Most criminal defense lawyers, particularly public defenders, pay little attention to the ridiculous happenings in the world of Biglaw. While the self-proclaimed “best and brightest” were scribbling notes in the library for the first five years of their career, with their bonus checks on auto-deposit, criminal defense lawyers were busily answering the call of the calender and announcing “ready for trial,” for a fraction of the pay.
But the rosy world of Biglaw and Bigmoney is turning a bloody red these days. As reported by the chronicler of all things juvenile, Above the Law reports, the dissolution of Heller Ehrman, a Biglaw firm from San Francisco with offices in various other cities where Biglaw firms congregate, has not gone well. In fact, when the firm was forced to dissolve, it promised its lawyers that they would have 60 warning before the checks with all the zeros would cease. That changed yesterday, when 60 days turned into “today”.
It is with a great deal of regret that we write to inform you that we will not be able to pay you for work performed after today, Friday October 10 and, as a result, that your employment with the firm will be terminated today. We also expect that we will need to inform other employees over the following two weeks that we are unable to pay them any further and will need to terminate their employment.
It wasn’t too long ago that the talk was about first year associate salaries hitting the $200,000 mark, not merely a ridiculous notion and an outrageous vanity, but an affront to those who struggle in the trenches doing real lawyer work for real people at less than a quarter of that amount. Well, the worm has turned.
No doubt some of the Biglaw refugees will be absorbed by other Biglaw firms, even as they divest themselves of non-productive equity partners. But where will the others go, the ones who were contemplating whether to purchase the Testarossa, Quattroporte or the Murcielago? Will they be sending in resumes to the five lawyer personal injury firms that advertise heavily on TV? Will they try to explain to the Legal Aid Society hiring attorney how criminal law was always their first love? Will they attend Solo Practice University and learn how to hang out their shingle?
Lingering resentment lingers amongst many in the criminal defense practice, particularly the public defenders, for the outrageous salaries enjoyed by their law review-kissing brethren. who never knew the joys of brown-bagging a tuna sandwich to the office for lunch. But now that their world is coming apart, perhaps it’s time to let go of that anger.
After all, the deep concern of a first year female associate over finding unwanted facial hair when there’s a possibility that she could otherwise had human contact reflects the depth of their world. This alone should make you feel superior, as it reflects the most pathetic and infantile approach to life that one could imagine. While cash might compensate for their immaturity before, the Biglaw crash will show them to be utterly empty vessels. No one has any use for such insipid wastrels.
There will be, and is, pain in the criminal defense world, as legislatures fail to adequately fund indigent defense, and as caseloads grow and the qualifications for defendants to receive free legal services rise. But at least you are still needed. At least you still provide something meaningful to the legal system and to society. And most importantly, at least you aren’t one of them.
For the time being at least, it looks like the good guys win a round. Congratulations.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This is an ugly and silly side of you, Scott.
Ugly, perhaps. Silly, not at all. I take very seriously the pay disparity between public defenders (and ADAs, for that matter) and Biglaw associates. I take very seriously their utility relative to their pay. This is a very ugly issue, and I’m sorry you don’t share my concern for public defenders. I think they’re worth our concern.
As one of the few remaining Heller associates, I can assure you that not all of us fit the stereotype that you lay out. Speaking for myself, my decision to join a large firm was motivated by money — I have $160K plus in law school loans, undergrad debt, and my wife, who is a public servant, also has six figure law school debt. I am not sure whether or not I will be paid for the work I performed last week, and job prospects in this climate are few and far between. A lot of intelligent, competent, and genuinely good people — both attorneys and staff — have lost or are about to lose their jobs. I don’t understand why this is sad situation is something which you’d choose to celebrate. Your so-called “concern for public defenders” instead reeks of pettiness.
I don’t celebrate your loss of a job, or a firm, but I do appreciate the irony. Do you think your pals from law school who took jobs with the PDs or DAs were there on scholarship? Do they not also want a place to live, food to eat, clothing to wear? You say you’re not the stereotype, yet you complain about the hardship on you from this collapse because of your school loans while you were making $180,000 a year as a first year associate, plus bonus. Yet nothing strikes you as disingenuous about this?
As for a “lot of intelligent, competent, and genuinely good people,” the country is littered with them at the moment. The only difference is few came out of school to be paid such a ridiculously unworthy sum in the first place. And their prospects probably aren’t nearly as good as yours. Yet you worry only for yourself, and call me petty? I don’t celebrate your firm’s demise, but I can’t say that I’ll lose sleep over it.
Scott, I let go of that envy years ago. It only took a few days of p.d. work to realize that what Public Defender Dude said is true: “Criminal Law is so much better than Civil Law.” Poor Biglaw kids…
I came out of law school and went straight to Gibson, Dunn. That money is alluring. It took me 4 months to figure out it wasn’t worth it. I’m a public defender now and I’m paid just fine, plus I’m so much happier than any of my former colleagues. It is pity, not envy that I feel for them because I was on a full ride to law school, which is why I could walk away. I made my choice looking at my value system and my situation, why would I force it on someone else? To each his own. Also, Scott, if you are so concerned about unjust compensation, maybe we should ask why private defense lawyers take upwards of 5 grand from people who could easily qualify for a PD with full knowledge that they are going to plead them to a standard first just the same as if they appeared in pro per.
You’ve mixed a number of different issues together. First, concern for underpaid PDs is not some generic “unjust compensation” concern, and the attempt to create a strawman argument is remarkably underwhelming.
Second, if a defendant can afford counsel, then the defendant should retain counsel. The fact that they can “qualify” is nonsense if they have the means to retain counsel. Society does not provide free lawyers for fun or because a PD can achieve as good a result as a retained lawyer. It does so out of necessity to provide justice, not fiscal convenience to defendants with concealed assets. And as for private lawyers who take money to blindly plead them out, I have frequently criticized that practice.
So next time you want to construct a strawman, you will need to work a little harder at it. This one fails miserably. Nor does the fact that you’re okay with your circumstances, since you got a free ride through law school, mean that everyone else should feel as good as you. I’m happy that you got a free ride, but why then demonstrate such callousness for others who had to pay the freight?
Its not callousness, I’m just not going to fault those who choose to do something less meaningful for more money. That is their decision. Who are you mad at here? People who want to make money? If you want to talk about PDs being underpaid, that is one thing. In some states, including yours, they are. Drastically. That is not biglaw’s fault. Should we be mad at everyone who does something that you don’t consider valuable for lots of money or does biglaw deserve special attention? Why?
The funny part here is the tone you’ve taken with me. Don’t forget, I’m the one who IS a public defender. I’m the one who actually makes the financial sacrifice you laud. How much money do you make a year? I could triple my salary if I decided to go do private criminal defense practice, and to go back to biglaw would do about the same.
We can argue all day about who is technically entitled to indigent representation. I’d estimate at about 95% of the population those for whom it is next to financially impossible to pay for the kind of representation they receive from the public defender’s office so you then run into the problem of someone who has a little bit of money and therefore doesn’t technically qualify as indigent having to hire mediocre counsel meaning the only people who get good representation are those who can’t afford anything and those who can afford the real deal. Fortunately, in my county the courts seem to have recognized this and will generally appoint the PD to the category of folks who fall into “not rich enough to hire legitimate counsel,” much to the chagrin of the private defense bar.
I’m not creating a strawman, I’m overgeneralizing about the private defense bar as you’ve done about people who go to big firms out of law school. My generalizations, I believe, are far more justified and come from what appears to be more experience with those I’m generalizing about than you have with the biglaw kids you rail against.