How Rookie Lawyers Can Avoid Big Mistakes

Careers

Posted May 8, 2008, 06:48 am CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss

Most new lawyers make some mistakes, but some are worse than others, such as throwing huge tantrums, hiding errors and sending flaming e-mails.

Steven Bennett, a partner at Jones Day and the author of The Path to Partnership, offers advice to new lawyers on how to avoid these pitfalls in a National Law Journal article.

His recommendations:

Don’t cover up mistakes. Hiding a mistake can magnify the error and prevent it from being corrected. It also may give your supervisors reason to question your judgment.
Don’t abuse the staff. Hurtful words, screaming tantrums and inappropriate physical contact or intimidation are big no-no’s. Your reputation will be harmed and staffers will make your job more difficult. Bad behavior could also result in lawsuits. Learn to “play nice,” and if you blow up at someone, make sure you apologize.
Don’t badmouth clients and higher-ups. Your words may get back to those you criticize. Others who hear your tirades may wonder if you are making similar comments about them.
Don’t write angry words in an e-mail, and don’t respond to a “flaming” e-mail in kind. Assume your e-mail will be forwarded to others.
Don’t drink to excess. Social occasions with colleagues or clients should still be treated as business meetings.

Bennett sums up his recommendations with these words: “Everyone makes mistakes. Lawyers are no exception. What distinguishes a learning experience from a career-ender is whether you can focus on the words ‘professional responsibility.’ Act like a professional. Take responsibility for your actions.”

Comments

Report Abuse

Posted by Jack - 4 months, 4 weeks, 18 hours, 8 minutes ago

You forgot to mention don’t have sex with your clients.
Posted by Bob - 4 months, 4 weeks, 9 hours, 5 minutes ago

You can have sex with your staff though. Ask Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann.
Posted by Brian - 4 months, 4 weeks, 8 hours, 29 minutes ago

I thought sex with clients was okay, as long as you were having sex before you were retained…
Posted by anonymous - 4 months, 4 weeks, 8 hours, 6 minutes ago

Owning up to your mistakes doesn’t guarantee you won’t be fired - even if the mistake was corrected by a supervisor & resulted in no harm to the client.
Ask me how I know.
Posted by Enon E. Muss - 4 months, 4 weeks, 7 hours, 23 minutes ago

Comment #3, how could you possibly know that?
Posted by JS - 4 months, 4 weeks, 6 hours, 49 minutes ago

I agree about the no sex with clients/staff advice. Everyone should follow the adage, “Don’t ‘go’ where you eat!”
Posted by Pieter de Beer - 4 months, 4 weeks, 6 hours, 36 minutes ago

When you report and apologise a msitake, don’t forget to suggest how it can eb corrected, and what steps will eb atke not to repeat teh same mistake.
Posted by Anonymous - 4 months, 4 weeks, 6 hours, 30 minutes ago

Also, be sure to proofread your work (See comment #6).
Posted by AttyElizabeth - 4 months, 4 weeks, 6 hours, 27 minutes ago

Some employers are just REALLY bad and there is no pleasing them. The article should add (1) Don’t call out your supervisors on their mistakes, even if that means putting yourself into a position where you might be violating an ethics rule; (2) Graciously accept all the abuse clients heap upon you, especially if they pay their bills on time - give the paying clients your cell phone and home phone number, so they can have easier access to you when their butt itches and they want to sue someone about it; (3) Learn all of the inter-firm politics for the tri-state area during your first week on the job, so that you don’t accidentally send out a particularly aggressive discovery request to someone’s golf buddy, (4) If you are a woman, don’t ever try to hold yourself out, in word or deed, as an equal to any male at your firm - attorney, staff or otherwise.
Posted by Matt - 4 months, 4 weeks, 6 hours, 27 minutes ago

I can’t believe that people actually have to be told not to throw tantrums in an office, push around other people, or drink excessively. I learned not to do this a long time ago, when I was in kindergarten.
Posted by Angela - 4 months, 4 weeks, 6 hours, 12 minutes ago

Atty Elizabeth- Is the comment meant to be sarcastic? I certainly hope so.
Posted by Weed 'em out - 4 months, 4 weeks, 6 hours, 2 minutes ago

If our propfession would require a lengthy apprenticeship and more practical hands on experience practicing law as a requirement to being admitted to the bar many of the juvenile attitudes and and character traiits could be spotted and corrected before new lawyers are unleashed on the public. If they can’t be corrected no ticket to practice.
Posted by ILoveElizabeth - 4 months, 4 weeks, 5 hours, 56 minutes ago

