1. Home
2. Daily News
3. California judge admonished for doing this…

Judiciary

California judge admonished for doing this after telling newbie attorney to stop shaking her head

By Debra Cassens Weiss

December 12, 2024, 10:21 am CST

A California judge has received a public admonishment partly for flinging court papers at a newbie defense lawyer because he thought that she was shaking her head at him.

Judge Thomas R. Adams of Santa Barbara County, California, acted in November 2023 after expressing impatience with Deputy Public Defender Reem Yassin, according to the Dec. 10 public admonishment. Yassin had been admitted to law practice for only three months at the time.

Law360 has coverage.

Yassin had filed a request for pretrial diversion for her client and noticed it for hearing during a continued arraignment. During the hearing, the prosecution objected to the diversion request on several grounds, including that the arraignment department was not the proper forum.

The California Commission on Judicial Performance’s public admonishment says this exchange followed:

“Let me interrupt,” Adams said. “This is not the time that I’m supposed to play referee between public defender and district attorney. OK? I just don’t have the time or the patience to do that. OK? If you want to have a fistfight with the DA, take it outside.”

Adams continued after Yassin tried to interject.

“I have a whole bunch of people sitting here waiting for their cases to be called. I just don’t need this, OK? I just don’t need it. This is not the first time it’s happened. So, we’re all on—we’re all on notification.”

“And I’m sorry,” he said as he threw off his glasses. “Don’t shake your head at me like, ‘Oh, don’t give me this crap,’ OK?”

Yassin protested that she wasn’t shaking her head at the judge.

“No, you are,” he said as he pointed at Yassin. “I’ll come back later. You guys can have a seat right there, OK? I just don’t need this from you today, OK? Are we on the same page? You’re asking the court to do you a big favor.”

At that point, he flung the moving papers toward Yassin. They landed in front of the podium where she was standing.

The defendant then commented, “That was crazy.”

Yassin was so distressed by the incident that her superiors sent her home and temporarily reassigned her cases to other attorneys. She didn’t return to court until the following week.

Adams later sent Yassin an apology letter acknowledging that his conduct was inappropriate.

The public admonishment also said Adams made misleading statements to the California Commission on Judicial Performance in a previous ethics investigation when he said he intended to retire.

“Judge Adams hopes that the commission will conclude that in light of nearly half of a century’s career on the bench and Judge Adams’ retirement, his missteps do not warrant the imposition of discipline,” he said in his response to the preliminary investigation letter in the previous ethics case.

Adams did not retire. He was privately admonished in June 2023 in that case, which cited an ex parte conversation with the jury foreperson, a failure to cooperate with other judges and court officials in the administration of court business, and conduct that could reasonably be interpreted as biased based on sex and gender.

The bias incident stemmed from a defendant’s remark that a female attorney was “so beautiful.”

“I’ll stipulate to that,” Adams replied.

Adams received a previous private admonishment in 1993 for ordering a pro se family law litigant to be taken into custody for two days without a contempt hearing.

Adams respects the public admonishment decision by the California Commission on Judicial Performance, his representatives told Law360 in a statement.

Throughout his 50-year judicial career, the statement said, Adams endeavored to be “respectful, courteous and patient” to everyone in his courtroom, the statement said.

“The incident involving the deputy public defender was an isolated occurrence for which he immediately sought to make amends by sending her a private letter of apology,” the statement said. “Judge Adams did not intend to mislead the commission regarding his plans to remain on the bench but acknowledges that he should have communicated with the commission more clearly his intention to continue his judicial service.”

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Jones Day has hired nearly 100 SCOTUS clerks…

Careers

Jones Day has hired nearly 100 SCOTUS clerks in a dozen years; how many are in this year’s class?

By Debra Cassens Weiss

December 12, 2024, 12:43 pm CST

Jones Day has hired 10 former U.S. Supreme Court law clerks from the October 2023 term, adding to an “already-deep bench of talent,” according to Noel Francisco, the partner in charge of the law firm’s Washington, D.C., office and a former U.S. solicitor general.

Jones Day has recruited 96 Supreme Court clerks since the October 2011 term, according to a Dec. 10 press release.

