I was never much of a fan of inspirational posters. I can remember that ubiquitous poster of a kitty cat hanging on a tree limb, with the words, “Hang in there, baby. Friday’s coming,” in almost every woman’s dorm room at college. I was also never much of a fan of cats.
While the old poster is a cheesy reminder of the past, inspirational posts live on. A particularly inspiring one comes from Susan Cartier Leibel, at her recently moved blog, http://buildasolopractice.solopracticeuniversity.com/2009/05/26/stop-telling-me-what-i-cant-do/.
As new lawyers, we are told over and over again that “we can’t” open our own practice right out of law school. Like my fourth grade teacher, these naysayers in the form of professors, career counselors, other lawyers, judges and family members are just projecting their fears upon you, maybe the very same fears that stopped them from venturing out on their own and pursuing their dreams. Find out why they are so fearful of you, so you can address the obstacles to the success they perceive to be insurmountable, one hurdle at a time.She’s right. You can. Anyone can open their own solo practice right out of law school. While there are a number of things you might want, there are really very few things you absolutely need. A telephone and a computer will largely cover it, provided you aren’t living out of a car. Maybe a pen, but you can usually find one lying around the courtroom and nab it when no one is looking.
You can open your own legal practice. Some perceived hurdles might present challenges you’re not willing to take on. That, however, is very different than saying, “I can’t.” If you’re just not willing to make those hard choices, that’s perfectly alright. But you absolutely can open your own law practice if you want to.
There is one more thing you’re going to need. Clients. You will need to find people who are willing to pay you for your services. It’s not the easiest thing to do, but it too can be done. There are plenty of people happy to show you, the newly-minted lawyer, how to sell yourself as the best thing since sliced bread to the public. For a small fee. If they can get a few people with cash to call your telephone number, then you’re in business.
Almost. There is still one dilemma. What do you know about actually representing a client? Maybe you can find your way to the courthouse with Mapquest, but do you know what to do once you get there? Some of you may have an idea, having either clerked your way to prosperity or paid attention in a law school clinic. It’s a start. Others wouldn’t know a notice of motion if it bit them on the butt. Of course, this doesn’t stop you from putting up a fetching website extolling your virtues, but it does present a dilemma when it comes to earning the money that those nice people want to throw at you.
There is a gap in Susan’s otherwise very inspiration post. It’s only focus is on your will to take a chance. But the chance you are really taking is with some other person’s life. There’s nothing in there about the damage you could do to someone if you take on a case that you’re not yet equipped to handle. You get paid. They get screwed. Is that okay with you?
Not to nitpick, but there is one “threat” posed by Susan with which I take issue. The naysayers aren’t fearful of you. As full of yourselves as you may be, you don’t pose a threat to us. We are, however, fearful of the potential for harm you can do to others and to the profession. Once you’ve got your ticket, you are a lawyer. You are entitled to hold yourself out as a lawyer, to offer your services as a lawyer, to stand up in court as a lawyer. But you are also expected to recognize your limitations as a lawyer. This is why there are a bunch of ethical considerations and disciplinary rules that apply to what you do going forward.
For the worst arguers in the bunch, the retort is that there are lawyers who have practiced for years who are utterly incompetent. Very true. Very unfortunate. Very problematic. Perhaps even more so than you going into private practice when you haven’t a clue. But two wrongs don’t make a right. You are responsible for yourself, and the fact that some other lawyer is an incompetent fool doesn’t make you a competent lawyer.
In tough times for those beginning their legal career, the lure of hanging out a shingle may well prove to color the vision of young lawyers to the extent that they care only about their own circumstances. Loans to pay off. Mouths to feed. Years of lost opportunity to catch up on. Business school friends making fun of your clothing. Maybe a BMW. Whatever. It’s hard to turn down the opportunity when a few hours and a cheesy website can turn you into the greatest lawyer ever.
But you need to ask yourselves whether you, if you were in trouble, would want you to be the person standing beside you. Somebody cares about that client who called, and they will entrust you with their loved one. Are you really prepared to take on that trust? Are you really?
Some will be able to represent clients right out of the box, at least with a little help and support. Most will not. With a little experience and a lot of effort, most will be capable of fulfilling their role as lawyer and performing adequately to take on the representation of human beings. There’s no shame in falling into the latter category; indeed, there’s honor in respecting the solemnity of your duty to be competent.
Don’t feel badly if you’re not one of the very few who should open your own practice on day one. Hang in there, baby. Competency’s coming.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

The New York Times has an article about Brian Deese a 31 year old Yale Law graduate who is in charge of dismantling GM. I realize that representing a client is very different from being in charge of dismantling GM, but what kind of message does this send about competence and who is competent to do what.
Not having read the article, I dunno. He seems quite young for such an extraordinary responsibility, but perhaps he’s a savant. Or perhaps he related to Chuck Schumer. What’s your take?
It is a political appointment so a different standard of “competence” applies. On reflection I guess his appointment does not say anything about what is competence in the real world.
SHG wrote: ” . . . there are really very few things you absolutely need. A telephone and a computer . . . . Maybe a pen, . . .”
You also need a checklist. See Carolyn Elefant’s post.
The key words are “absolutely need.” A checklist is not on the checklist.