Elizabeth that was awesome...you are so on the money.
Posted by Jack - 4 months, 4 weeks, 5 hours, 22 minutes ago

I’m surprised that no asked why I mentioned no sex with clients - do any of you know of such a situation? It’s ugly, especially when the partner that did it flips the young associate into the case and you’re left with a hysterical client.
Posted by Ron - 4 months, 4 weeks, 5 hours, 1 minute ago

I agree with #9. I have often thought about the old, old model of young barristers who would “write the law” in an apprenticeship. Perhaps going to law school for two years and the entire third year in an approved apprenticeship. It would be akin to a med student doing an internship and residency. There is soooo much to have to learn right out of law school (e.g. we spend a whole year in Contracts our first year, but when you graduate, do you actually know how to DRAFT a contract?)--substantive areas of law have to be mastered while also learning decorum, ethics, managing egos (bosses and clients), writing well (but quickly), dealing with judges with black-robitis (i.e. narcissistic, tempermental behavior of judges), etc. A pre-vetted, state-approved apprenticeship before taking the bar exam would be an excellent way to teach and train new lawyers.
Posted by Scott - 4 months, 4 weeks, 4 hours, 53 minutes ago

Ron, I agree with you about additional training. Back when attorneys were honorable men each associate had a partner mentor them. That mentoring was more than 1 meeting a month to confirm # of billable hours. That partner would actually meet daily with the associate to discuss the work, family ect. and offer advice. The partner was actually interested in the associate as a person and young attorney as opposed to a number attached to billable hours. Unfortunately those days are gone forever . . .
Posted by Lucky Lawyer - 4 months, 4 weeks, 4 hours, 35 minutes ago

I often feel very fortunate to work in a firm where I don’t have to worry about behavior mentioned by Atty Elizabeth and Jack, because I have friends that put up with it every day for fear of losing their jobs, or gaining a poor reputation by switching jobs too many times early in their careers. It is a real problem that should not be ignored.
Posted by R - 4 months, 4 weeks, 4 hours, 24 minutes ago

In addition to all the “Don’ts” in the article and comments, I would add one important “Do”: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Look at each discovery request, letter, pleading you’re about to send out and ask yourself, “How would I feel if I received this? Would I think it was legitimate and professional, or would I view it as harassing bullshit?” If you conclude the latter, tear it up, get out of your office to stretch your legs and clear your mind, and start over.
Posted by bhead jones - 4 months, 4 weeks, 3 hours, 50 minutes ago

Re: Comment 8 and 16. Elizabeth, what is a “particularly aggressive discovery request” there is no such thing. either you need the information for your case or to flesh out the other side’s position, or you don’t. “Agressive” means that it has little to do with the needs of the case and more to do with making the other side spend time and money. This isn’t practicing law, it is harrasing people professionally.
Posted by michael - 4 months, 4 weeks, 3 hours, 30 minutes ago

We as a profession need to abandon our Cannon-tied restriction on medical-style specialization--and then provide a “cursa honorum” to gain expertise--like Tax LLM--appropriate to the substantive specialty..Too much of what passes for “expertise” is based on “I once worked on a case where the client was in X industry"--That doesn’t make you an Oil & Gas, Environmental, Telecom, IP, IT, criminal trial or any other “specialist"-IMHO.
Posted by RookiesRus - 4 months, 4 weeks, 3 hours, 3 minutes ago

The majority of comments seem to be aimed at the long term practitioners and not the rookies. So, it would seem, that the many of the long-time practitioners should have been weeded-out long ago?
Posted by Jack - 4 months, 4 weeks, 2 hours, 51 minutes ago

Yes, they do # 19 - as long as the long timers hold the positions of power and seem to have our professional futures in their hands it will remain the same.
Wonder if the author, Attoney Weiss has read any of these comments.
Posted by chairman meow - 4 months, 4 weeks, 2 hours, 23 minutes ago

What is with all the bigotry and veiled hatred towards women in these comments (see comments #8 and 19)? Since women comprise over half of new jd graduates, that particular bias, fyi, may not ultimately serve you well.
Posted by chairman meow - 4 months, 4 weeks, 2 hours, 23 minutes ago

I meant #17, not #19.
Posted by Older Rookie Associate - 4 months, 4 weeks, 2 hours, 18 minutes ago

Law is my second career. My first was in business. I was in one of the last business school classes that accepted students right out of college and there was a big difference in maturity between those who had worked even two years and those who had never worked at all. I think law schools do the profession a disservice by not requiring some work experience prior to admittance. Some of the behavior I’ve witnessed from my fellow junior associates astonishes me - from treating staffers as servants to excessive drinking at cocktail parties. I think part of the problem is they haven’t had time to perceive a break between fraternity/sorority parties and work functions. We spend so much time at work and with work colleagues, it has much of the feel of college - in the sense that your work and home life tend to run into each other. Perhaps this lack of separation of work life and personal life has led them into the trap of treating your work colleagues like your college buddies.

