Not usually the handgun in our briefcases though.

On my way into court this morning and an attorney forgot that his firearm was in his briefcase… He was arrested in front of everyone and made a huge scene. Not a new attorney by any means, in fact, he’s a Managing Partner.

He also apparently does not hold a valid CCW permit.

I’m sure the local FB group is having a field day.

Pepperdine Law, where I went to school, just deleted their whole social media account. Guess glazing a Trump admin member who lied about being an attorney is not a good look for a law school.

Also, what’s with all the fake news about “attorney” vs “lawyer”? Both are the same thing.

Edit: they brought it back up between my post and now

and I feel... nothing? Yesterday, I went up against one of the best, if not the best, family law attorney in my jurisdiction. The hearing had been weighing on me for months. I just knew I was going to lose. He's been practicing 25 years to my 1.5. His 2nd chair was also goated. I knew I was cooked.

I planned every detail of my case. I went through all the deposition transcripts. I agonized over every pre-trial decision and email. I just knew I had missed something.

The day of the hearing comes. I ask my boss, who, up until this point, had provided very little support or oversight, to come with me. When we were walking through security at the courthouse, OC and his 2nd chair were in line in front of us. My heart fell to my asshole. That's when I realized I forgot to take my beta blockers. I'm cooked. I thought for the 1 billionth time. No way I'm making it through this without them.

My client, my boss, and I take the elevator up. OC is already there sitting on the bench by the courtroom door. He looks calm. His 2nd chair looks calm. The defendant looks calm. What do they know that I don't?

We stand a distance away. I can't help but keep looking over at them. My boss leans over and hisses at me to put my game face on. She says I look scared. Well, I am.

I get through the hearing. I get most of my evidence in. I forfeit some exhibits because I'm on a time limit so I make a game time decision to admit what I considered the most important evidence. We make closing arguments.

As the Judge is issuing her decision, I black out. I....won? How?

From my POV, I had fumbled through my objections and fumbled through my closing. How did I.... win?

I thought winning would feel more rewarding but it just feels like a fluke. Like maybe I just got lucky. Maybe the Judge granted the order because she felt bad for me. I was obviously out of my league.

I thought I would get a feeling of relief when this case was over. Instead, I feel...blank.

I won. Why do I still feel like a loser?

Maybe I just need a nap.

So, the new blonde lady has been saying she’s a lawyer, but isn’t a lawyer?

Tell me about this in real life - is it a serious criminal thing in the US? I’m not US based lawyer. It is an offence in my jx but I don’t recall anyone ever being prosecuted or even investigated.

Mid level associate at am200 law firm.

Just had my annual review. Billed just under 2100 hours this year, well above the minimum goal. Litigation. Clients love me, won several very large motions/arguments, work product is excellent, do things without any supervision. Partner told me there is zero issue with my intelligence, product, writing, capability, and I’m one of the very best associates we have ever had…if not the best.

The issue is the partner wants me billing 2300 or 2400 hour per year so that I can make a bunch of money as a partner at the firm. He told me every other associate who bills less than this is a loser. He called other partners in my office and in the firm losers. He said I should get up at 4 am and work late at night so that I can be a “good dad” without my work suffering. He said making $300k is a shit goal and for losers.

Basically my review was work 200-300 hours more solely so everyone can make more money.

In the end he said I am like a son to him and this is for my future financial wellbeing and no other reason. He wants me to make 7 figures so I can have a “comfortable life.” Apparently I need to bill 2400 hours to do that.

This sounds awful and makes me want to go in-house. Am I crazy?

Recently started taking depos for a construction case with a bunch of different parties, and although i've taken them in other real estate litigation and some fraud cases, this was a special breed of boring.

The way my brain works is usually to efficiently find out critical information that actually leads to results, and while I understand that there's strategy to weaving important questions into otherwise mundane ones to catch a deponent off-guard, the other attorneys in this particular case seem to be perfectly content to sit there all day droning on and on. The only silver lining I can think of is the billable time you can drain out of it, but idk if I have it in me to not fall asleep.

It’s been a journey to say the least, anyway I actually went Solo to Vegas and relaxed for 3 days this last weekend.

Had my first deposition today in months, I was plaintiff side plaintiff being deposed. It’s been months since my last depo, it was nice to get a positive reaction by my client at the end.

In the middle of it I was not sure if I could continue but I stuck with it and I think I did well!

