From Casebooks to Courtrooms: Why Law School is Like Training for a 5k When You Need to Run a Marathon

Embarking on the journey through law school is undoubtedly a rigorous and intellectually challenging experience. The hours spent studying case law, participating in mock trials and/or law review, and engaging in spirited classroom debates all contribute to the cultivation of legal knowledge. However, as many legal professionals will attest, there exists a noticeable gap between the theoretical foundation laid in law school and the practical demands of the legal profession. In this blog post, we'll explore why law school may fall short in fully preparing aspiring attorneys for the realities they encounter in the field.

Now let me translate that into layman's terms: Law school blows. I went to an academically rigorous private school for Kinder through 12th grades. I graduated 3rd in my class. I loved it. I went to what was, at least at the time, a top ten university in the nation. I graduated cum laude with a dual degree. I loved it. I am a self-professed academic nerd and proud of it. School came pretty easy for me, and I loved the objective validation of top grades. Yet, law school was different. It was weird. I earned good grades, though not the high A's across the board that I was previously accustomed to. Grades felt less objective. And to be honest, I really did not like the vast majority of my peers, who were assholes and/or obnoxious gunners (with some lovely classmates mixed into the bunch - you know who you are, so don't be offended). The Socratic Method felt like an entirely unnecessary form of torture and potential humiliation. The environment felt stuffy and stressful. I'm just being honest. But the hardest part was that when I graduated and entered the working world as a baby associate, I felt so ill-prepared to actually practice law. In this blog post, we'll explore why law school does fall short in preparing aspiring attorneys for the wild, wild west of the professional world (and why generally, it just mostly sucks).

1. Lack of Practical Skills Emphasis:

Law schools predominantly focus on teaching the theoretical aspects of law, such as legal theory, case analysis, and statutory interpretation. While these are essential components, there is often a lack of emphasis on developing practical skills that are crucial for day-to-day legal practice. Skills like client communication, negotiation, and document drafting are vital in the real world but may receive limited attention in the academic setting.

What do you do when a client is impossible to work with? What strategies should you use to negotiate a settlement during mediation? As a new associate, how should you interact with your colleagues, support staff and managing partners? The questions could go on and on.

I recall the first time I attended a mediation. It was my first year of practice, fresh out of law school. One of the named partners at my firm was lead counsel on the case. I was there to help, but in reality, my presence was primarily intended as a learning experience. The partner, however, was not particularly keen to really walk me through the strategy and thought process of what I was observing. I recall hearing the partner tell our client that "you know a mediation settlement is successful when both sides walk away somewhat unhappy" (in other words, a compromise, by its nature, will likely leave both parties feeling like they did not "win" in the way they wanted to). Hearing this truism was helpful, and I proceeded to use it when preparing clients for future mediations. However, the rest of the mediation process that I observed on that day was somewhat mystifying. The partner continued to throw out numbers (i.e. suggested counter-demands/counter-offers) to our client while the mediator flitted from room to room. He conferred with the client and negotiated on the client's behalf so confidently, but was he just pulling numbers out of his ass? Was there actual strategy behind his calculations and suggestions, or was this all just a fake-it-until-you-make-it charade? And how do you know when it is time to gently nudge your client into accepting or making an offer that inevitably does not make the client feel whole (or feel appropriately vindicated, depending on which side of the line the client sits)?

I have gone on to represent numerous clients, on both sides of the line, at mediation. I gained confidence and believe that I have effectively and successfully represented my clients, reaching appropriate and beneficial settlement agreements. But I do wish that my education and/or training had addressed this type of real life practice situation.

2. Limited Exposure to Real-world Scenarios:

The controlled environment of law school can only simulate real-world scenarios to a certain extent. In practice, legal professionals often find themselves faced with unexpected challenges, tight deadlines, and high-pressure situations. Law school does not always prepare students for the dynamic and fast-paced nature of the legal profession, leaving many feeling unprepared when they enter the workforce.

