- law dawg
- 71 Comments
- 3114 Views
How did you or do you deal with feelings of inadequacy when it comes to practicing law? Sure, there are some of us who are lawyers, or used to be lawyers, who have no problem faking it until we make it, or convincing others that we do know what we’re talking about even though we have no idea. But what about the rest of us? What insights do you have on this? Does anyone feel competent in their role? Is that something you have to grow into? Does that mantle settle on you with the appearance of gray hair? How do you balance being confident with being careful about things that you can’t know with certainty? How should a young associate approach this compared to how someone starting a new job mid-career handle it? What tips do you have for being comfortable in the role you’re assigned?
Put aside the ego. It’s difficult as an attorney. It’s ingrained in us from day one of 1L year, but put it aside. Do the work, but don’t burn yourself out with overwork. Try to learn from everyone you work with. Different attorneys have different strengths, learn a little from each of them. Keep your word. Being known as a liar is a terrible thing. If you want to be a litigator, go to court on everything you possibly can. No amount of CLEs or mentoring will replace standing in front of a judge and/or jury. Finally, every time you win, give away the credit.
This is only going to get worse as licensure becomes easier to achieve. We’ve allowed both law school and the bar to be dumbed down. We deserve what we get. People will increasingly experience a sense of being unqualified because they will indeed actually be unqualified. We reap what we sow. God help the clients.
It’s not just licensure and law school. Everything is getting dumbed down. Standards are being lowered to make sure nobody is left out or excluded. Inclusion has been prioritized over competence and character development. The same thing has happened in the following areas:
1. CCSD graduation requirements
2. College admissions
3. LDS missions
4. Military recruitment
Feel free to name others that you’ve seen. Some things in life should be a difficult challenge to qualify for and/or complete. It builds character and weeds out weak and incompetent people.
Military recruitment standards have gone up, not down. Men used to literally be told to join the army or go to jail. The AF was the only service that required enlisted people to have a high school diploma for a long time.
Curious about #3, are you alluding to the increase in women serving missions?
Absolutely not. I’m referring to letting people call home whenever they like, among other things. It’s good to be cut off from direct, immediate contact with Mom and Dad when you are 18 or 19. You are forced to dig within yourself and work out your problems. People THRIVE in this challenging environment. Letters and emails are great support from home. But when a missionary can call home weekly, or even more frequently, it encourages them to not be present.
I know all the pushback I’m going to get on this, so I’ll just address it now. Yes, there are some people who have legitimate mental health issues. Yes, those issues need to be addressed. They can do a service mission here in Vegas. There’s no reason to water down the experience for everyone. There are better ways to accommodate people who are unable to thrive in that environment.
Missions are supposed to be hard. They force you to dig within yourself to develop interpersonal skills, self discipline and confidence. Decades later, my mission has more impact on my skill set as a practitioner than anything I did in undergrad and most things I did in law school. It builds character and we are robbing the current missionaries of skills they could have used the rest of their lives.
1:10 PM here. One more thing. My kids are now approaching missionary age. It’s up to them whether they serve*, but if they do, I’m going to tell them I won’t take their phone calls. They can email me or send me a letter and I will respond.
*not everyone should serve a mission. If someone doesn’t want to go independent of external expectations and pressures they SHOULD NOT GO. No one should be pressured, directly or indirectly, to serve a mission.
It’s all good 1:10PM.
They will work out their issues with you in therapy, after their first divorce. “My dad wouldn’t even take my phone calls. . . .”
1:10 PM. You say that and wonder why your 35 year old incel son still lives at home and works for $10/hour.
I’m not Mormon but this is a laughable argument.
Anyone in Vegas knows that the average Mormon does exceptionally well. Many are doctors and attorneys. Many of these individuals went on missions under the old standards. So if anything this shows that 1:10 may actually be doing something good for their kid’s long term development by putting them in that environment.
And we all know those Mormon adults are so emotionally healthy.
I mean Nelson, Oaks, and Eyring didn’t serve. I’m gonna give my kids a pass. It’ll be a refreshing pass in my new wife-beater Gs.
Agree with about 50% of this. I too served and grew way back in the day. But I also had 3 kids that served under the various iterations of the “home contact” including the latest.