I’m starting to take time to my own benefit and health!

I recently made partner at a small firm of ~25 lawyers, and am wondering if anyone else has had similar experiences - because it is not what I expected at all, and I'm seriously questioning whether it's time to make a change.

First, it came as a complete surprise. I found out after the vote had been taken, less than 24 hours before it was announced firm-wide. No conversations about what the expectations would be, or whether I even wanted to become a partner in the first place (and honestly, I never aspired to it). I felt I had no choice but to say "thank you" and just...be grateful.

The day-to-day feels almost exactly the same as being an associate, just... harder. Most work comes from the more senior partners who assign work to me without regard to my capacity to take the work. Whenever I say I'm at capacity and cannot complete an assignment within the requested timeframe, the response is usually, "well, you're a partner now - if you can't do it yourself, delegate it to an associate." And I wind up owning the assignment anyway. But as the most junior partner, I can't get any of the associates to do anything for me, because they are all overloaded themselves and prioritize work from the more senior partners over me.

Then there are the productivity expectations. My take-home nearly doubled after the first year, so I thought to myself, perhaps I don't need to bill so much anymore. I asked about billing expectations, and they told me that as long as I'm billing enough to cover my expenses, and receiving distributions, I'm making money for the firm and all is well. But fast forward 9 months - I'm covering my expenses and receiving distributions, yet now they're telling me my hours are way too low, and I need to either get them back up or they'll boot me to independent contractor status. I expressed surprise/confusion over this, and was basically told that since I only generate a handful of my own clients, I still need to make a certain amount of money for the other partners by billing hours to their clients.

Perhaps this is totally naive of me to ask but, isn't that what an associate does? Does partnership just mean you keep doing the same thing, and make more money? Is there no middle-ground?

I'm just curious whether this is normal for junior partners in small firms - basically looking for a gut check. Was I totally misunderstanding the nature of partnership when I thought I would have more agency over the quantity of work I took on? Was it unrealistic to think I'd have the option to scale back on hours as long as I was still covering my own expenses, and still making money for the other partners (albeit less than I'd be making them if I were billing 1800+ like an associate would)?

I've never worked anywhere else, so I'd really appreciate whatever perspectives you guys can share.

EDIT: Since everyone is assuming non-equity partner, I should clarify here: I get a regular draw, quarterly distributions, and a K-1. I don’t have a salary. This is why I thought (however naively) that if I billed less, the only person I was hurting was myself.

I’m about to enter my second year of practice. Currently job hunting. I have a job but am looking for a better and more stable work environment.

I interviewed with a firm and they really liked me and want to hire me asap. Their offer was $90,000 flat salary with a 2050 billable hour requirement….. Am I crazy or is that like…. Insane? The other places I’ve been looking into/interested in offer about that much with a 1800-1900 billable hour requirement. Some with no requirement at all. I should obviously turn this down right?

EDIT: I live in a mid-size city. Not a major one. Living expenses here are low.

I was torn. I posted about it here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Lawyertalk/comments/1vst21v/torn_about_lateralling_as_a_partner_after_such_a/

I am genuinely happy. I like practicing law again. Most of my partners were simultaneously sad I was going and happy for me. I had a good paralegal who I could not take with me cry. I had clients who had non-waivable conflicts with New Firm get upset but be happy for me. I had sizeable clients come with me.

I did everything by the book and the rules of ethics. One large client told me it was the most ethical and conscientious exit that they had ever seen, then joined me. The partners I wanted to leave were and are still butthurt. The people I felt bad about leaving genuinely are still friends.

It was excruciating making the decision and doing everything on the high road but it has all paid off and I am truly happy at my new spot.

And there was a poster or two who glibly posted I was replaceable. I am not and was not. I had a niche practice in a niche jurisdiction, right u/gigglemanesq ? Reports from friends are that there is genuine panic about what to do in my absence. We have a unique bar.

I appreciate the subreddit for helping me process the enormity of my decision and I made the right one.

First year litigation associate here. I just checked my time and realized I’m already at 138 billable hours this month. We’re not even halfway through October.
Between depositions, motions, trial prep, and the endless emails, every time I finish something, three more things land on my desk……..

Please stop contacting me with porn site esque ads about a “lawyer opportunity near me” with no details on the billable hour requirement, salary, location, or even the firm name.

Please stop calling me right at 8:00am and right when I get off work and am trying to decompress.