How do you handle facing bosses that are Class-A jerks? What do you do when you need to "fire" a client because they are uncooperative, uncommunicative or fail to pay their legal bills? What should you do as a female attorney when your client exudes a ridiculous amount of machismo during your interactions and insists on calling you "sweetie"? And a biggie: what does the trial experience really feel like, as opposed to just what it looks like? We see trials on TV and during law school we learn, at least procedurally, what happens during a trial. But what about the lack of sleep and extreme stress? The psychology involved in jury selection? And what about properly preparing your client for trial? You can spend countless hours sitting in a conference room reviewing exhibits and practicing testimony, but an experience early on in my career (informally questioning jurors once they were discharged after a shocking mistrial cut things short) taught me that you need to caution your client about their facial expressions and body language because jurors are watching everything. While you might assume they are focused on the testimony coming from the witness stand, in reality, they are taking every opportunity to sneak a glance at your client and will make snap judgments at the drop of a hat. None of these things were addressed during my law school education.

One of my most poignant (and unpleasant) memories that is relevant to this topic comes from the weeks following the birth of my second child, when I was home on maternity leave. I received word that one of my clients was displeased with the outcome of the matter I had been handling for him. He had a several thousand dollar balance owing to the firm, and he was grousing that he had been double-billed by multiple attorneys - an accusation that was absolutely false (and offensive to me, given the pride I specifically take in implementing fair and accurate billing practices - click here to see a prior blog post referencing attorney billing practices). I was home with a newborn and extremely shaken to find out he was threatening to sue the firm. In reality, he was nothing more than a disgruntled curmudgeon who did not want to pay for the services that had been provided when the outcome was not exactly as he had hoped. But it felt personal. And my postnatal hormones did not help the way in which his threats were perceived. Fortunately, my partners handled the issue in my absence, ultimately entering into a settlement agreement in which the firm agreed to accept a fraction of the balance he owed in exchange for a release of claims. In truth, this is not a terribly uncommon situation, and my firm handled it how most would by agreeing to accept a discounted amount in order to avoid the hassle of a potential legal claim that would not be worth fighting. However, to me, it felt personal, and I experienced a lot of guilt, shame, anger and frustration that my client had lodged complaints. It would have been nice to have been prepared for this kind of situation. But law school sure did not help in this regard.

3. Evolving Legal Landscape:

The law is a constantly evolving field, influenced by societal changes, technological advancements, and new legal precedents. Law schools may struggle to keep their curriculum up-to-date with the latest developments, leaving graduates with a potential knowledge gap when they enter the workforce. Adaptability is a crucial skill in the legal profession, and law schools may not always adequately instill this trait in their students.

I distinctly recall reading case law that felt antiquated and borderline irrelevant during law school. I recognize that keeping curriculum up-to-date is a challenging hurdle in the world of academia, but studying cases from 30 to 70 years ago - with some exceptions, of course - sometimes seemed onerous and immaterial.

4. Limited Exposure to Practical Tools and Technology:

Legal practice today heavily relies on technology and specialized tools to streamline workflows and enhance efficiency. Unfortunately, law schools may not always provide students with hands-on experience using the tools commonly employed in the legal profession. As a result, new lawyers may find themselves grappling with technology that they were not exposed to during their academic training.

For example, in law school, it would have been so helpful to have practiced document review using any one of the many document review and production software programs that is utilized by firms for this purpose. While things like flagging, tagging and Bates labeling documents isn't rocket science, many attorneys will find themselves entrenched in the document review process, scouring through thousands, if not tens of thousands, of documents while using unfamiliar software. It would be less daunting and certainly less onerous of a task if exposed to this process during law school.

Conclusion:

While law school serves as the foundational stage for aspiring lawyers, it is essential to recognize its limitations in fully preparing individuals for the multifaceted challenges of the legal profession. Bridging the gap between theory and practice requires a holistic approach that integrates practical skills, exposure to real-world scenarios, and a commitment to staying current with the evolving legal landscape. Aspiring attorneys should seek opportunities for internships, externships, or mentorships to supplement their formal education and better equip themselves for success in the dynamic field of law. But frankly, I believe law schools could do better too. Ultimately, understanding the disparities between law school and legal practice is the first step toward building a successful and fulfilling career in the legal profession.

Oh, and once again, law school sucks. But all joking aside, I by no means am discouraging students from setting their sights on, and attending, law school. It does serve an important purpose and does provide an important foundation for embarking on a fulfilling career in the legal profession.

Sometimes I daydream about teaching a practical skills class in law school - maybe something akin to a home economics class for the law world that focuses exclusively on the practice of law rather than the law itself. Maybe some day...