Two years of work experience before attending law school should be standard. Business schools require it for a reason.
Posted by Jack - 4 months, 4 weeks, 2 hours, 12 minutes ago

Both that you reference are the comments of women (if posting names are real in terms of gender) - # 8 appears to be saying that women are not treated well. And, # 17 - well # 17 is not veiled at all - it may be a cultural thing - you know, walk ten steps behind..
Also, it makes no difference how many women are receiving JD’s until they are the partners, hold the power, things will not change.
Posted by AttyElizabeth - 4 months, 4 weeks ago

Meow - how can you interpret my post (#8) to be bigotry or veiled hatred towards women? For those who did not get it, which you might be one of, it is satire. Check wikipedia for the definition and you will see that my comment is dead on point.
Posted by AttyElizabeth - 4 months, 3 weeks, 6 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes ago

I also think that all of my “pointers” would apply to any sex or race, except for maybe (4).
Posted by Jeffrey J. Estrella - 4 months, 3 weeks, 6 days, 21 hours, 58 minutes ago

I think that you all make good points. I do believe that apprenticeships would be improper for law students. In this economy, it is hard enough to find employment or volunteer opportunities, let alone if it was required. Also, the student loan lenders wouldn’t like the idea of post-poning payments until years after graduation. Most schools do have required clinic or extern participation that are, in my opinion, excellent segues from studying law to practicing law.
Posted by Ralph Rutledge - 4 months, 3 weeks, 6 days, 21 hours ago

That is why they call it “practice”. No one gets it right the first time. Law schools should provide experience, not just theory. There is a whole industry geared to helping law graduates pass the state bar. Why?
Posted by Melissa - 4 months, 3 weeks, 6 days, 16 hours, 25 minutes ago

There should be a “residency program” for JDs just as they have for MDs.
Thanks,
from a PT JD
Posted by New but not Naive - 4 months, 3 weeks, 6 days, 4 hours, 35 minutes ago

While I appreciate the ABA attempting to offer advice, everything on this list is incredibly obvious and frankly kind of silly. We are all intelligent and highly educated individuals, I think we can handle some more complex advice.
Posted by Jack - 4 months, 3 weeks, 6 days, 2 hours, 10 minutes ago

New: Your pont is well taken

In a number of the postings it’s seems that it’s not the “rookies” that need this list. Frankly, I believe the list should be in a blog for “long timers.”

There are large firms where partners have done or are doing “Don’t” after “Don’t” on Attoney Weiss’ list.

To me it’s clear that those that have commented have not yet been jaded. I love the posting by R # 16. Also those that have suggested a mentoring or residency program - the firms would pay enough to cover studnet loans and to live, not large, but live.

So, until the “ long timers” have an opportunity to read the Don’t list I’ve decided that this will be my lawyer support goup.

Working at home, working just the same.
Posted by Stating the obvious - 4 months, 3 weeks, 6 days, 33 minutes ago

The firms with the highest peer-rankings have apprentice-type mentor programs… Well, at least Cravath, Swaine & Moore does…
JD candidates should have work experience prior to law school, preferably in an efficiency-driven industry. From my (limited) experience and (not-so-limited) 2nd-hand experiences, law firms are neither the model for professionalism or competently managed.
My theory is that the BA/BS=>JD=>Law Firm track welcomes adults with an undergraduate mindset who neither comprehend nor appreciate practical reality and respect towards colleagues…
Posted by Bob the Lawyer - 4 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 21 hours, 43 minutes ago

So many reasons above why I went solo right out of the box. It’s tough, hard work, but I’m not subject to jerk-off partners abusing me. I’d rather cap out at $120k for the rest of my life than ever work for a firm and become “partner.” No thanks. And I sincerely mean that.

Commenting has expired on this post.

ABA Journal - Law News Now

Careers