Please stop calling me on my work phone, sending me work emails, texts to my personal number, and LinkedIn messages when we have never spoken.

Please stop acting like a pushy frat bro who won’t take no for an answer when I tell you to leave me alone.

Please stop saying you’re “very impressed with my experience” when it’s clear you haven’t read my profile because you’re offering me a role in a completely separate practice area.

Please stop ignoring what I tell you I’m looking for and offer me roles that are not at all relevant.

Please stop ignoring me the second I ask you for an update after not hearing from you for weeks.

Please stop making me BEG you to schedule interviews after an employer expresses interest in moving forward.

Please. Stop.

I’m about 80% sure that’s what was happening, as did our expert who was being deposed, and a law clerk who shadowed. You could tell the attorney had no idea how to ask follow up questions about the opinions of the expert, and so every fifth question or so there would be a long pause where counsel would turn to another screen, type something, wait a second, and then appear to be skim reading what’s on the screen, before turning back to the camera to ask something generic and silly like “How can you be sure the traffic signal was operating properly?” or “So you’re saying that if you didn’t have this video you wouldn’t be able to do your calculations?” only vaguely connecting to the prior topic.

I’ve had experts tell me before they’ve had depos like this that drag on for hours longer than they should’ve because whatever software being used is just designed to keep asking follow up questions, not actually elicit useful information.

I have more depos with this attorney and I’m not sure what my options are. Yeah I get it that our expert is getting paid regardless and it’s just making the attorney look bad, possibly to our benefit, but it feels weird to do what I did today which is just sit there with a blank expression while we wait for the noticing party to ask for another question prompt.

And let’s assume for the sake of this question (cause idk still if I’m gonna say or do anything) you’re 100% confident someone is using ChatGPT during the depo. Do you put something on the record about it? Call them out off record?

Assalamu Alaikum everyone,

I recently graduated with my law degree and am preparing to start active practice. As I build my career, I want to take practical, high-value steps to strengthen my profile, deliver better outcomes, and establish a solid professional foundation.

My current skills & background:

**DRAFTING** : Competent in both handwritten and computer-based legal drafting (pleadings, notices, petitions).

**COMMUNICATION AND ADVOCACY**: Strong spoken communication, court craft, and client interaction.

**LEGAL RESEARCH**: Sound base in statutory interpretation and case law research, which I am actively working to refine.

To senior advocates, legal professionals, and chamber partners:

What specific skills or practical tasks beyond basic drafting/court appearances made the biggest difference early in your career?

How can a fresh advocate build credibility and showcase value to senior chambers or corporate/tax clients?

Are there niche areas (such as tax filing, corporate compliance, or legal writing) you recommend picking up early?

If any seniors are open to offering mentorship, sharing advice, or discussing potential opportunities/chamber attachments, I would welcome a direct message or reply!

Looking forward to your insights!

I’ve been doing personal injury litigation for two years now, I’ve had experience in both plaintiff and defense. I’ve come to the conclusion that I hate litigation and personal injury. I really want to do something that still pays a six figure salary but isn’t these. The angry, combative nature of the field isn’t for me. Contracts is apparently getting phased out because of AI, trusts and wills is hard to break into without a tax background. Any suggestions? I’m also trying to start a family in the near future so I’m not looking for a mergers and acquisitions type of job where I’m working 20 out of 24 hours a day. Any women or moms on here can give me some advice? Or even ideas for a field that I can explore for a career field switch?

Eating lunch and thinking about this, so bear with me.

Most of the talk about professional responsibility regarding AI has been in terms of confidentiality, privilege, and hallucinations. Honestly I think hallucinations are becoming less of an issue if you’re using decent tools and actually checking the work. And the fake-cite-in-a-brief stuff was always a lawyer problem, not an AI problem. I also think the courts will sort out the confidentiality and privilege issues in favor of broad use of AI with both remaining in tact except in fairly narrow circumstances, so this post isn’t meant to be about those.

What I think is coming next is Rule 1.1 and duty of competency (ignoring that citing fake cases is at its heart, a form of competency issue) .

I started out in a narrow very specialized transactional practice area and developed strong narrow skills the traditional ways. Over the last year I’ve drifted into general transactional and corporate work: commercial leases, general counsel type stuff, NDAs, employment agreements and more. A big part of why that’s been doable is AI. It does a lot of the legwork and gives me something to test against my own judgment. And if I’m being honest, I could probably fake my way through something like trusts and estates now, which would have been completely off the table for me a few years ago.