The once weekly phone contact (not whenever they want) doesn’t really change anything. I wont argue with the fact that this gen is softer than we were, but they were headed there long before the changes.
That said, I love the way that church leadership is asking the question “why?” Why do we do things this way? Is it doctrinal or just the culture? and if its culture, what do the alternatives look like?
Feels like progress while at the same time reverting to the most important stuff without all of the pomp.
But then again, I have 4 high functioning and more importantly self reliant adult kids. Not perfect by any means, but they don’t ask me for money, ever.
The *only* time I’ve ever asked my parents for money was $300 to fix my truck while I was in college. I paid them back 10 days later when I got paid. Of all the ways I’ve tried to honor them, this is one of the most important.
I’m shocked at how lax LDS mission requirements have gotten
In what ways? I think you are operating under a complete misunderstanding of the standards and requirements.
Are they setting up a new missionary house at the new LDS temple parcels in Mission Hills Henderson?
What exactly is a “mission house”? That’s a new term to me.
The requirements to be a foster parent are incredibly lax. Foster parents receive approximately $700.00 per month for each foster child up to a maximum of four foster children. The county is desperate for foster parents.
I’m LDS and would say that OP probably means well but sounds like someone that has never lost a child. This life is so short. There is an old saying that one would cut off their arm. I would literally for 5 minutes with – I can’t even text this post. Hug your children and take every call you ate ever Blessed with. They will turn out fine and be better for your calls. Soften my friend.
AGREED!!!
FWIW…The Nevada Supreme Court just told the law school that undocumented applicants will now be allowed to take the bar.
And next year they’ll be admitted upon request – no racist/sexist/elitist/ Bar exam required.
It’s going on everywhere, not just Nevada. It is an outgrowth of law schools lowering admssions standards in order to keep the student loan money flowing in.
Lowering Bar admissions standards is the the natural next step in the process. When nimrods are admitted to law school and then blindly given degrees, we must find a way to admit those same nimrods to practice, Otherwise, the whole scheme ceases to work.
The goal is not to produce qualified lawyers. Rather is is to enrich academics and increase the influence of the various state bar associations.
This is not said enough. There is no counterbalance to the financial disincentive law schools have to not rigorously screen out unqualified candidates.
It’s a fun job. It’s even more fun if it’s collaborative. Ask question, bounce ideas, respect the opinions of others–and just ignore the responses that aren’t helpful.
If you don’t care one way or another whether or not your approach is going to impress on others competency or intelligence or confidence you are far more likely to leave a good impression than if you’re worrying about those things.
Also, being smart or capable isn’t the ends, it’s a means to the ends. Just do the work. When you’re younger it may take you more time and more energy than it will 10 years later, but the results are what matter. Work the problem. Don’t put off the hard stuff.
But don’t brag about how hard you work.
http://www.clarkcountycourts.us/public-input-invited-for-probate-commissioner-candidates/
1. Who?
2. Who?
3. Who?
4. Yes.
It’s wild that two candidates with zero probate experience had an internal conversation that ended in the conclusion, “Oh, yeah, I’m the fucking guy for *that* job! Move aside everyone!”
Do your realize that every past Probate Commissioner with the exception of one has been LDS? How many of the applicants are LDS? Just sayin. What a coincidence. There are no coincidences. I bet the second Commissioner will be female and LDS.
A few thoughts from an old gray haired guy.
1) You don’t know everything and it takes a while to learn. But you will. You’ll reach a point one day (probably 3-5 years in) where a legal issue will come across your desk, and you’ll say “Oh, I know what to do here. We need to file a motion for X, and we’ll need to do discovery on Y issues, and then do Z.” And then you’ll realize, wow, I *do* know what I’m doing!
2) Ask questions. Ask why. And then pay attention and learn. If you’re litigating, watch good lawyers in court. If you’re at a firm, try to work with partners/associates you can learn from.
3) Don’t “fake it until you make it,” rather, Act like you belong. You do! You graduated law school and passed the bar, you deserve to be here.
4) Take care of yourself. It’s a stressful job. But it’s just a job.
I know they take a lot of criticism but, re lowered requirements, the OBC could go no lower. People with literally no experience judging those with 25 years of a clean record. C’mon man. No joke.
