Lost in an Inbox, Part II

As I was thinking about e-mail as a means of communication and why e-mails sometimes get sent off never to be responded to, I noticed how I use e-mail and some of the ways in which I have also been less than perfect in responding to the e-mails that arrive in my inbox. It is true that e-mail is relatively new, a fact spoofed in this weeks Onion in an article talking about uncovering an e-mail artifact from 1995, but there are so many tools available for organizing e-mails and other information that it seems a little strange that we have such a hard time keeping the information organized. I think this is mostly due to lack of understanding. Just as Einstein claimed we only used 10% of our brain, mos uf us use only 10% of the functions available on our computers. So in an attempt to create greater e-mail efficiency in my life, I set out to find the best tools. I found some advise from Richard Kuo's blog on how to manage e-mail effectively. It took me a couple of hours to work through the over 500 e-mails that had amassed in my Inbox since the Christmas Holiday, but the time was well spent. By keeping my inbox basically empty, I can actually deal with the new mail that streams in on a daily basis.

The reason I cam back to this topic is because staying organized is an important skill to develop for aspiring lawyers. Working in the law has a lot to do with the best ways to gather, organize, and process information. In addition, the law has a lot of deadlines, and for some if these deadlines, if you miss them, you can get sued. I went to a talk last semester on "how to prevent malpractice suits." The presenter, I do not remember his name, claimed that if we sat through his hour long talk, he would show us how we can reduce our chances of facing a malpractice suit by 50%. He showed us a lot of statistical data that indicated that half of all malpractice suits are filed because two things that lawyers do wrong: 1. missing an important deadline, such as a statute of limitations, which prevents a client from pursuing an otherwise valid claim; and 2. poor customer relations, where clients feel like their lawyers do not respond to their calls, e-mails, or otherwise stay in communication and keep the case organized. So learning how to organize one's e-mail is an important skill to learn in the age of the technological lawyer.

Its Showtime

I was sitting around watching c-span, as I am sometimes apt to do, and I was drawn in to a fascinating debate going on in a house commitee. Apparently, the Smithsonian, which is partially publically funded and was created as a trust by the congress for the benefit of the people of the United States, (read their history) made some backroom deal with Showtime for a long term, 30 years, contract. All sorts of people are up in arms about this such as independent filmakers, historians, and Congress, because no one asked for their permission. The problem seems to be, besides the fact that this contract was made without congressional oversight, that if a filmaker wants to use the resources of the Smithsonian, they will have to compete with Showtime for the privledge to do so. (More details here) One of the groups that is concerned is PBS. They regularly make use of the Smithsonian archieves, but now, when the Smothsonian is deciding which projects to lend their resources to (this power seems to lie in the hands of the currators), they must decide between PBS, who will make a film for no profit and provide it to the public for free or Showtime, who will share the profits from the film that they show on their on-demand network.

This got me thinking. If we are all the beneficiaries of the Smithsonian trust, have we been taking advantage of the resources of this trust by watching shows on public television? I myself am a regular public radio and television listener/ viewer, but this should not be surprising, since I just admitted I was watching c-span for fun. And I know there are others like me out there. One of the arguments I heard put forward for this deal is that the people who watch public television are already more highly educated and have ready access to educational materials or resources. (This is one of those chicken/ egg questions: is the public television audience more intellegent because they cancelled cabel and watch PBS, or do intellegent people cancel cabel and watch PBS?) The argument would go that if we allow the private sector to produce educational/ historical films using the Smithsonian archeive, they will produce more entertaining and more appealing films that will appeal to an audience that is made up of mostly what I will call Cable Plus individuals (people who not only subsribe to cabel, but also the premium channels). These are entertainment consumers, but by feeding them simply a highly polished Smithsonian production, are we really bringing the trust of American Artifacts and Historical data to the People. I always doubt any project, the purpose of which is to appeal to the masses, and the idea that a private corporation is going to be making a profit off of what belongs essentially to the public trust rubs me the wrong way, even though I can admit the strong argument that such a contract will provide resources to the Smithsonian to fund further projects that would not be possible on its normal budget.

Before I go on too long, I want to add one more thing. One of the side effects of law school is that it gets you to start to look for both sides of an argument. I can see why the Smithsonian thought this was a good deal, but after looking at this issue from that perspective, I return to what my gut tells me. It is just wrong privitise our historical heritage and I have grave doubts about Showtimes production quality, although I am willing to give it a chance to see what they do with it. Cabel has failed. Have you watched a show on the History Channel lately. If you do, does it ever leave you with the feeling that they have the amazing power to produce an hour long show with only about 12 minutes of actual information. I guess that is what happens with commercials, which is the one possible saving grace with Showtime, but cabel is overpriced as it is. Who has an extra $25 a moth to get what belongs to us already.