Each of the high court’s conservative justices had employed at least one of Jones Day’s new associates. Justice Brett Kavanaugh employed three of them, while Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Justice Samuel Alito each employed two.

Only about three dozen law clerks work for Supreme Court justices each term, “which means these lawyers—and their unparalleled knowledge of the court—are in incredibly high demand,” the Washington Post reported in January.

Jones Day is “the leader in the race to recruit and hire as many clerks as possible,” the article reported.

What kind of a signing bonus can the former Supreme Court clerks expect? A Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher spokesperson told the Washington Post in January that bonuses have reached a new high of $500,000.

A Jones Day spokesperson did not immediately respond to an ABA Journal request for information on its signing bonuses.

Jones Day hired eight former Supreme Court clerks last year and seven in 2022, the National Law Journal reported in its story on the new associates.

As we reflect on our journeys through the legal profession, one theme emerges: the power of mentorship, particularly female mentorship. The power of female mentorship cannot be overstated, as it can play a critical role in transforming a talented yet uncertain junior attorney into a highly skilled and autonomous senior attorney.

Female mentorship is also a mutually beneficial relationship that encourages growth, resilience and dedication relative to navigating the challenges of a demanding profession. While women have been graduating from law school in equal or greater numbers to men for years, there is still a gender disparity among practicing lawyers beyond the associate level, and it grows wider with seniority.

Hallmarks of mentorship

One of the key hallmarks of a successful mentor-mentee relationship is an unwavering commitment by the mentor to nurture talent, foster professional growth and provide comprehensive support to the mentee—professionally and personally. Truly successful mentor-mentee relationships are built on a foundation of inclusivity and respect—not unbalanced power.

As the ABA has noted, the higher you look in the legal profession, the greater the gender disparity. In 2021, the ABA issued a report examining the reasons behind the exodus of senior women from the legal profession.

This report examined the challenges faced by senior female attorneys. While the report examined several factors, most notable for this article is isolation and the billable hour and its negative impact on relationship building. In the post-pandemic world, it is harder than ever to connect with colleagues and teammates.

Real-world mentorship

We have been mentor-mentees since 2019. Annie had just returned from her second parenting leave and was navigating the challenges of being a litigator with two children when she first began working with Tonya. Tonya, also a mother of two, had just expanded a client relationship and needed support in a new geographical region where Annie was admitted to the bar. Over the coming months, our relationship evolved from supervising attorney and midlevel associate into one of mentor-mentee.

During the pandemic, balancing work and child care became particularly challenging for working parents, and we worked late nights to accommodate the needs of our clients. For example, during emergencies with tight deadlines, such as preliminary injunction hearings, we never left one another to handle the workload alone. Instead, we would stay up and handle the task at hand, even if it meant staying up until 3 a.m.

We think that this leadership approach makes a significant difference. Knowing that someone else is in the trenches with you makes the work more bearable and motivates everyone to give their best effort. If you’re going to ask someone to take on an unenjoyable task, especially one that will require working all weekend or late into the night, it’s crucial to show that you’re willing to do it with them. It builds trust and loyalty and shows much-needed support.

Mentor-mentee relationships should be considered strategic partnerships. The more that a mentor invests in a mentee, the greater the payout is for both parties. Over the course of our mentorship, Tonya has spent countless hours counseling Annie on navigating difficult professional scenarios, such as unconscious bias and sexist comments at a previous law firm and positive professional transitions into a senior associate and a new firm.

Tonya has advocated tirelessly for Annie to have a seat at the table, including pitching client work, presenting in webinars and serving in a client-facing role. But it is not just Annie who has benefited. As Annie has become more senior, Tonya has gained a valuable first lieutenant on her team.

Evolving mentorship

We have seen firsthand how mentorship is professionally rewarding and deeply inspiring, which is why we think that others can find tremendous benefits. In a successful relationship, a mentee is given the opportunity to observe the mentor’s ability to balance their role as a top attorney and a supportive mentor.

This includes studying how a mentor treats their mentees as equals, respecting their opinions and encouraging healthy dialogue. Over time, a respectful and inclusive mentorship has the potential to have a profound impact upon a mentee.

One of the biggest challenges that we’ve faced is navigating the perceptions and expectations of others in the legal profession. Over time, we’ve encountered situations where others attempted to define our practices, identities and career trajectories based on their assumptions of us, rather than our knowledge and skill set.

