Chuck Newton

8 Reasons Not To Go To Law School

I do not know.  The whole world is a critic.  I the justification of a law school education is not different.  Most often in this regard people are cynical and discouraging.  You take things with some truth and exaggerate.  Do not get me wrong.  I have probably done the same thing.  But, you need to go to law school because you believe you will enjoy the law, the reasoning, and helping people.  You cannot let sites like H. Luiz Presents discourage you with things like the his 8 Reasons to NOT go to LAW SCHOOL.  They are:

1. FINANCIAL SUICIDE
2. IF YOU’RE A CREATIVE PERSON, FORGET IT
3. THE “BREAKUP” RATE IS NEARLY 80%
4. THE BAR EXAM IS BRUTAL
5. TOP JOBS ARE HARD TO COME BY
6. INSANE HOURS
7. LAW PROFESSORS ARE A-HOLES
8. HARASSMENT BY FRIENDS SEEKING LEGAL ADVICE

Could You Office In A Milk Crate?

There is always a lot of discussion about two things related to workspace.  One, I need additional space at home or a quiet separate place at home, or close to home, to practice.  Two, I am worried about the costs of construction of even a small office space.  Well, I like creative ideas and have shared them from time to time, and I like this one.

In this regard, please find the space built from shipping containers on the bottom and ordinary milk crates on the top as presented on the BBC. 

German artists Wolfgang Winter and Berthold Hörbelt, who have bee built what is place in Castleford.

Sure you might have to put in some plastic or clear barrier on the inside, but most of this stuff can be purchased at the home improvement store.

 

The Lemon Law Niche

When lawyers talk about lemon laws, they might be talking about consumer protection or deceptive practices in a broader sense.  But, those are practice areas and not necessarily niches.  Practicing in the area of lemon law is a niche.

Lemon law also does not refer to actual fruits or produce.  It refers to what is known as the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and a host of state laws that protect the purchases of cars, trucks, vans, SUVs, motorcycles, RVs or similar type vehicle and mechanical, warranty-based goods, that fail to meet standards of quality and performance.  These failed products are called "lemons"

In the 1800s, it is said, people started to use the work "lemon" to describe others who were sour or unfriendly.  The word came to be recorded as slang term meaning a "worthless thing".  From this, these laws have been tagged with this description.

For those interested, Lemon Law America, is a good place to start.  It can give you some very basic information, and then point you to some attorneys and websites in your area that practice in this area.

South Texas College Of Law Scored Its 101st Advocacy Win

If you believe that the central aspect of law is advocacy, then there is no better law school than South Texas College of Law (STCL).  It simply excels in this area.

And, when you think about it, whether in trial, or on appeal, or administrative hearings, or even real estate closings, simple demand letters or even client consults, the basic underpinning involves advocacy.  When you talk about training practice ready lawyers advocacy might not be everything, but it is a big part of it.

Back in April of this year students from STCL captured its 101st advocacy title when it took first place in the national American Bar Association Appellate Advocacy competition in Chicago. The ABA competition started earlier this year with 187 teams competing in six regionals. The final 24 teams then met. The South Texas team of Bridget Burke, Stephanie Lindsay Holcombe, and Katie McFarland defeated 10 teams for the title including students from Duke, Samford, University of South Carolina, Howard, and the University of Arizona . Burke was named Best Advocate of the competition. The competition puts teams of students in a hypothetical case arguing to a panel of judges. This year’s problem revolved around separation of powers issues with congress attempting to force the executive branch to carry out its will. The team was coached by South Texas Associate Dean T. Gerald Treece, Rob Galloway ’91, Adam Massey ’08, and Michael Long ’08.

If you are looking for a quality law school, you ought to give STCL a serious look.

The Future Might Still Hold Room For A Public Law School In The Texas Rio Grande Valley

I certainly hope so.

According to Texas Lawyer's Tex Parte Blog, although the Texas Legislature passed on establishing a public law school in that region this session all was not lost.  The Legislature did agree to fund a study.  In an amendment the House added to S.B. 936, which authorized the establishment of the University of North Texas College of Law in Dallas, Texas, also requires the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board to study the need and feasibility of establishing a public law school in areas that do not have a law school, including the Texas-Mexico border region.  S.B. 936 requires the board to deliver results of the study to the chairmen of each Legislative committee with jurisdiction over higher education by Nov. 1, 2010.

The Texas Rio Grande Valley is not actually a valley.  It is a delta or floodplain.  Early settlers from Mexico thought the term "Valley" or "El Valle" sounded more inviting.  It is called "El Magico Valle del Rio Grande" or "The Magical Valley of the Rio Grande" -- RGV for short.

