New York’s New Pro Bono Requirement – What Is All The Fuss About?

Generally speaking, in order to become a lawyer in New York you must get a law degree (3 years), pass the bar exam, pass a professional responsibility exam and pass a character assessment test.  Going forward the 10,000 or so prospective lawyers who meet all of these requirements will also be required to perform 50 hours of pro bono legal services before they can become lawyers.

This has caused a stir among some who say that this is among other things “indentured servitude.”  Another wrote, “I feel really bad for law students that graduate these days. And having brand new attorneys forced to be the ones to handle most pro bono smells like bad policy considering they have little to no experience and will invariably do a bad job of it.”

I am not sure what all of the fuss is about and I think a mandatory pro bono requirement is a fantastic idea!  A few points on this topic.

First, 50 hours is the amount of time you will spend during your first week of employment.  We are talking one week of work spread out over your law school career and the year after it.  The requirement is certainly not locking you into some long drawn out act of service.  It is 50 hours not 50 weeks or years.  In many countries, you must article (practical training) for next to no money before becoming a lawyer and this requirement is often 2 years.  Come on it is 50 hours helping those who need the help. 

Second, the requirement will not impact the majority of students as they already fulfill the requirement in law school.  I went to a law school (Harvard) that has a 50 hour pro bono requirement in order to graduate and this policy is not uncommon in law schools.  At the end of the year, Harvard published the actual average number of hours per student and it far exceeded the 50 hours.  Moreover, the requirement can often be met by clinical work performed or any volunteer work done while in school. 

Third, the more practical experience that one gets while in law school the better.  In some cases, fulfilling this requirement will be done by meeting with clients, drafting legal documents and perhaps even arguing cases before administrative tribunals. I met my pro bono requirement by working in an immigration asylum & employment law clinic and I was able to do all of the items listed above.

Finally, what is wrong with giving lawyers a taste of what it is like to give back to the community?  Also, as lawyer help others for free, isn’t there another benefit where the at times negative view of lawyers can be reversed?  This idea of giving back is already emphasized and encouraged in our professional responsibility requirements so why not formalize this a bit for new lawyers. As discussed above, this will not have an impact on most but will give those who would never have considered pro bono work an opportunity to see what helping someone else out without getting paid feels like.

As far as I am concerned, it is just another requirement to become a lawyer the same way that sitting for the MPRE, getting a character assessment or taking certain courses are requirements.  Not sure why anyone would be against this.  I would be interested to hear your thoughts.

How To Publish While in Law School Voted Top Post!

           If you have not already, check out my latest publication in the Lawyerist!  The article summarizes the benefits of publishing while in law school and gives you some practical tips on how to make an effective submission.  See why last week it was the Top Post!  
          View the entire article: www.How To Publish While In Law School.com
          Please feel free to like, tweet and/or share the page.

Do Not Borrow Time From Subsequent Exam Questions As You May Not Be Able To Repay The Loan

Another key to law school success is time management on exams.  This is yet another area where person after person will offer the same advice but in the heat of an exam, many reject it.  Here is the key piece of advice yet again.  At the beginning of an exam, take note of how much each question is worth and divide your time accordingly.  Once you have done this, DO NOT BORROW TIME FROM OTHER QUESTIONS.   While it is hard to do, you should get into the habit of noting the time and once you have reached the time on a question, you should stop (even in mid sentence – ok, you can finish your sentence) and move on to the next question. 

There are a few good reasons for this strategy.  First, you have likely picked up the majority of the points you will gain on the question you are laboring over and the time you will spend will likely not yield many more points.  Second, if you do not move on from a question you are stuck on, you may not finish the exam and a blank exam question means a low grade.  Third, the subsequent questions on the exam may be easy. When I sat for the NY bar, the last question on the exam was a very simple corporations question.  If I had borrowed time from the first few more difficult questions though, I would have missed easy points on that last question.   At the end of the day, a point is a point and I will gladly take an easy one that takes me one minute rather than 10 minutes.  Finally, you can always go back to a question if you have time.  This is a far better strategy and the break from the question may even give you alternate ways to approach the question. 

This bit of advice was one of the first that my first law school professor, Linda Feldman, gave the class for our first law school exam.  Regrettably many did not listen to her.  The exam was made up of two questions and each of them was equally weighted.  Go figure the first question was tough and I could have spent the full exam period trying to nail down the question.  Instead though, I stopped writing after half of the time and moved on to the second question.  The second question was almost identical to a question that the class had gone over during a review of an old exam and it was easy to pick up easy points. I ended up with an A on the exam but many of my fellow classmates left the exam barely touching the second question. 