It is crucial for us to believe in the value that we bring, even if it doesn’t align with someone else’s perception or fit neatly into predetermined boxes. Building a team, including mentees who understand their mentor’s leadership style, helps to create a supportive environment where everyone’s contributions are valued, and each team member has the opportunity to pursue their career goals.

An empowered mentee has learned the skills to continue the cycle by becoming a mentor to more junior attorneys. The mentee-turned-mentor will be focused on not just professional growth but also building a supportive and collaborative community within the legal practice.

Going forward, the mentorship triad will continue to thrive and grow. With each new attorney added to the mentorship, new skill sets and perspectives are gained, offering new opportunities for personal and professional growth and evolution.

Successful mentorship

Mentorship is more than teaching someone how to draft a brief or win a case. It is about empowering women to have a voice in a room where they are often outnumbered, to trust their instincts and to aspire to leadership positions.

We think that strong female mentorship can play a key role in the continued growth and equality in the legal industry. A junior female attorney benefits immensely from observing strong female leadership, recognizing their potential and evolving over time to mentor those more junior to her.

For more senior attorneys, there is an opportunity to impart legal knowledge and helpful wisdom garnered through years of practice and to learn from their more junior colleagues as they navigate the complexities of ethical dilemmas and professional challenges. Ever-evolving mentorship provides a nurturing environment for growth and development for mentors and mentees.

---

Anne V. Dunne, a litigation associate in Greenberg Traurig’s Boston office, focuses her practice on commercial litigation, concentrating on financial services, class action defense, government investigations and whistleblower litigation. Tonya M. Esposito, a shareholder in Greenberg Traurig’s litigation practice, focuses on a variety of consumer issues, including financial services, antitrust and marketing and advertising.

---

ABAJournal.com is accepting queries for original, thoughtful, nonpromotional articles and commentary by unpaid contributors to run in the Your Voice section. Details and submission guidelines are posted at “Your Submissions, Your Voice.”

---

This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Teen who enrolled in law school at age 13…

Bar Exam

Teen who enrolled in law school at age 13 becomes youngest person to pass California bar exam

By Debra Cassens Weiss

November 19, 2024, 8:51 am CST

A 17-year-old girl has beaten her brother’s record to become the youngest person to pass the California bar exam.

Sophia Park passed the California bar Nov. 8 when she was 17 years and 8 months old, report YourCentralValley.com, the Sun-Gazette, the Visalia Times Delta, KMPH, ABC News and a Nov. 13 press release.

Park’s brother Peter Park was 17 years and 11 months old when he became the youngest person to pass the California bar in November 2023. Park will join her brother working for the Tulare County district attorney’s office in California.

“I don’t think it was extremely difficult,” Park said of the bar exam in an interview, according to YourCentralValley.com. “But I do think there was difficulty in how much you had to put into your brain in a limited period of time.”

Park graduated from the Northwestern California University School of Law in 2024. The school offers online instruction and is accredited by the State Bar of California, according to its website.

Park first considered a legal career after a sixth grade career survey said she should consider the profession.

Park started law school at age 13 in 2020 while she was in junior high school. During her freshman year of high school, she concluded that her work there was taking up a lot of her time, so she took and passed the California High School Proficiency Exam.

Park worked as a summer intern at the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office at age 16 and has been working as a law clerk in the Tulare County district attorney’s office. She will begin work as a prosecutor after she is sworn in as a licensed attorney in March 2025 upon turning 18, according to the press release.

“I wanted to work for the prosecution,” Park told the Sun-Gazette, “because I like the idea that I get to represent the people of the state of California, keep our community safe and make sure that justice is served.”

Park’s record may be surpassed by her younger sister, who is 14 years old and in her second year of law school, Park told KMPH. Her younger brother, who is 8 years old, also wants to be a lawyer; he dressed as one for Halloween.

Leah Wilson, the State Bar of California’s executive director, told ABC News that passing the bar is a “remarkable achievement” that follows Peter Park’s similar success last year.