The RGV represents the southermost tip of South Texas, which separates Mexico from the United States.  Over 80% of the residents of the Valley are referred to a number of different ways including "Spanish, "Tajano, "Hispanic" or "Latino".  The area is a way point for tourists seeking to visit Mexico.

One of the most important people from the area that I remember was Lloyd M. Bentsen, Jr., who was the former popular U.S. Senator, presidential candidate, vice presidential nominee and Secretary of the Treasury.  But, other probably think of more popular stars like musician Freddy Fender, Chicago Bears football player Roberto Garza, or actor and singer Kris Kristofferson.  All, when you think about it, have strong and memorable personalities.

The Valley's economy is very reliant on agribusiness, including citrus and vegetables, and along with South Padre Island tourism is big.  It is a very popular Winter tourist destination for residents from the Midwest United States and  Canada.  Wildlife is abundant.

The goal in the Legislature was generally to get a public law school approved for The University of Texas at Brownsville.  And, it is needed not as much because we need more public law school seats in Texas (and we do), but because this area is rich in culture, rich in diversity, and it has no law school to train lawyers to appreciate and reflect this for the State of Texas.  It would be nice to have a law school that reflects the personalities, ambitions and aspirations of those in this area of the country.

(The University Of Texas Brownsville campus is pictured).

15 Bargain Law Schools

About.Com lists what it believes are the 15 best bargains in law schools in this country where you can good a great education but pay less for it.  Some require residency in the state to attend, but many have loose rules that allow you to be a resident after a year.  These law schools are:

1. BYU Law School

2. Florida State Law School

3. Georgia State Law School

4. North Carolina Central Law School

5. Temple Law School

6. Texas Tech University

7. University of Alabama Law School

8. University of Arizona Law School

9. University of Florida Law School

10. University of Georgia Law School

11. University of Memphis Law School

12. University of Mississippi Law School

13. University of New Mexico Law School

14. University of North Carolina Law School

15. University of Tennessee

Scott Bassett - "You Just Have To Realize That The Things You Think You Need Are Actually The Things That Weigh You Down."

I think that we all appreciate real life examples of the Third Wave practice of law.  So, when I received this email from my fellow Third Waver, Scott Bassett, which described his practice, I thought you needed to know.  His email is inspiring.
___

A friend licensed in both Michigan and Texas sent me her copy of the July 2009 Texas Bar Journal.  [You can read the articles by clicking HERE and HERE]. I was delighted to read your articles about practicing law at home.  You do what I do, but you've been doing it a few years longer.  In mid-2001, I finally realized that my traditional family litigation practice in the Detroit area was making me crazy.  Although I was regarded as one of the better and more knowledgeable family law attorneys in Michigan, I was not happy.  As a result, I wasn't as good a father or husband as I could be. 

Together, my wife and I decided to sell everything, simplify our lives, and move to the Gulf coast of Florida where my parents retired a few years earlier.  My wife and kids arrived here in late 2001.  I was left behind in Michigan for another five months winding-down my practice and selling our home.  We now live in beautiful Manatee County, a short walk from a small national park in one direction and a new county-operated nature preserve in the other.  The mouth of the Manatee River, as it flows into Tampa Bay, is 600 feet away at the end of our street. 

Initially, I took a full-time job as an entry-level consultant for a law office technology company in the Tampa Bay area now known as InTouch Legal.  Although I left all of my trial court work to my former law partner, I kept a couple of pending Michigan family law appeals so as not to lose touch with the practice of law.  Before too long, my colleagues from Michigan began contacting me to handle their appeals.  Less than three years later, my long-distance home-based appellate practice was large enough that I gave up technology consulting.  However, I still write the monthly email newsletter for InTouch Legal and the other three law office tech companies that comprise Affinity Consulting Group.  I also manage and write most of the posts for Affinity's blog.

My colleagues in Michigan often say, "I wish I could do what you did."  I respond, "You can.  You just have to realize that the things you think you need are actually the things that weigh you down."  I don't think I've persuaded anyone yet, but in time some will see the light. 

Although we practice in very different substantive areas (my practice is 100% Michigan family law, almost entirely appellate, with a very few trial court research projects in the mix), the technology I employ is almost identical to yours.  For example, I use a notebook PC to take my office anywhere.  After years with a succession of Toshiba notebooks, I now use a dual-core lower-end ThinkPad with XP Pro and 2 GB of RAM.  When at home, I press into service a vintage 1999 15 inch Samsung LCD monitor that pivots to portrait orientation as a secondary monitor.  I also use a ScanSnap S500 scanner to digitize all case-related or practice-related documents I receive.  I then put the paper away and generally never see it again.  In my Contract for Legal Services, I advise clients that I will destroy the paper file two years after their case is complete. 