For February bar exam takers, keep this key piece of advice in mind. It will serve you well.

Why You Should Publish In Law School & Tips For Successful Law Journal Submissions

Check out my new publication in the Lawyerist See article that describes what editors are looking for & what makes and effective submission!  For the full article, click here.  Please feel free to "like", "tweet", and/or "share"!

Sitting for the Bar in July? How Many Bar Exams Should You Sit For?

As you may know, as a general rule, you are required to sit for a bar exam in every State you wish to practice in.  While in law school, the question often comes up of how many exams you should sit for on your first attempt.  In my opinion, you should try to take Bar Examinations from 2 States right after you graduate from Law School. There are a few good reasons for this. 

First, the best time to take a Bar Examination is immediately after you finish law school as you will have retained a significant amount of core knowledge and this knowledge will dissipate over time.  This knowledge makes it easier to pass the bar exam and you are best positioned to do this right after law school.

Second, when you study for one State’s Bar Examination, you may not have to do much additional work to pass another State’s exam.  A few things to keep in mind here. First, most bar exams consist of two days – one day will be made up of a local State day and one will be the Multi-State Bar Exam (MBE), and the MBE is the same exam for every State.   Your score on each day is added together and each State will determine whether you have passed or failed.  If you sit for two bar exams (one in your primary State and one in another State) most if not all States will allow the MBE score to be transferred to the State if it is taken concurrently with your primary State.  Most States however will not permit you to take the MBE one year for one State and then have it count towards the Bar Examination in a different year or session.  For example, New York used to permit candidates to count their MBE score from a prior year towards a current session and as such, in the past the candidate would only have had to sit for the local New York portion of the exam. (1 day as the person would not have to sit for the MBE).  Starting in 2011 though, New York only allows candidates to transfer MBE scores from another State if the exam in the other State was taken in the concurrent session.  Many other States have similar rules.  To clarify, if you sit for two bar exams, you would sit for the exam for three days instead of two.  This extra day can help you avoid sitting for the grueling 200 multiple choice MBE in another year.

Another good reason to sit for two bar exams is that many State exams do not contain much State specific information.  For example, the New Jersey bar exam tests only 7 subject areas and six of those areas are covered on the MBE.  (and the other will likely be covered by your primary State)  As such, the only additional work you will have to do for that exam is sit for the exam.  I sat for the NJ bar when I sat for the NY bar and I did not do ANY additional studying.  (ohhh..and I passed).  Other States are similar and even States where you do have to learn State specific material, it will almost certainly be in areas such as Corporations, Wills and Criminal Law.  As such, you will already have a foundation related to these courses from the work you will do to prepare for the primary State.

Another reason to sit for two bar examinations is that you are more marketable.  Even if you have a job, your situation may change and you may be looking for one in the future.  Being certified in many States not only shows initiative but could give you a practical advantage if a job requires certification in that State.

Lots of good reasons to consider sitting for two bar exams in July.

Should You Accept a "Cold Offer" from a Law Firm?

The legal job market is tough and for many turning down a full-time job offer from a large law is something that is not considered.  The question arises though of whether or not you should accept an offer even if you get a clear signal that the firm does not really want you.  My answer is no but the decision will be guided by how badly you want the job.  So how does this happen?

In the legal field, there are many organizations that track and publish statistics regarding how many summer associates are brought into the firm after their 2L year and how many are offered full-time jobs after they graduate.  As many large firms want to maintain their statistic of offering 100% of their summer students jobs in order to attract the best students, they will at times give students a “cold offer.”  A cold offer is something like this.

“John, your performance during the summer has not really been that great and we do not see that you have much of a future with the firm. That being said, we are going to make you an offer. You should really consider whether this place is the place for you and we strongly encourage you to do some soul searching before you accept the offer. Perhaps a large firm is not for you.”

This is of course a "strong" cold offer and there are variations of them.  My personal opinion is that a cold offer is not a good thing and I would recommend turning it down unless you are desperate.  If you do accept the offer, the firm is under no obligation to keep you after you start and you will be a “marked” person who will be the first to be let go if there is ever downsizing.  Moreover, as your performance is already in question, you could be terminated with cause shortly after you start.  Also, in the United States employment is “at will” which means an employer can terminate you even without cause.  The ultimate decision is of course yours but these factors are something to consider.  Also remember that if the firm does not want you, someone else will.  Let your pride guide you and go somewhere where you are wanted.