“Passing the state bar exam at any age is a tremendous accomplishment, and to do so at 17 is truly exceptional,” Wilson said.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Utah considers allowing law grads to choose…

Bar Exam

Utah considers allowing law grads to choose apprenticeship rather than bar exam

By Debra Cassens Weiss

November 7, 2024, 1:21 pm CST

The Utah Supreme Court is seeking comment on a proposal to allow law grads to become lawyers without taking the bar exam.

The plan released Monday gives law graduates two options to obtain a law license: They can pass the bar exam, or they can complete “alternate path” requirements. Both options also require a passing score on the Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam.

Those who choose the alternate path must have graduated from an ABA-accredited law school within the last five years, must have successfully completed several listed law school courses, and must complete 240 “supervised practice hours” under a supervising attorney.

The Utah Supreme Court is inviting comments through Dec. 19, Reuters reports. The state supreme court acted in response to a 2023 proposal of its Bar Admissions Working Group.

One of the working group members is Catherine Bramble, a professor at Brigham Young University’s law school. She told Reuters that she hopes that the alternate path program “could be implemented as soon as next summer.”

Other states with apprenticeship pathways are Oregon, Washington and Arizona, according to Reuters.

See also:

Examining the Bar: Should law grads need to pass the bar to practice? Some say there is a better way

Bar exam does little to ensure attorney competence, say lawyers in diploma privilege state

Judicial task force will take deep look at legal ed, bar admissions

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. These law firms are tops for midlevel associate…

Law Firms

These law firms are tops for midlevel associate satisfaction; how were their tech ratings?

By Debra Cassens Weiss

September 5, 2024, 12:02 pm CDT

BigLaw’s midlevel associates have spoken. The top law firm for midlevel associate satisfaction is O’Melveny & Myers, according to results from the American Lawyer’s 2024 Midlevel Associates Survey published by Law.com.

“We’re given a lot of autonomy over our assignments, which means we can take more ownership over the final product and our schedules,” said one O’Melveny associate whose comments were published in another Law.com article. “It’s also a ‘mature’ firm, in that everyone understands, expects, and respects the fact we have lives and obligations beyond the firm.”

O’Melveny was also near the top in the 2024 Midlevel Associate Tech Survey, receiving a No. 2 ranking, according to Law.com. Indeed, the five firms on top for overall associate satisfaction also had high technology ratings.

The satisfaction and tech surveys were sent to BigLaw associates in their third, fourth and fifth years at 72 firms.

The satisfaction rankings consider 12 factors, including compensation, training and guidance, relationships with colleagues, work satisfaction, billable-hours policies and management transparency.

The top five firms on the midlevel associate satisfaction list, along with their tech rankings, are:

1. O’Melveny & Myers, ranked No. 2 for tech
2. Blank Rome, ranked No. 1 for tech
3. Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, ranked No. 3 for tech
4. McDermott Will & Emery, ranked No. 4 for tech
5. Proskauer Rose, ranked No. 20 for tech

The fifth-ranked firm for tech, Baker & Hostetler, was ranked No. 9 for overall associate satisfaction.

Steptoe was in last place for overall associate satisfaction, while Covington & Burling was ranked last for tech.

One Steptoe associate complained about a failure to set expectations and provide constructive feedback. Covington associates complained that its tech is “abysmal” and “is still quite poor for a firm of its size.”

Will Drake, Steptoe’s professional development committee co-chair, told Law.com in a statement that the firm is committed to “cultivating an environment where our associates can thrive.” The firm’s recent efforts included a summer associate retreat, focus groups, one-on-one sessions and a new talent team, he told the publication.

Covington did not respond to Law.com’s request for comment. One associate said the firm attributed its poor showing to a low response rate to the survey.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Justice Thomas hires clerk accused of sending…

U.S. Supreme Court

Justice Thomas hires clerk accused of sending racist text; was she set up by rogue employee?

By Debra Cassens Weiss

February 26, 2024, 9:51 am CST

A graduate of the George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School will be clerking for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, despite a prior allegation that she sent a racist text while working at a conservative group.

Crystal Clanton, class of 2022, will clerk for Thomas for the 2024-2025 term, according to a press release (via How Appealing), the New York Times and an opinion column by the Washington Post.

The New Yorker had reported in 2017 that Clanton allegedly sent the text to a colleague in 2015 while working at the conservative student group Turning Point USA.

