The Mutually Shared Delusion

As I look back on my old posts here from 9 months ago, I can't help but blush a little. The excitement and optimism about the law and being a lawyer is just dripping from all the writing. It was a time of blissful ignorance and naivete. There was a feeling that everything was at my fingertips and I was seizing the day. Unfortunately, there was no day to be seized. I'm not sure that everyone, even some in the legal community, understand how times have changed. My corporations teacher starts nearly every sentence with "when you are a corporate lawyer." She gives us helpful hints and things to think about when we are in practice and working on putting together "big deals." If it wasn't so sad, it would be funny. No one in that room is going to be a corporate lawyer, working on big deals for multinational clients. At least not for the foreseeable future. They'll be lucky to find volunteer work with the City government this summer.

Despite this inconvenient truth, time marches on at NYLS. Everyone lives in a mutually shared delusion. The faculty and administration pretends they are preparing students for a legal career. The students pretend that they are preparing themselves for that legal career. On my more cynical days, I tend to think the powers that be at NYLS know how dire the situation is, but purposefully coordinate their activities so as to keep it a secret from the vast majority of students, who have not been exposed to the realities of the legal market in 2009. Other days I think they are just as blind as the poor students whose tuition money they take. Perhaps they are in denial of the fact that the school is simply not relevant and has nothing to offer students in this market.

That might seem a bit harsh. But consider this. My class at NYLS has 420 students in it. To finish in the top 10 people in a class that size I think everyone would acknowledge is quite a special accomplishment. Yet, of those ten people (of which I am one, and I know most of the other 9), 1 received a job offer for next summer from a big Manhattan law firm. If the school cannot secure jobs for the top ten people in its class, why does the school exist? It should probably just close up shop. Perhaps this a little unfair because from what I understand even schools like Harvard and Yale are having trouble placing their students this year. However, it is not an unreasonable or unjustified thought.

Maybe things will get better. Maybe they won't. The fact is that the legal profession has imploded and there is absolutely nothing that recent grads or those in law school now can do about it. The fast track to prosperity for those who worked hard and finished at the top of their law school class does not exist anymore. Even if you assume that things will eventually improve, everyone's career has been set back years in terms of money and work experience. Some people just laugh it off, put their blinders down and just keep plugging along. I am jealous of them. However, I wonder how much of that is just for show. I can't imagine there is anyone in my position right now who is not also having a crisis of confidence.

So pardon me if the glow of the first year of law school has worn off. I've been there and done that. I had the Kingsfield-like Contracts teacher. I got an A from him. I learned about mens rea, personal jurisdiction, proximate cause, and adverse possession. I got A's in all those classes too (well except Torts). It was the most exhilarating and rewarding 9 months of my life. When I received those grades, it was the greatest sense of pride and self-accomplishment that I have ever felt. But looking back now however many months later, was it all worth it? Did it really matter as much as I thought it did at the time? Did it matter as much as every single person I went to for advice in my life told me it mattered? The answer is a resounding and unequivocal "no". It's virtually meaningless. I'll have to prove myself again this year all over again and hope that maybe next year some employer with throw me a crumb. Right now, my 1L GPA of 3.75 and $2.25 will buy me a subway ride to Brooklyn.

But hey, I have to get to bed early now. I am required to attend a conference early tomorrow about the emergence of a new duty in corporate law that directors owe shareholders (known as the duty of good faith). I'm told that it will come in handy for me when I am a big corporate lawyer. And the delusional continues....

Statutory Interpretation

Unlike torts, contracts, and property, criminal law is almost entirely statute-based. There are still many cases to be read. But unlike in the other courses, the cases are not read in order to discern what the law is. Instead, the purpose of the case readings is to provide examples and guidelines for how to interpret criminal statutes. Often times statutes can be quite ambiguous. When lawyers and judges are interpreting statutes, they need to consider the legislative history and the legislative purpose in order to understand what the statute means. For example, in criminal law, in order to be found guilty of a crime, there is almost always the requirement of a mental element (known as mens rea). It is not enough that a person does a criminal act, that person must also have a culpable state of mind at the time of the action (purposefully, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently to name a few). Sometimes statutes are silent as to what the mental requirement is. The usual common law practice is for court to assume that a mens rea requirement is implied in the text of a statute, and can only be nullified by the legislature specifically stating that there is no such requirement. However, interpretation can sometimes lead in another direction. Policy considerations sometimes can counteract common law assumptions. For example, if a law is passed that has clear public policy objectives (for example regulating the sale of prescription drugs), a court might discern that those objectives outweigh the potential harm done to an individual who is found strictly liable for breaking that law (finding a defendant guilty for simply committing the act without any consideration of fault or the reasonableness of their conduct). In these cases, courts will interpret the statute as not having a mens rea requirement unless the legislature specifically requires one. 

I understand that this can be confusing. That is precisely the point. Statutory interpretation is NOT easy and can be downright painful. But my extensive work with it in criminal law is providing me with another skill that every lawyer needs to have. I continue to be impressed at how well-rounded and complete the first year of law school is in teaching students all the required basics of being an effective lawyer.  

Study Groups [John]

So the study groups officially have began...

As 1L by Scott Turow suggests, study groups are essential to the law school experience and it is very important to find a good group. So far, I have only one study group for my Torts class. The group is comprised of, what I feel, some of the best minds in my class. Today, we spent most of our time outlining the topics that were covered in our first tutorial. I felt that we did a great job filling in the blanks with exceptions and clarifications of the rules and principles. We will be meeting every week for the next 12 weeks to review and outline the topics that we discussed in class.

Also, this Friday I have my first practice exam. Generally, the only grade you receive in a law class is the final exam. This stands true for all my classes except for my legal writing class--I have about 3 grades in that class. However, unlike in the past, more and more law professors are providing in-class and/or proctored practice exams that will not be graded but will be looked at and the professor will provide suggestions. I think this is an excellent addition to my doctrinal classes because it helps us gauge how much we have learned and also provides insight into what the professor expects on our final exams.

Giving in...

So today was Torts. Excellent class with an excellent professor. However, even though I had read the cases thoroughly, briefed them and answered his proposed questions, I am still struggling. I finally had to give in and turn to Study Aids. If any of you have read 1L by Scott Turow, you will know that Study Aids were like illegal drugs in those times. Now, professors think they are an excellent source to reference. (Not a supplement to your case readings though) Even some professors actually recommend certain Study Aids to compliment their class.

I still, as a traditionalist, didn't want to use study aids. But I finally had to give in. I went to the reference desk in the library and whispered to them "could I have a Torts study aid." It felt so illegal especially when the reference desk clerk got "excited" like this was some rare thrill. Anyway, as I mentioned it isnt illegal, its not looked down on and many people in my classes use them. They definitely helped me clear up specific topics within last nights readings. Regardless, I still don't believe I am going to buy them, but I definitely see myself frequently checking them out of the library.