As for example, not being able to distinguish between a retainer and a flat fee.
Any practitioner that still offers flat fees is asking for it, IMO. Whether you think it’s good public policy or not, we all know that offering flat fees to clients/the public is like swimming in shark infested waters covered in seal blood. Going forward, when I read about attorneys who are disciplined for flat fee issues, my sympathy will be limited, regardless of how ridiculous a position OBC takes.
Agreed. Not to mention when they persecute some attorneys for doing XYZ and have actual knowledge of other attorneys engaged in the same XYZ and decline to persecute the other attorneys. OBC does NOT apply the rules fairly or equitably. Add to that, OBC does nothing with BH files a late appeal and blames his paralegal. Uh…Dan…might want to review 1.1, 5.1, and 5.3 to start. For the second course we could arguably discuss 3.8. PABs.
Believe me or don’t as I’m anon, but when a former bar counsel was persecuting some for act “x” he had done act “x” for years. How do I know? I worked for a company that provided services to his practice before law school.
Which BC and which rule(s)?
SH
SH and re refunding unused fees.
Off topic but can someone provide me with a legitimate reason as to why we shouldn’t have voter ID laws.
I genuinely have not heard one that is more sophisticated than “voter ID laws are racist”
Considering this is a blog on the internet and you’ve clearly commented which demonstrates that you have access to the internet. So, go to http://www.google.com and cut n paste this into the search bar “What is wrong with vote ID laws” or “why are people opposed to voter ID laws” and then using your eyeballs or whatever adaptive devices you have in case you don’t have use of your eyeballs anymore, read through the results. Best of luck!
Challenge – find someone, legally residing in the US, over the age of 16, who does not have ID.
Access for Marginalized Groups: Critics argue that voter ID laws can disproportionately affect low-income individuals, the elderly, and minorities, who may have more difficulty obtaining the required IDs. This raises concerns about potential disenfranchisement of certain voter groups.
Potential Impact on Voter Turnout: Research has shown that strict voter ID laws can lead to lower voter turnout, particularly in communities that may find the process of obtaining an ID burdensome due to factors like travel costs, limited access to ID-issuing offices, or lost wages from time taken off work.
Questionable Necessity: Fraud prevention is often cited as the primary reason for implementing voter ID laws. However, many studies indicate that in-person voter fraud is exceedingly rare. Critics argue that the laws might not address a problem significant enough to warrant restrictions that could affect legitimate voters
“Critics”
“Research”
“Studies”
“Critics”
All of these = Bullshit and have no basis in either fact or science.
There are no legitimate reasons. Some of the key Opposition to voter ID laws come, in good faith, from the idea that voting should be made accessible without any barriers at all (or extremely minor barriers). Generally, opposition to any voter ID law initiatives rests on either 1) Burden (Opposition cites statistics that they pull out and piece together to suggest that at least 10% of American citizens do not have a government issued ID); and/or 2) Racism (Opposition argues that minorities are disproportionately likely to not possess a government issued ID).
We can all do what we wish with these arguments and the “cited statistics” and either agree or believe its a hole lot of nonsense, but those are generally the big points for opposing voter ID laws.
Oppose what you want. This is passing.
Question re ID law: Does your ID need to reflect your current address to vote? My son is in college in Reno and will probably move every year (give or take) but his license still reflects our home address in Clark County. He updated his voter registration to Reno but not his ID. Under voter ID laws would he not be allowed to vote in Reno? I know most of the pro-voter ID folks are also against mail-in ballots. Is the proposed solution getting a new ID and re-registering each time he changes apartments? Or flying back to Las Vegas to vote?
My son is also in college out of state. His home address is still my house in Las Vegas and he remains a Nevada resident. I mailed him his mail ballot and he filled it out, signed it and stuck it in the mailbox.
Seems to me that your son as a student is still likely a resident and can keep his license and other info at your house. Changing his address when he is transient causes more problems than it solves.