The rules already let you get competent in a new area by studying up or by association with a competent lawyer in the practice area. AI just makes that way faster and cheaper and reduces the need for association and mentoring, while removing much of the checks and balances that cam with mentoring. And it allows for learning in real time (which is another issue, client billing practices, of it's own). But there’s a difference between actually becoming competent and being able to crank out work that looks competent, and AI makes that difference a lot harder to spot. And the potential to crank out great work on paper could quickly be overshadowed if called to defend that work in a court without an full understanding of it and the ability to consult the AI and test its answers in real-time. A lawyer in this situation become instantly incompetent for the task at hand.

The part that bugs me most is the unknown unknowns. You can check what the AI tells you. It’s a lot harder to catch the issue it never brought up. In an area you actually know, you notice what’s missing. In one you don’t, you probably won’t. And in something like estate planning you might not find out you screwed up until the client is dead.

Same thing with junior attorneys. They can turn in really polished work now without the judgment behind it. Polish used to tell you something about how deep someone’s understanding was. Not so much anymore and they may literally never develop personal competence because supervising attorney's expect higher level work than junior attorneys should be able to produce, and on tighter time tables.

I also wonder if malpractice carriers end up policing this before the bars do. And at some point does the flip side happen, where not using AI becomes the competence problem?

Curious where other people are drawing the line. Have you taken on new areas because of these tools? Turned stuff down you could technically produce now? Anyone seen carriers or firm GCs start asking about it?

New Republic - Did Trump’s New Press Secretary Lie About Being a Lawyer?

Popular Information- Is she?

Curious if anyone could make the case that she is.

I am an attorney, approximtely 10 years experience. Was prosecutor, now private criminal defense at small firm (<5 lawyers, <5 other staff). Our defense area is generally in a classic niche area with plenty of work in our jurisdiction (think motor vehicle stuff, drugs, etc.). 5 years into this role.

I know I am good at my job. I don't hate the substance of my work, nor do I love or obsess over it. I don't have another type of legal job or role in mind that I think I would enjoy more at this point in time. I have worked 9-5pm desk jobs in the past, and they aren't for me. Like many of you, I am that classic Type A, overachieving employee. Nights, weekends, whatever the job demands. I am not nieve to the tradeoffs that come along with living this way.

Current compensation, all-in, about 175k. I have done the breakdown on the "hourly" rate, not a great success. It does provide a very solid floor for lifestyle in my area of the country (HCOL). No equity stake.

I am quite disillusioned with my firm and the other attorneys I work with. I know I am used as a form of deoderant for a variety of short-sighted, bad, and sometimes outright lazy firm management practices and coworker behaviors. I am basically the only enduring associate in my time here, at least 2 others have come and gone in that time (both were let go, but at the end of the day you could deem it a mutual bad fit, criminal defense isn't for everyone, nor is this firm).

Although I did not raise these issues with boss at prior points, I have been doing so lately. I have been fairly direct about them. Boss does the classic listen/acknowledge, but not actually change anything maneuver. If anything, my role expands without more compensation reguarly.

I want equity stake, boss says no. I do everything from A-Z. Boss rebuttal is that firm does most of origination work, and this is true. It is also true that many repeat clients these days come back looking for me directly, so in some ways not a true origination, but it is more than nothing. If I went solo these former clients may be more likely to contact firm out of not knowing how to get in touch with me directly, a factor I am aware of. Our firm has no shortage of work, if anything, we turn some work away or can't handle it all. It has always been this way.

My question: Given what you know from I have said, am I crazy for walking away from this and hanging my own shingle? Like anyone contemplating that idea, I am terrified at the idea of having to generate all clients. At the same time, I look at my contemporaries and have no doubt in myself to be able to "figure it out." I work 70-90 hours per week, my biggest conern is that I don't think I can give it a true go until I am no longer working here. I have laid some basic ground-work (website domain, motion/pleading bank compiled, email set-up, some of the basics). I have the savings for 12 months of runway, though I am quite terrified at the idea of losing it and failing.

I understand I may be trading one set off problems for another, but if I owned all of these problems as truly mine with the chance of upside to if I can solve them, I feel it would be easier to get out of bed in the morning. I fear I don't know what I don't know.