Lost in an Inbox

Since I began looking for a legal job for the summer, I have probably sent off about 20 resumes attached to e-mail's as per instructions in the job ad. Each time I send off an e-mail, I also attach anticipation and expectation and what I have learned is a nieve expectation that I will hear anything from the recipiants of my e-mails. Now I understand that no one is just going to hand me a job, and I also understand that these employers are probably receiving many similar resumes and cover letters on top of the rest of their daily e-mail, so I am not really shocked that I have not gotten a job yet, but what I am shocked at is the lack of any type of response, not even a "thank you for your inquiry; we will keep you in mind." or "thank you but not thanks." This is not to say that a few potential employers have not responded. I received one e-mail to tell me that although he was "extremely impressed with my qualifications" he decided to offer the job to another canidate. Although I wondered what it takes to be more than extremely impressing, I did appreciate the response. I also hear back from a professor for a research assistant position, but in my reply concerning my availability for interview times, I have yet to get a confirmation. For the rest of the recipiants, whether professors, private practitioners, non-profit organizations, and temp agencies, I fear my e-mails are buried deep in someone's inbox or spam filter.

I can only guess at the reason for this response, or lack there of. One reason might be that people simply receive too many e-mails. If I consider the number of e-mails I receive on a daily basis and then think about a lawyer with business contacts and professional organization mailings and other reasons to mail, and I can understand that we all get a lot of e-mails, but one of the things I learned last year is that being a lawyer requires attention to detail. You don't just delete an e-mail without reading it. The subject line of my e-mails always indicated the mail's intention, so I assume that the employers receive and have at least glanced at my e-mail. This means that they simply see it as something like junk mail. Is it possible they already have a canidate in mind and posting an add was simply a necissary formality? This might be the case, but how hard would it be to send of a short not to say they received my e-mail but can't offer me an interview? It might also be that they receive multiple e-mails until they see one they like and then call that person, but I would think just as above, a short note would be appropriate? Do these lawyers really have so little time that they can't send of a form e-mail to unsuccessful applicants to a job a job the lawyer has taken the time to post on a law employment website? Such an e-mail would take less than 5 minutes. I don't need anything but we received your e-mail and not thanks?

I realize that one of the classic rules of finding a job is follow up, and this is what I plan on doing today: to go back through my sent e-mail box and find out the status of my application. I have done some of this, and I was again shocked at the number of e-mails it took to even get someone to write me back that they had received my material. This whole process has not left me with a good impression of real legal work, or maybe this is a phenomenon of e-mails. Maybe e-mail is not longer really a valid means of communication? It is quick, efficient, and easy to keep track of, which means that we get a lot of e-mail, but this should also mean it would be increadibly easy to respond. It is a mystery.

Final Post

I think it is time to wrap up my thoughts about the One-L year and make the move in both my thinking and my blogging toward the next step in this legal journey. I think the One-L year is unique in the way that it takes on legendary proportions. You do not see books written about one's Two-L experience and how transformative it was. Whatever changes are in place for the next year(s), they will, I anticipate, be more internal and will not fit into the tradition of One-L recollections.

I do not feel that this year was especially transformative personally. This might be because I can to lawschool at a relatively older age than many who come either right after college or after working for a year or two. I did learn a lot and I think I know how to process information now better than ever before. I also just have a lot more basic knowledge about the law and government and a bit of society and I experienced all of the stress, confusion, and competitive striving that is a part of the archetypal One-L experience. What I do not feel, however, is that I know any more what it means to be a lawyer. This last year has been a wonderful academic exercise, and that has value to expanding my general knowledge of the world, but I do not really feel any more like a lawyer than I did a year ago. Maybe this is typical as well, and maybe the first year does not really teach what lawyers actually do. I think there is some truth to that, but I have always had a penchant for theory, so I don't really mind. I like learning about history and how the law developed.

Now it is time to get some hands on experience (i.e. a job). It has not proved that easy. I sent out five resumes today and I have already sent out about 10 more. Either there are just so many law students applying for these job that you send of a resume and never hear back or a bunch of gnomes are posting joke job listings just to torment law student with the illusion that we will find work. This hunt for work is going to be a theme of next year's blog law-two-view as well as similar types of thoughts and observations about law school.