“I hate Black people,” the text said. “Like f- – – them all … I hate Blacks. End of story.”

Clanton told the New Yorker that she had no recollection of the messages, and they “do not reflect what I believe or who I am.” The executive director of Turning Point USA, Charlie Kirk, told the New Yorker that “Turning Point assessed the situation and took decisive action within 72 hours of being made aware of the issue.”

Thomas’ wife, Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, was on Turning Point USA’s advisory council. After Clanton left Turning Point USA, she lived with the Thomases for close to a year. Justice Thomas has said he encouraged Clanton to go to law school.

After her graduation, Clanton clerked for U.S. District Judge Corey L. Maze of Alabama and Judge William H. Pryor Jr. of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Atlanta.

The federal judiciary investigated the situation after Pryor hired Clanton at the request of seven Democratic members of Congress. Pryor told the judiciary in a letter that he learned that the racist email was actually written by a rogue employee fired for creating fake text messages to discredit co-workers. A lawyer for Clanton told Pryor that she did not dispute the allegation because of a nondisclosure agreement.

Thomas recommended Clanton to Pryor, and he thinks that the allegations were false, according to a letter that he submitted for the judiciary investigation.

“I know Crystal Clanton, and I know bigotry,” Thomas wrote. “Bigotry is antithetical to her nature.”

The judiciary investigation ended with a determination that Maze and Pryor knew about the allegations against Clanton but found them to be false.

As a law professor, one of the most rewarding parts of my job is helping students navigate their burgeoning legal careers and find positions that bring professional satisfaction and success. I am always delighted when students appear in my office with an offer in hand or a story about an amazing case that they worked on over the summer.

Correspondingly, one of the worst parts of my job is witnessing the disappointment, embarrassment and uncertainty that students face when a hoped-for offer doesn’t arrive, a job doesn’t work out, or something goes wrong at an internship or summer placement.

While my students have found professional success in a wide variety of settings—large law firms, small firms, nonprofits, government agencies, courts, etc.—I have been highly troubled by the number of students who have been subjected to hiring and employment practices at small firms that I would describe as unethical at best and deceptive and exploitative at worst.

Here are just a few examples from my 11 years as a professor at law schools in three states (with superficial details changed to protect the privacy of the students involved).

  • A student who, after working for two summers at a small firm, was offered a “three-phase employment plan,” in which the firm offered to (1) pay her a (very) low salary for her first three months, (2) the same salary for the next three months on the condition that she generate an equivalent amount of revenue or pay back the difference, and then (3) stop paying her a salary from the sixth month onward but charge her a fee to use the firm’s printer. The hiring partner told her that she should plan to have developed her own book of business by that point.

  • A small firm that hired multiple summer associates with the promise that everyone would receive offers of permanent employment at the end of the summer. After putting in long hours for the next three months, every summer associate except the hiring partner’s son and a prominent potential client’s daughter were told that they would not be receiving the offers of which they had been assured.

  • A student who received an offer from a small firm that wanted him to open a branch office in another town completely on his own. The firm offered to pay him $40,000per year and give him a stack of law books that it had purchased from a recent library closure but noted that he would have to pay for his own insurance and his own subscription to online legal research service Westlaw. When the student pushed back, the firm agreed to raise the offer to $60,000 per year and promised that, eventually, he would earn back some amount of the additional revenue that he generated at a percentage to be negotiated later.

In addition to other such troubling examples, I have frequently witnessed 2Ls and 3Ls performing significant amounts of unpaid or low-paid work at small firms during the semester. These students sometimes struggle to keep up with their classes and the demands of their supervising attorneys.

Many of those students, moreover, never receive offers from those firms and are left scrambling to find other permanent employment near graduation. Meanwhile, my sense is that these firms see no problem with such outcomes and instead commend themselves for having given students an opportunity to gain experience.

In some of these situations, the attorneys involved may have been overwhelmed by hefty workloads or truly miscalculated the hiring and supervisory capacities of their small firms. They may also have been out of touch with the current legal market and reasonable compensation ranges.

In others, I think that such firms have purposely exploited law students, extracting considerable amounts of work from them while dangling the prospect of long-term employment that they know they will never be able to offer. Finding a law student to intern is indeed a cheaper option than hiring another attorney, paralegal or assistant.