I was an early adopted of VoIP telephone service.  I opted for Vonage when it first launched because they offer a "virtual number" in my old Michigan area code for just $5 per month.  Service was merely OK in the beginning, but the technology has matured and I am now highly satisfied with the features, call quality, reliability, and especially price.  Voice mail is converted to an audio file and emailed to me.  I can receive it on my Windows Mobile phone and play back messages.  I can also enable Vonage's Simul-Ring feature so that calls to my "office" number also ring on my cell phone when I am away from home.  I also have a Skype subscription account for making and receiving calls from any of my computers.  I use Gmail for email, but with a custom domain name, along with the Google Calendar, both of which sync with my cell phone using a nice service called GooSync. My contacts, email, and calendar automatically remain in sync between my desktop computer (which functions basically as a file server), my ThinkPad, my phone, and my original 7-inch Asus Eeepc netbook (which I take on shorter trips instead of the ThinkPad). 

Although I am not a fan of faxing as a technology, I realize that many people still use it.  So I maintain an eFax account with a number in my old Michigan area code because most of my incoming faxes come from lawyers or clients in that vicinity.  I am amazed that people tell me they are amazed by the process of faxing something to a Michigan fax number that arrives in my email in Florida as a PDF attachment within a few minutes.  This has been possible for a decade or longer.

Let me close by again expressing my appreciation for your articles.  You captured my view on the subject of home-based law practice very well.  A few years ago, while still employed full-time at InTouch Legal, I was invited to travel to Ft. Worth to speak to the Family Law Section of the Texas Bar about law office technology.  I enjoyed my conversations with the many Texas practitioners I met at that event.  Hopefully I will have a chance to return someday. 

Advanced Law School Placement

What a cool idea.

D. Benjamin Barros, an professor at Widener Law, on his Property Prof Blog, advanced the proposition of teaching basic doctrinal law courses at the undergraduate level and that law students then be allowed to place out of these courses in law school.

It is law school re-engineering.  It helps those undergraduates that are thinking of a legal career and it does not overly disadvantage those law students who did not think of a legal career until later.

The issue is of course the soaring cost of a legal education, coupled with often required undergraduate degrees which are not preparatory for law school.  Legal education cost a small fortune and takes years to complete.  So, this idea tries to cure part of both problems. 

Admittedly, Dr. Barros was not necessarily bringing this argument up in the context of cutting the current law school timetable, but as a means of softening the expansion to law school to four years as some have suggested.  If there is no expansion of law school to four years, then this could act to help some law students complete their law degrees in two years.

As stated by Barros, "What we teach in law school can be roughly divided into two components:  stuff and skills.  In its current incarnation, legal education is largely focused on teaching stuff – the basic doctrinal rules, and related policy issues, of various areas of law.  There is a reasonable amount of legal analytic skill that is taught in your typical casebook course, especially in the first year.  But most of what we teach is stuff – basic knowledge of one sort or another.  Some types of stuff are more complex than others, but most of the basics really aren’t that hard.  I’m pretty confident that undergraduates would be able to handle most of the basics of property law, and of any other legal area ... If students came into graduate-level law school with a decent introduction to the law of property, then we could do so much more with them."

The argument is that the use of placement exams would allow the market to decide how best to promote undergraduate legal education.  These legal subjects could be taught online, for example.  There might be prep courses.  All that would matter would be competency.  Universities could start offering offer law majors.  The advanced placement could make it easier for law students to get a J.D. in two years.

Co-Branding

Sure, if you look on TV or look anywhere you will see evidence of successful co-branding.  Southwest Airlines has co-branded with SeaWorld to launch their Shamu inspired airplanes.  Michael Jordan teamed up with Nike to sell $100 plus Air Jordans.  And, there is TGI Fridays teaming up with Jack Daniels in terms of food flavoring.  But, co-branding really does not happen in the legal field?  Right?

Well, I did not really think so, but the truth of the matter, whether the bar-tenders or I like it or not, it happens all of the time.  An obvious example involves title companies or agencies, most of them run by or headed by lawyers.  The process of titles involves law, insurance, abstracting and accounting, but it is usually alright for an attorney to team up with a title agency or company, under its name, in terms of running what is know as a "fee office".  That is co-branding.