Anyways, I suppose this equal parts rant and looking for advice from those who have been here before, especially if there is anything you wish you had considered when in a similar situation in the past.

Longtime lurker of this sub, and on an unrelated note will add I appreciate all who have posted before me. We are truly all in this together, and more alike than different, regardless of practice area or experience level.

This is half looking for advice and half just needing a hug. I’m in my second trimester but I had to switch jobs due to my other firm completely collapsing.

I just need to say, yes second trimester is better but I honestly am just so emotional and want to cry every day. Learning a new job is so hard, and I’m always anxious about my cases (I’m about 3.5 years into practicing law so still newish).

I’m always exhausted and have trouble staying focused.

I am a second year family law attorney. I’ve done many hearing and smaller half day bench trials, but I have my first major one later next week. It’s a 2 day event, a few experts are going to be there, and there are a lot of facts. Frankly, I think, and know, I am a worse attorney than the other side because they have 20 years of experience. I feel like I don’t know the evidence rules as well as she does and I feel a bit overwhelmed. Do you all have any similar stories or how you like to prepare for trials like this? looking for any advice or encouragement.

Ive been an attorney coming up on finishing my second year in December. I work in insurance defense and finally starting to feel like im getting the hang of the day to day part of the job. What are some bigger picture things I need to focus more of my attention on?

This question is mostly for my fellow governmental attorneys.

Background: I am an SME in the legal office of a federal agency. I spend about 50-75% of my time on a specific legal issue involving interpreting and implementing court orders - and I’m the only person in-house who knows anything about these things. Everyone accepts that I own this area of law and related processes within our agency.

We’re expecting a massive work increase from a bill that will likely pass this year. While the work related to these orders may be significant, I expect little of it to be truly “legal.” We’ve already reviewed and interpreted these orders but we’ll need to apply the old orders to the new stuff under the bill. I would describe most of that work to be administrative.

Today I was put onto a team tasked with a contract for hiring outside counsel to do the work related to the court orders after bill becomes law. Am I helping the agency outsource my job? I cannot even imagine what outside counsel will do with these things - legal review is complete and the only question is implementing the orders under the new legislation. I expect I will need to review all their work anyway given the highly technical nature of the issues and the fact that, even if outside counsel have some expertise with the issues generally, our agency implementation is its own dog.

With current leadership I can absolutely believe they have no interest in employing subject matter experts anymore so I think some panic is reasonable. So I’m panicking.

Am I overreacting? Should I panic more? I appreciate any advice or wisdom any of you might have.

note: this was previously deleted as the overbot did not like my flair. I’ve tried a different one in hopes of evading its wrath. Don’t ban me, bro!

I’m 39, turning 40 soon, and a second-career attorney. I passed the bar in 2025, so I’m still early in my legal career. Before law school, I spent 10 years in business development, policy, and international development, eventually reaching director-level positions and earning a mid-six-figure salary.
I’m also a mom to a young son with special needs, and helping him adjust to school and find the right supports has been challenging. I’ve struggled to find a legal job that allows me to be present for my son while still building a meaningful career.
I’ve received two offers, both at $90K:
Option 1: ART/IVF law
Completely remote.
Transactional work involving surrogacy agreements and reproductive law.
Interesting practice area, but I’m concerned about long-term earning potential and career mobility.
Option 2: Family law firm
Two days in the office, three remote.
The culture respects family needs etc.
Litigation involving custody, adoption, international law, and other family law matters.
Broader experience that I think might open more doors and help me increase my salary in a year or two.
Honestly, neither salary feels great given my previous career. But I understand that I’m starting over in many ways as an attorney, and flexibility is incredibly important right now.
I’m leaning toward family law litigation because I think it could provide a stronger foundation and better opportunities to eventually return to a higher salary. However, I’m concerned about the demands of litigation and whether the remote ART position might be a better fit for my family.
As a first-generation professional, I don’t have a network of attorneys in my family to turn to for advice.
Am I thinking strategically, or am I overestimating how easily I can increase my salary after 18–24 months of litigation experience? Would you prioritize fully remote work and flexibility, or broader litigation experience and potentially better long-term opportunities?
I’d especially appreciate perspectives from second-career attorneys and parents who’ve navigated demanding legal careers with young children. I’m looking for honest advice, not just reassurance. What would you do?

Edit: Thank you all for your feedback so far!!!!