I am sympathetic to the unique workload and economic challenges faced by small firms. I am also aware that such firms can—and very often do—offer law students opportunities that larger firms cannot: opportunities to perform more significant legal work earlier in their careers.

I have had scores of law students find immensely satisfying employment at small firms and even start their own. Additionally, local small firm attorneys are often some of the most supportive and engaged alums that law schools have.

But I also think that the lack of transparency surrounding small firm hiring increases the risk of unsavory employment practices—a risk that law schools, the bar and small firms themselves should work to reduce.

Unlike large firms, which typically compensate associates in a given region similarly and whose hiring and compensation practices frequently find exposure on sites like Above the Law, small firms vary enormously and are often black boxes with respect to compensation. Law students understandably struggle to determine whether an offer from a small firm is a fair one and often don’t yet have the experience to know when a term of employment is unusual or objectionable.

The common issues with large firms are well known and widely discussed: grueling hours, difficult partners and high attrition, particularly among women and people of color. I worry, however, that in our profession’s very laudable efforts to improve the workplace at big firms, small firms have largely escaped scrutiny.

Worse, the attention on big firms seems to have created a mythology in the minds of many law students that working for large firms necessarily entails high compensation in exchange for terrible hours and poor treatment, whereas small firms are their gentler, more family-friendly—though lower-paying—alternatives. Experienced members of our profession know that to be a false dichotomy, but law students may not.

To combat these issues, law schools have to offer students closer guidance in contemplating job offers from small firms. They should keep track of which firms engage in dubious employment practices and caution students away from them. Law schools also have to teach law students how to do due diligence before accepting a job. Schools should encourage students to research how other small firms in the area are compensating attorneys doing similar work, check the disciplinary history of the lawyers at the firm, and ask tactful but thoughtful questions about the firm’s finances.

State bars should take a more active role in monitoring the employment practices of small firms and whether such firms are providing adequate supervision of law student interns. State bars should also provide more CLE opportunities designed to ensure that small firm attorneys are up to date on employment laws, ethical hiring standards and current norms in compensation.

Finally, small firms have to engage in careful self-reflection before hiring law students. They should not hire law students whom they cannot adequately supervise or fairly compensate. Additionally, they should be as transparent and upfront as possible with students about the possibility of future employment.

While having law student interns is undoubtedly helpful, particularly if a firm is struggling under the weight of a daunting caseload or financial uncertainty, the risks inherent in small firm practice should not be borne by some of the most vulnerable members of our profession.

---

Tracy Hresko Pearl is professor at the University of Oklahoma College of Law. She researches and writes in the areas of law and technology, criminal procedure and torts. Before becoming an academic, she was an associate at Hogan Lovells in Washington, D.C., and a law clerk for judges in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia and the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Denver.

---

ABAJournal.com is accepting queries for original, thoughtful, nonpromotional articles and commentary by unpaid contributors to run in the Your Voice section. Details and submission guidelines are posted at “Your Submissions, Your Voice.”

---

This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.

“It’s never going to go well,” Arizona attorney Lynda C. Shely says about the prospect of representing anyone you are close to, including family members and friends. Shely, the immediate past chair of the ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility, works in private practice and has advised more than 2,500 law firms around the country on legal ethics matters.

“What friends and family don’t understand is just giving them a little bit of advice creates an attorney-client relationship,” Shely says. “And a young lawyer can be sued if the advice they give is wrong.”

A friend or family member asking for legal advice can make for a complicated situation, especially because “young lawyers typically want to flex the knowledge they learned from law school or from their limited time as a lawyer,” says Khasim Lockhart, an associate at Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz in New York, whose focus areas include legal ethics and professional responsibility.

The risks of giving legal advice in these situations

The possibility of inadvertently creating an attorney-client relationship is a very real risk.

“When you start giving advice about how to deal with somebody’s particular legal problem and not just giving referrals to sources of assistance, the risk is that you are going to inadvertently create a lawyer-client relationship—because the person is going to understand you are giving them assistance about their particular problem that they can rely on,” says Bruce A. Green, the Louis Stein chair at the Fordham University School of Law, where he directs the Louis Stein Center for Law and Ethics. Green is the current chair of the Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility.