One-L. What else to say. I weigh more than I have ever weighed before. You can see it in my belly. It seems to go along with the profession. Even though I worked out more last semester than first semester, I am not as young as I used to be. Sitting around and reading all day is a force, or lack there of, that is hard to fight. It would be interesting to see the collective number of pounds put on by our class. Do we need the extra space to store all that information we learned? There were a few exceptions to the weight gain trend of law school but the overall trend tips the scale of justices.

I must also say, I think I am one of the few poeple who went to law school to make money and ended up feeling a greater obligation to do work for social justice. Most people come to law school with big ideals and hopes to change the world and end up looking for work at a corporate firm because of the financial demands of school debt and the dangling carrot of success offered by the big firm experience. I came to law school with very practical goals and I don't think I have necessarily abandoned my goal of financial security, but a desire to do work that I am passionate about has been awakened. I have always been socially minded and never really motivated by needed a new car and all-inclusive vacations but I think being surrounded by so many career oriented, monotarily motivated individuals has reminded me how little imporance that has had for me in the past. I don't know how why I imagined I would work for some corporate law firm motivated by the bottom line of billable hours. Once I realized this, I have had to adjust how I think about the law and what kind of career oppotunities I will seek out: non-profit? government? non-legal?

Well, this thinking could all be the result of being currently unemployed. I did sent an application to Safco as well as a community housing organization. I do feel like the law has made me more aware of the legal needs of the poor, but I understand that pull toward gainful employment. Ah, this is the real dilemna of the law student.

I am not really sure how to wrap up the One-L year. The conversation is really an on-going one, so look to pick up the thread at the new blog. I will make sure that this blog links there properly.

e-mail backed-up

I have spent much of this morning working through the backed up e-mail in my inbox. It is this sort of thing that if you let it get out of control during the semester, you have to spend half a day sorting it out during the break. It is amazing how much e-mail I get, and what is more amazing is that I keep so much of it. When you add the mail from school, the different newsletters I subsribe to, and the notification e-mails from banks and such, your personal mail can get lost. I think some people who havn't heard from me in a while might be getting a word or two in the coming days. I am working in reverse order, so if you wrote in February and I havn't written back, I am sorry, but I don't want to miss the more recent important e-mails, so I think it is best to work in reverse.

Final's hangover

The relief of the end of the semester has been shadowed by a nasty stress hangover. I think I have been carrying the pressure of the last few weeks around without feeling it, but as soon as it was over it all came rushing in. I have had a stomach ache since before the last exam and I have taken a couple of naps today. Basically I am pretty exhausted. It feels like a hangover. Goes to show that stress is a toxin.

The last final was my favorite of them all. One of the questions asked us to write an essay on the way statute and common law bled together and it was fun, as fun as a final can be, to be able to think generally about what law is and the way courts apply the law. Policy is my cup of tea. I want to take the philosophy of law classes and law and literary theater. It is not that I do not enjoy the process of applying law to fact, which most law finals test, but it does not come as naturally to me yet. I have always been plagued by needing to think about "why" things are as they are. How is it that we have decided that we all walk around with a duty to "act reasonably" and that there is an institution that will enforce the breach of this duty. Most studying at law school is not helped by asking such foundational questions. Most tests test your capacity to know which law to apply, and I think this is important, but for me I do not see how to apply law if I do not know where the law came from. I like learning the law through the case law meathod. Of course the board wants to know that we know the black letter law, but I like to see how this developed and why it is that the law changed.

Test Day 4: Torts

I woke up feeling sick this morning. I need my body and mind to make it through the rest of today. I think the stress finally is catching up with me. Getting through civ pro was like coming over a false summit, that we knew was false, before having to make the final push to the top of the mountain. Right now I feel like one does when climbing a 14,000 ft. peak. When you get near the top, the air gets thin and you feel exhausted, light headed, and weak from lack of oxygen, but you keep on pushing because you can see the top. I have four hours now to get myself together and run through my torts outline before the exam. Then four hours of exam and One-L will be over.

I do not plan on getting on the computer tonight. Once I get done with the exam I am going to shut it down and take a night off from reading, writing, computering, etc. I will update tomorrow about the final exam and in the next couple of weeks I will be posting some thoughts about this year in general and take some time to look back and think about what has gone on and what it has all meant.

