Andrew P. Connors

I previously wrote about the difficult decision to attend law school and the problem of unsatisfactory legal writing in law school.  In the first article, I concluded that a prospective law student should consider–above all-else–whether he will enjoy reading, writing, and arguing and whether he has a reasonable aptitude for those things.  Once at law school, the student should persevere unless substantially low grades or other concerns suggest that the love and aptitude the student once thought he had has vanished.  In the second article, I commented on the intractable problem of the significant number of law students that seem unable to adequately write about a legal problem.  There, I concluded that practice is the most essential thing required to improving legal writing.  It seems to me that these two issues are interrelated, and an examination of them reveals much about whether law schools are actually producing “lawyers,” that is, professionals of reasonable competency.

The answer: “It depends.”  As with any form of education, the institution can only go so far.  I mentioned this in Notes to a Prospective Law Student.  A law student must really practice if he wishes to build the foundation for success as a licensed professional.  The practice of law must always include a significant amount of writing.  How could it not?  Yet, in legal academia, it is possible to avoid stringent writing to a significant degree.  Exams do not necessarily require good writing; with the limited time and closed universe presented by an exam, professors are to some degree lenient on student writing on an exam.  Some classes may require written assignments, but those assignments are not very rigorous and often lack depth.  If a student avoids moot court, mock trial, or law review, he can probably mostly avoid tackling new and interesting legal problems, and avoid the nasty process of researching, writing, and thinking.  To the extent the student may have some practice with these skills in an introductory research and writing course, expectations at that point are still low, and grading might again be relatively lenient.  In any event, the best 1L researcher, writer, and analyst may not fare so well by his 3L year if he has managed to avoid practicing those skills.  The same is true for attorneys in practice.  That’s why they call it practice, right?

So what does this all mean?  If you want to be a good lawyer, go out and be one.  Having a “J.D.” or even an “Esq.” after your name won’t make you one.  Work hard.  Research and write often.  Continually improve.  Perhaps law schools should require more stringent writing of all students, but this can only go so far.  You must make the difference in yourself through hard work and sacrifice. It is then when you will truly see the best shine through.