This may violate your duty of competence if it relates to something outside your realm of expertise under Model Rule 1.1 of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct.

“As a young lawyer, you want to be helpful to anyone, especially family members, but at the same time, the biggest risk from helping family members is that a lawyer can end up dabbling,” Lockhart says. “What I mean by dabbling is a lawyer having limited involvement in a subject matter and giving a few pieces of advice based on general knowledge from law school or a random case they read while simultaneously trying to avoid fully engaging in the matter. But even five minutes of advice can be truly damaging.”

Ethical duties and the possibility of a malpractice claim

Shely says young lawyers should understand that even if they think they are giving just “a little bit of advice,” say on the sidelines of their kids’ soccer game to another parent, the lawyer would likely be required to put that contact in their firm’s database as a potential client and a potential conflict under Model Rule 1.18 and pursuant to their local rules that cover duties to prospective clients.

In addition to the risk of losing a friend after offering bad legal advice, a young lawyer could also be sued for malpractice.

“It happens all the time,” Shely says. “And that’s not a debt you want to take on along with student loans.” Even where your firm might have malpractice insurance, if you provide advice outside the scope of your job, it may not be covered.

How to respond when a friend or family member asks for legal advice

So what is a young lawyer who specializes in labor and employment law supposed to do when a family member comes to them with a criminal defense issue?

The best thing to do is be straightforward and say: “I have no experience in that area of law, but I can find someone for you,” Lockhart says. New lawyers and seasoned lawyers alike are familiar with other attorneys at their firms or through bar associations and can connect a family member or friend to one with the experience they need, he adds.

It’s OK to represent friends and family members, but do it the right way

If a young lawyer feels competent to represent someone close to them, there are no rules preventing that representation, but it must proceed the way that any other representation would.

“You have to do the full gamut of having them come into the office or doing a consultation virtually and sending an engagement letter,” Shely says.

She also recommends that lawyers who choose to represent a friend or family member make sure to carefully limit the scope of representation in a written engagement letter to just that matter and not agree to represent on appeal.

“Otherwise,” Shely says, “that friend or family member could mistakenly think you’re going to handle all of their legal matters for free!”

Lockhart also notes that although representing a friend or family member might feel a bit more relaxed and laid-back than a more formal representation, the ABA Model Rules still apply.

“You don’t want to assume you will be more favored by a family member or friend if something goes south,” he says.

---

Editor’s Note: This column first appeared in the ABA Young Lawyers Division publication TYL on Oct. 13, 2023.

---

Samuel Dangremond is an attorney admitted to the Connecticut, Florida and New York bars. He works as a trusts and estates associate at Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle in New York City.

---

Mind Your Business is a series of columns written by lawyers, legal professionals and others within the legal industry. The purpose of these columns is to offer practical guidance for attorneys on how to run their practices, provide information about the latest trends in legal technology and how it can help lawyers work more efficiently, and strategies for building a thriving business.

---

Interested in contributing a column? Send a query to [email protected].

---

This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.

Ten years ago, I was a bright-eyed and bushy-tailed young attorney, fresh from a federal clerkship and eager to start my litigation career. One year later, I was a sleepless, burned-out basket case on my way out the door asking myself, “Did I make an awful mistake when I went to law school?” Fast forward almost a decade, and I can answer that question with a resounding no.

I’m not alone in recovering from a poor fit with my first-year firm to go on to succeed in a thriving legal career. In law school, we are often told that our first year will make or break our career, and an early exit will stain our resumés and make firms question our ability to cut it in the “real world.”

Yet statistics show that younger lawyers are moving around more often than ever before. In 2022, the International Bar Association reported it had surveyed 3,000 lawyers ages 40 and under about their plans for the next five years and found that 54% said they were either highly likely or somewhat likely to move to a new workplace, 33% wanted to switch to a different area of law and 20% were thinking of leaving law behind.

The trend in law mirrors the trend across the U.S. In 2016, Gallup found that 21% of millennials surveyed reported changing jobs within the last year—more than three times the rate of the other age groups. The Gallup report shows that the trend in career switches isn’t purely pandemic-related since it predates COVID-19 by three years.

