A Lawyer's Lament: Law Schools and the "Profession" of Law

This is certainly not a traditional law review article. It is not intended to be. It is an essay that closely mirrors the remarks I made at the symposium on the future of legal education held Friday, April 28, 2006, at Vanderbilt University Law School. Those remarks were merely one person's opinion; however, they rest upon almost forty years of practice that has provided an opportunity to work with clients throughout the United States. The remarks also rest upon extensive conversations with, and letters and emails from, a wide variety of practitioners who responded to my request for their opinions so that I might fold their responses into what would, hopefully, be a coherent presentation reflecting a diverse cross-section of experiences. It is important to note that in no way is this essay a condemnation of the teaching of law or of those who teach it. I, for one, feel the greatest respect for the teacher-scholars who labor in America's law schools. Albeit as a mere adjunct for more than twenty years, I share some of the frustration and exhilaration of both teaching and scholarship.1 I recognize, and readily and enthusiastically acknowledge, the vital component of American life that the scholarteacher plays in exploring the principles of law that must be examined, expounded upon, and taught in order for American society, business, and government to function, flourish, and evolve. However, that admiration and respect must not be allowed to dim the recognition that there are problems in the law and in the way that the law is practiced. As I initially acknowledge in my essay, one cannot simply point to the law schools as the cause of this problem. In fact, one should perhaps point to the practice of law and to American society as a first cause. Yet, the way the law is taught in today's law schools plays an extremely significant part in setting the stage for later failures, stresses, and dysfunctional lawyers. It is the goal of this essay to shine a light, however dimly, upon these failures and to begin a dialogue so that the practitioner and the scholar might come together to look not only at legal education but also at legal practice and say, How collectively can we do this better? mistakes are we making and how can we, how must we, cure those mistakes? It is or should be with a great deal of humility that a practitioner participates in a symposium such as this surrounded as he is by scholars of such obvious renown. It is also, however, the mark of a good lawyer that, no matter what the odds, he or she goes forward to do his best to address the issues and to seek to find a way. One hopes that the reader, with the same degree of humility and receptiveness, will do so as well. I. INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM Many of you may wonder: Why is he here? What does he have to add? He has practiced law for thirty-eight years; therefore, he has no role in an academic institution. You have all heard this before, and perhaps some of you have actually said it. Well, just consider me the consumer's representative. After all, it is the law firms and law departments who hire, who consume, the product of the law schools. They are the intermediate consumers of the product the law school produces, with the ultimate consumers being the men, women, and entities that actually use legal services. And someone must speak for the consumer in a discussion of legal education. Moreover, one might note that the reviled and revered U.S. News & World Report rankings respect practitioners' inputs as one criterion in the ranking process. But the reader should also consider me as one who is gravely concerned about legal education because I am gravely concerned about the practice-the profession-of law. And it is that concern that I wish to discuss with you. Let us all acknowledge at the outset that the practice of law is under stress from both internal and external sources. Candidly and sadly, a primary cause of the stress is the rise of greed and a corresponding focus on self esteem. …