Then, there are legal insurance companies which team up with groups of attorneys to provide services for their insured.  In a way this is co-branding, is it not?

Lobbyist are often lawyer or are associated with non-lawyers or lobby firms.  This is often difficult in some states in which the lawyer has to be the owner or the employee but lawyers and non-lawyers cannot mix as partners to share profits.  That is not true in markets like Washington, D.C. where lawyers and non-lawyers can operate as partners for specific reasons, and non-lawyers can be included in the firm's name.  See here.

And, then there are lawyers that start or work closely with surrogacy and adoption organizations.  That is co-branding.

I am sure there are more examples.  But, what becomes obvious is that attorneys that actively solicit referrals in various professions and from various types of professionals are in fact co-branding.  It might not be intentional or contractual necessarily, but they are co-branding in the sense they have formed an informal alliance and they have a marketing synergy as to a particular type of related service.  When you as the attorney trade on the market segment of others, that is what co-branding is really all about.

Finally, when you break it down, niche marketing is really a loose form of co-branding.  If you limit your practice to real estate closings, you are co-branding with real estate sales.  If you organize your practice around the wineries, you are co-marketing with the wine industry.  In these examples, it might be without the overall consent of the industry for you to do this, but you are forming an informal alliance to work together with the industry even if that decision is unilateral on your part.

I guess my overall point is that I am going to look at co-branding and lawyers a little differently from now on.

Frenemy

In reading the Houston Business Journal, I noticed that "frenemy" is a new word that has been added by the Merriam-Webster's latest collegiate dictionary.  (When I checked, however, it had not been added to Merriam-Webster's online version).

Frenemy is a combination word that has developed, which means one who pretends to be a friend but is actually an enemy.

Now, of course, I suppose that a frenemy can exist in any environment and any profession, but one place that frenemies have to exist is in the practice of law.  And, I am sure they come in all varieties.

Hell, I can probably be accused of engaging in the act myself as there are just some opposing counsel I viscerally dislike, as I am sure there are does that have the same reaction to me.  But, I try to maintain my cool.  Most of the time I am successful.

Many years ago in Tyler, Texas I remember a group of lawyers talking about two particular creditor attorneys that often appeared in court.  One was always in your face and rather upfront with his position, and as a result not much liked by debtors' counsel.  The other one was mostly smiled, shook your hand, had a nice joke for you, unless his creditor client was around or he was in the middle of an actual trial.  Most of the lawyers in the group were bemoaning the 'ol cuss of an attorney.  My law partner at the time, however, disagreed.  He stated that to him the 'ol cuss might be none too friendly but he was upfront with you, his trial tactics were upfront, and he did not lie or mislead you in anything he did or planned on doing.  He was, in short, an open book even if he did not have the greatest personality.  My partner stated, however, that Mr. Likable was deceiving.  He was the kind of guy who would put his arm around you, presumably in friendship, only as a prelude to stabbing you in the back.  He would lie to you, mislead you, withhold evidence from you, and deceive you as to his position in the case.  In fact, he was more likely to do these things when he was holding a winning hand that if you, as opposing counsel, knew about it might end the  in a way favorable to Likable's client.  It was the opinion that he did these things just so he could continue to bill the britches off his own client.

Now, Mr. Likable, is obviously a frenemy of the worse kind.  But, in some ways frenemies are more subtle.  I do not think I fall into Mr. Likable's category.  However, that is really a decision, I suppose, of opposing counsel in my cases.

The more subtle approach, and the camp where I occasionally fall, is in not really caring much for a lawyer on the other side, to the extent I feel the need to buddy up to them and give them advice.  You know the advice, do you not?  You know, if I were you I would not have brought this case, or raised that defense.  In my years of practice, what I have come to learn is that how other's perceive you is important, and you need to be mindful of that.  If you do not have your integrity, what do you have?  Have you considered the ethical ramifications of that action?  Your client is going to get you into trouble.  Have you considered the Rule 11 ramifications of your position? 

My wife and fellow lawyer says that I am "preaching", and then she tells me to stop it.  I usually tell her that "I'm trying to help the guy out".  She usually shots back, "He doesn't want your help".

I am not sure what all of this means really.  Is it better to just be upfront with your disgust and dislike for opposing counsel, or to just put a smile on your face and try not to burn bridges?  It is a good question to which I am not sure I know the answer.  What I do know, however, is that Mr. Likable is still an archfiend because he goes beyond niceties in the face of real emotion.  He deceives for his own profit from his own clients.  So, he might be a frenemy to me, but he also a frenemy to his own clients.  That is never a good thing.