Reading Day 10 and 11

Test Day 3: Civil Procedure

This was by far the most brutal and difficult exam of all the law school exams I have taken so far. It was not so much that the fact pattern was complicated with many issues or that it took the entire four hours of steady writing to get everything down on paper but the nature of the exam was exhausting. In contracts or property, we were supposed to describe the parties rights and liabilities. If I was not sure exactly what a court would do or what I would advise a party, I could just write about what both parties to a dispute might have as rights and could move on to the next issue. The civ. pro. exam required us to take a position on the issues and we couldn't hedge our answers. This forced us to decide one way or the other and what made the doubt and necessity to make a decision worse, subsequent issues depended on how we decided earlier issues. Each conclusion of an issue effected how you decided later issues and since it was timed, you could not spend a long time trying to decide which way to play it. It was "an rewarding educational experience" in a way, but it feels like I went running for four hours. It made me think how productive I would be if I could bring some of that same level of focus to studying. You can't function at that level of intensity all the time, but an exam shows you both how well your brain works and where its weaknesses are. Alright, I am not really making any more sense here. Tomorrow I begin to study for torts. Two more reading days and one more final and then a weekend off!!!!!

Reading Day 9

As I was taking the dog for a walk, I was thinking how nice it would be if when I got home I could have a nice relaxing Sunday evening. The last time I had a Sunday evening with nothing more to do than cook dinner, read a book, and relax was during spring break. I am pretty tired of studying, or maybe I am feeling exhausted because I know that a study free Sunday is only a week away. It is not that law school takes all that much time. I feel like I have more free time now than when I was working in restaurants, and when I am off now, I am not physically exhausted, so I actually have energy to do other things like ride my bike. What makes school so exhausting is that the work is never done. When you want free time you have to demand a space for it from the otherwise filled up schedule.

I worked through all of the rules, statutes, and cases that we have looked at this semester in civil procedure. I enjoyed the material on personal jurisdiction. Maybe because you can really see how common law works. The standard still used today for haling a defendant to court in a distant forum is the minimum contacts test laid out in International Shoe and its progeny. I love the way the courts say "and its progeny" as if the case were a sun surrounded by planets. Murcury would be the cases that most clearly exemplify the holding in International Shoe, whereas a case like Burger King Corp v. Rudzewicz would be somewhere around the Earth's orbit. There are minimum contacts, but there is also some debate, a dissent. When you get to the outer rim cases, the Neptune's, jurisdiction is barely there or maybe only in found to be present by the dissent such was the case in Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia v. Hall. Of course there are cases that did not make it into the orbital sphere of International Shoe, but this cases surely did not find their way in the case book. For educational purposes, only the close call type of cases or the ones that present a new rule of law are really relevant.

We also studied the planetary sytem of cases surrounding the Erie doctrine and also several cases that dance around the idea of supplimental jurisdiction. These latter cases are orbiting systems around a statute that are held in place by the statutes gravatational pull of authority. The most recent of these was the Exxon Mobil /Rosario v. Star-Kist Foods, Inc case that was published last year and brough together the various standards floating around like stellar particles and formed them into a coherent ruling on the matter of supplimental jurisdiction. For me, it is easier to remember a rule if I can associate the rule with the facts of a specific case, and I think this is one of the main reasons that law school still teaches us the law by having us read cases. Even in areas where the law is governed primarily by statute, no one would want to go to law school or teach at one if learning was simply a matter of memorizing rules. Rules are developed from facts and are then re-applied to new facts. If I have learned anything this year, it is that the law is a continuous dialogue between rules and facts, each one affecting the other and dependent on the other for any coherent legal meaning. We study the facts of cases so we can learn the law and we learn the law so that we can apply it to new facts, and when no law can be rightly applied to a new set of facts, those facts can move through the legal system changing the law so that the law reflects what is the just outcome in a particular set of facts. This new law will then be applied to the subsequent facts that come into the courts, and on and on and on.

Reading Days 7 and 8

There is an interesting debate going on on Ann Althouse's blog about whether students believe that professors use the final exam as a rewarding educational experience. I found my way to her blog when I heard her speak on the public radio program Open Source. The topic of the show was Steven Colbert's hilarious and powerful performance last saturday at the white house press core dinner. I pretty much didn't agree with anything she had to say, so I wanted to check out her widely read blog to see what she is about. Lo and behold, she is a law professor, and although I continued to find little to agree with after reading some of her posts, I do think that there is some rewarding educational experience from taking a final. As I think I said in an earler post, the final is about the only time in the course of the semester that you get to see how all of the material you have learned comes together. The topics are no longer isolated into neat units that can be broken down to managable reading assignments and 50 minute lecturs. I think there is something rewarding about making connections and seeing pieces of a puzzel fit together. However, I do not think most students see it this way. One commentor cynically noted that most students just see law school as a means to a high paying job and the only thing rewarding about the exams is that they are necessary to purchase a nice car. I would, however, that even if many students are motivated by money, they realize that they have to get a good grade to get a good job, so much of their thoughts surrounding the exam are simple on getting a good grade. I believe students are focused on getting done with the best possible results than they are on the actual experience of the exam. Especially this semester, students seem to see each exam as one less barrier to some imagined summertime freedom.