With lateral moves becoming more common and therefore less frowned-upon even among young associates, navigating the changing job market means learning to see a switch early on not as a sign of failure but as a chance to build a career that fits your goals and skills.

When your first-year experience falls short, your instinct may be to take the false start as a reflection on whether you can make it as a lawyer. Instead, think of the setback as a step on your legal journey. Before you leave your old firm, identify where you can improve and don’t be afraid to ask for feedback. Making a mistake almost never spells the end of a career, but being able to accept constructive criticism is a skill you must build to ensure you don’t repeat it.

Look for mentors and work to build the skills you might be missing. If it’s legal knowledge, take CLEs and attend meetings of professional associations. If it’s social connections, join groups to build social skills. The groups don’t have to be legal; in fact, you might benefit from simply pursuing hobbies with people who share your passion and give you perspective. The worst thing to do is hide in shame—now is the time to tap into your network.

Leaving an old firm is a great time to consider what worked, what didn’t and where you want to go. Remember how much you’ve learned about our profession after working in the industry, and be open to the fact that your goals might have changed since you graduated. As Mireille Guiliano, former CEO of Clicquot, Inc., says in her book business book Women, Work & the Art of Savoir Faire, “Life is lived in episodes and stages.” You don’t have to do the same thing all your life to be successful at each stage of your life.

Now that you’ve done the hard work, you’re ready to look for your next job with a strong sense of what you’re looking for and what you have to offer. At the interview, don’t bash your previous employer; rather, make it about why you’re excited to work with the new firm. Having been both an applicant and a hiring committee member, I believe that unless you have a pattern of hopping from job to job, employers are less concerned with why you left than why you’ll be a good fit.

What did you learn at your old firm that you could bring to the new one? Are there missing pieces in the range of services it offers that you could fill? A good firm is as diverse as its client base, so if everyone at the firm looks the same and follows the same path, they may not be able to see the issues from every angle. Nontraditional industry experience can help bridge that gap.

The interview is also your chance to confirm that you really want to work at the new firm. Do your research and tap into your network for the inside scoop. Then ask questions to make sure the firm culture fits your lifestyle.

Is the compensation structure reasonable, are marketing opportunities available and is the firm’s business model financially viable? If you are newer to the practice, what will the firm offer in terms of CLEs, mentorship and building your network? Is the firm open to remote work, at least after you’ve gotten your feet wet? What can you expect to learn at the firm in your first six months, first year and first five years?

Be open to opportunities, but don’t be tempted to take a job just because you got an offer if it’s not a good fit or you can’t see how it would help you reach your goals. In the immortal words of Judge Judy, “For better or forget it.”

Finally, you make it to the big day and start a career with a new firm! Don’t set yourself up for failure by judging the new firm based on your experience at the old one or by seeing every mistake you make (and you will make many of them) as a sign that history will repeat itself. The firm hired you for a reason and wants you to succeed.

Now that you’ve spent time in practice, you’ll find you’re better able to understand not only what you’re doing but also why you’re doing it. The more you engage with your clients and take ownership of your projects, the more you’ll feel like you’ve earned your place at the table. Remember everything you bring to the table—including a broad perspective and life experience.

In many legal actions, someone wins, and someone loses. But just because a litigator has lost a motion doesn’t mean that they themselves are a loser. Treat a setback in your career as you would a setback in your case—a sign that you perhaps need to reevaluate your strategy, but not necessarily throw in the towel.

In her article “3 Pieces of Career Advice You Won’t Hear Anywhere Else,” Sallie Krawcheck, CEO and founder of the investment platform Ellevest, proudly owns the fact that she was fired on the front page of the Wall Street Journal—twice. Her philosophy is, “If you want to have a big career and you’re not making some real mistakes along the way—faceplant stuff—you aren’t taking enough risks.” Remember that everyone who has succeeded has also at one point failed. A poor fit in your first year is not the end—it’s the beginning.

---

Xenia Tashlitsky is a construction and insurance litigation attorney based in San Diego who enjoys Star Wars, yoga and cat cafes.

---

ABAJournal.com is accepting queries for original, thoughtful, nonpromotional articles and commentary by unpaid contributors to run in the Your Voice section. Details and submission guidelines are posted at “Your Submissions, Your Voice.”

---

This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.