Law Vibe

From Susan Cartier Liebel, Esq:

Last week I was invited to the Quinnipiac University School of Law Externship Program Reception which honors the supervisors who provided invaluable externship experience to the law students. In my opinion, the in-house legal clinic run by my very good friend, Carolyn Wilkes Kaas, and the externship program run by both Carolyn Wilkes Kaas and Cindy Slane, are truly incredible. Students in the externship program are placed with Federal Court Judges, The Governor’s Council, General Electric, Subway World Franchises, Inc., World Wrestling Entertainment, Federal Aviation Administration, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the booklet listing placement opportunities is pages long. The externships also include a slew of solos and small firms.

Now comes the odd part, or maybe it is not so odd. They select three students to speak to the attendees discussing their externship experiences. The three they selected were externs with the WWE, SEC and the Governor’s Council. Why not the extern with the solo practitioner? Of course, we all the know the answer to that now, don’t we? Where’s the prestige?

Another point of interest. If the students were placed with solos or small firms they could only work on pro bono work. They were not permitted to do work that was billable. Why can’t they work on a for-profit matter (which is more realistic) but the attorney agrees not to bill the client for their time? Why does the ‘matter’ have to be pro bono? (supposedly the first argument is that attorneys would then just want externs for slave labor. Do solos have less integrity then their in-house counsel counterparts? And the second argument is law schools have a responsibility to further work in the public interest. So, Subway-World Franchises fits into that equation how?) I just find that argument a little disingenuous.

And then I had the distinct pleasure of talking with a site supervisor who was completing her second year post-graduation clerkship for a federal judge. She was then going on to a well-respected boutique firm. As we talked she said she really admires solos and doesn’t want the Big Law firm culture because it doesn’t fit her needs. As we got further along in the conversation and the topic of my class came up she said, “all through law school I worked for a solo. It was the exposure I got there, including so many opportunities to write real world briefs from beginning to end which in large part got me my job with the federal judge.” Mmmmmm. And the bonus? She says she may end up solo yet.

And another oddity of the evening. There were two extraordinary placement supervisors, a two woman law firm that specializes in special education law. They are both wives and mothers and have a very dynamic practice. Their extern was my student who not only wants to go into this type of law but prior to law school taught special education. It was a perfect fit. These women are in the forefront of a huge trend and have a stellar operation. Why wasn’t this extern speaking on behalf of a fast growing segment of the law?

I don’t pretend to understand all the politics. But I do give kudos to Carolyn Wilkes Kaas and Cindy Slane for an outstanding externship program because they are ahead of the curve on this one having built this program up over the years, some site supervisors already having supervised more than thirty law students.

I’ll finish up with one last story. When I was in law school back in the early nineties our in house legal clinic was then an eight credit course. This was when I met Carolyn Kaas who was second in command at the legal clinic. We did the “trial from hell” which lasted more than one month. My co-counsel and I researched everything, prepped and examined and cross-examined all the witnesses.

I actually got pneumonia during the trial (and the judge had to threaten stopping the trial if I didn’t go home and take care of myself) and my co-counsel and I missed our finals because the trial ended on December 24th. (This case eventually ended up at the CT Supreme Court a couple of years later). Here was the kicker. Carolyn went to bat for us regarding our missed finals. We ultimately lost no credit and were able to make up our exams the first week of the new semester. But, ironically, that semester we were taking trial practice with a renowned trial attorney. We couldn’t complete the course and do our three hour mock trial. The attorney agreed to Carolyn’s plan to work out our grade based upon our experience in the clinic. However, this had to be approved by the tenured professors. For literally one hour they debated whether we should be given credit for our trial practice course when we had been unable to meet the stated requirements of the course. Finally, one lone professor stood up and said, “Let me see if I understand this correctly. These students missed doing their three hour fake trial while conducting a month long real trial and you are unsure if they should get credit for their trial practice class?” There was a collective ‘oh’ and we were given our credit. (This story was relayed to me by a little birdie in the room.)

Law school should be a mix of those who teach and those who practice. Both should have equal say in the curriculum. When this is done, the student wins.