I have made a personal commitment to not talk with other students about the exam after it is over, except very generally, so I can't really say how their experience the exam. I do this for my own sanity and because once you finish one exam, unless it is the last, there is still more studying to be done, and when you talk to another student about the contents of their exam, inevitably they will have seen something that you did not see. This kind of exchange can only lead to the feeling that you did not stack up to the other students, and even if you spotted 8 issues that the other student did not see, you are going to think about the one you missed. Therefore, if there is a rewarding educational experience, it is wholly personal and I don't think it is reflected so much in the grades, and because law students are cut from an especially competitive and over-achieving cloth, grades get a lot of the focus of many law students minds, even if they will become wholly irrelavant three years down the road.

I am in the middle of a three day civil cram-it-in-the-brain procedure. This material is definatly more engaging than easements. The weather has turned cloudy again, and I am grateful.

Test Day 2: property

Half way through this two week battle that we have been preparing for since January, but there is still a substantial number of struggles left. As a friend told me today after our property final, this is like a marathon: you are half way over at mile 20. I was loosing some steam the last couple of days, but I feel energized for civil procedure on monday. I never could get excited about property. Easements and covenants just did not get me excited to want to learn the material, but I have enjoyed the topics in civil procedure this semester. Jurisdiction and choice of law and appeals touched on that philosophical part of my brain that the policies around "touch and concern" just could not, well, touch and concern. Whatever it is I'll take it. I think that is a sign I am going to like constitutional law and evidence (things to look forward to.) Tonight I have some simple plans: vacuum, dishes, clean the misc. papers off the desk , and some t.v.. And what does a law student with a philosophical bent in the middle of finals watch: American Inventor. This show could make any steely eyed cynic cry. It is a blatent television manipulation. I do think these inventors are passionate, but the way the television edits out all of their hours of boring and mudane hard work and only shows their break downs and moments of inspiration makes it for emotional tv. I guess most things are not like tv. Lots of long mundane work for a few minutes of excitement. Sounds like finals, if you can call them excitement.

Reading Days 5 and 6

Two days to read for property, or rather, two days to learn property. Not a whole lot to report right now. I spent most of yesterday reviewing outlines and taking computerized "cali" lessons about the property material from the semester. Even though I have the feeling I didn't learn any of this stuff until yesterday, it wasn't completely foriegn, which goes to show that just being in class and doing the reading is sometimes enough. Today, I am taking practice exams. Preparing, or learning in general seems to have both a passive and an active aspect. The passive aspect is when you are reading your notes, or a case, or an outline to trying and comprehend the material. The active aspect is when you are faced with a series of facts and you have to apply the material you passively comprehended. The active learning requires much more focus, but it is the kind of focus that is required in the exam. When faced with motavating for an active exam preparation exercise, I always have some internal hesitation. It kind of hurts in the same way the first five minutes of a long bike rike hurts because your musceles are not ready to move, but once you get into it, it feels pretty good. There is something pleasureable about applying law to fact. It is the same part of the brain that is stimulated by puzzles or word games. Without taking at least some pleasure in this kind of work, law school would be a real drag.

Nice weather today. I might get out for a bike ride this afternoon. I took a couple hours off yesterday and went downtown to the pike market and had lunch with my girlfriend at Cafe Campagne. It was the perfect way for us to take a break from the books and stay fresh. It is important to keep perspective on life even during finals. We still have 8 days of reading and taking finals, and the last one counts just as much as the first one. A happy brain is a relaxed brain (not too relaxed, this isn't vacation). Again, just like biking, if you relax your upper body, your legs become more efficient. Ok, on to practice exams.

Test Day 1: contracts

The thing you realize every time you take a final is that you learned way more than any three hour final can ever test you on. The reason you have to learn all that stuff is that you never know exactly what will be in those three hours. The other thing you realize is how much energy it takes to think about this stuff in an intense setting, but in a way, finals are kind of fun. They are like a game where you get to show off as much of the stuff you learned as you can.

I really can't think very well tonight. I have been trying to rest my brain for tomorrow. I have two day to learn everything we convered in property this semester. We didn't cover that much: Landlord / Tenat duties, covenants, and easements, so I think I can do it. I felt pretty good about todays final, but I did not really talk to anyone else about it (purposefully) so I can't really say how I compared, and none of us will really know till the grades come back.

I am sorry for the disorganized mess of this post. Tonight is a night off from clear thinking. I'll be back tomorrow. I hope