NRS 293.487 When residence not gained or lost. No person may gain or lose residence by reason of his or her presence or absence while:
1. Employed in the military, naval or civil service of the United States or of the State of Nevada, or while engaged in the navigation of the waters of the United States or of the high seas or while married to another person who is so employed or engaged;
2. A student at any seminary or other institution of learning; or
3. An inmate of any public institution.
This is one of the problems with voter ID laws and whatnot. As a veteran, I voted all four years of college and throughout my active duty time via absentee ballots (i.e. mail-in ballots). Active duty military remains a resident of their home state unless they file to change it. Just because you are serving in Florida does not mean you have to vote in Florida. Moreover, the problem in this country is NOT vote fraud. It is not enough people showing up to the polls. The allegations of millions of fraudulent voters are false and have been proven false over and over again. The infinitesimally small number of cases that have been discovered have been republicans casting mail-in votes for dead relatives, not undocumented folks. The GOP is advancing the voter fraud allegations as a means of undermining the legitimacy of our elections. It’s traitorous, un-American behavior. If republicans could win fair elections they wouldn’t need to gerrymander districts or suppress the vote.
He should be able to vote in Reno at his newly-registered address with his outdated address on his ID. I had the opposite problem in 2020 (had my Reno address on my license, but registered to vote in Clark County) and it was not a problem voting in person.
Check your ego at the door and be open and teachable and willing. I dealt with a newly licensed attorney a few weeks ago at another firm during a depo who turned her nose up at me when I asked her to please make a copy. Make the copy. Make the coffee. Do the work. And work your way up. Try not to be a dick along the way. The city is small and people remember.
Yes new female attorneys should make your coffee as THEIR ego needs checking.
I kinda agree with 2:23. Mid-depo I can see the need to step out and make a copy. If the depo is at my office, it’s probably gonna me stepping out to make the copy. On the other hand, I will not be making your coffee. You want coffee, I’m sure there’s a starbucks nearby.
Bruh.
There’s a distinct difference between asking for a copy and asking another attorney to make you a copy. Newly minted or not, don’t ask another firm’s lawyer to make you a copy. It may be a difference without distinction to you, but I assure you, the female attorneys in the room and in your life are very familiar with it.
@3:07 2:58 here. I am the female attorney in the room. I know exactly what 2:23 was referring to which is why I said I kinda agree with them. If the depo is at my office, it would be kinda weird for OC to stand up on a depo break and just wonder around looking for our copier. Shit happens and there’s nothing wrong with politely asking for a copy. There’s a lot of nuances there, but overall if it’s a simply courtesy that keeps the depo moving, I’m not throwing a fit. If OC asks me to copy all their exhibits, fetch coffee, and talk quietly, then we might have a problem. Anyways, Bruh, have a happy afternoon.
Thank you, OP here. I AM a woman. Attorney or no, she can hand it off to someone who can. The whole point is to be civil and courteous. Man. Woman. Goat.
I can see if you read my post as being made by a man and you’re a woman, that may seem threatening.
But I assure you I made my share of coffee and copies, even as a woman.
The whole point is to get over your own damn self, and for some reason, newly minted attorneys struggle with that.
But I do find the appalled fervor in the responses amusing.
If I am hosting a depo at my office, I will absolutely unequivocally get off my ass and make you a fucking copy of a document and I have been in this game for 25 years.
Like said previously. Don’t be a dick.
also, don’t be a Jane
THANK YOU
Also the female in the room. If it were me, I would graciously get it fckng done. I may step out and hand it to my assistant to do, or I may even (gasp) make the damn copy myself.
No one is expecting involuntary servitude here, bro.
You’re so much cooler than all of us other female attorneys. Gosh.
We obviously wouldn’t be friends. I wouldn’t hire you, either. Happy Halloween
Just make the copy, doll face. It’ll be easier on both of us.
Has anyone else had issues working with Boyd recently? It feels like the new administration is not very open to alumni support or involvement…
Just send money, that’s what is wanted from alumni, nothing more.
Higher ed is so inefficient with money, it’s the VERY LAST place I would send any of my charity dollars.
Hey @lawdawg, is there a way you can make the comments of the blog searchable? Sometimes I want to respond to something I saw earlier, but then have a hard time finding it again. Thanks!
Hey anon, they are searchable.
How about “Control – F”?
Easy peasy.
From what I can see, the titles are searchable using the search bar at the top, but the comments are not. Control F is fine too, but sometimes I want to be able to search through multiple posts, not just one.
There’s always the Google. [search term] site:lawblog.law