneys' fees the leverage that all parties need to settle?

Any thoughts?

Trailblazing Ideas from Pace Law: NETWORK, says Dean Littman

The Pace Law Grads in this article, all suffering from diminished expectations and lack of job prospects, didn't get the memo.  According to Yahoo, legal hiring is up 29% and lawyers are earning $110K on average!  What are they doing wrong?  What am I doing wrong?  Hell--what are you doing wrong?

Well, Pace is being innovative by re-introducing the wheel and fire to humanity suggesting that students network the hell out of other attorneys.  I guess I forgot to do that.  According to Littman, networking is key: 

Littman said students must attend networking events, make good impressions, collect business cards, and follow up with telephone calls.

"Networking and experience go hand in hand," she said.

When she says they go hand in hand, what does she mean?  By networking, I will gain experience?  Or my experience will be enhanced by networking?  That's gobbledygook.  Your students have no real experience, so it will not be enhanced or diminished by networking.   Who is she kidding?  Even after one year of practicing, most lawyers don't have enough experience to hang their hat on.

Dean Littman also warns students that six figure salaries are hard to come by.  Really?  I've been turning down jobs offering $60K and $70K daily--holding out for that six figure job! Silly me.

Littman said she also advises students to have more realistic starting salary expectations, noting that only 2 percent of graduates are getting salaries of $150,000 or more a year.

Younger said students might want to consider "hot areas" of law, such as bankruptcy and intellectual property, to increase their chances of getting hired.

"There is an enormous unmet need for lawyers in America, especially for people who can't pay the rate that Fortune 500 companies can pay," he said. "These jobs don't pay $165,000 a year, but they pay something."

Do I find it ironic that the rest of the article focuses on the stories of Kavitha Mukund, Jennifer Lincoln, and Marjorie Levine--all students that were unable to secure a job offer?   Yah.  I do.  Then there's the story of  John McCarron, a guy who didn't even try to find a job. Instead he started as a solo right out of the gate.

Dean Littman, can you point me in the direction of the "unmet need for lawyers"?  I can't seem to find it anywhere around here.

Thanks Tipsters!  :)  It would be so hard to keep this up without you.