Let’s Take a Break

1. Recreating a scene from Rock ‘N’ Roll High School or perhaps State v. Wiggins, 272 N.C. 147 154, 158 S.E.2d 37, 42 (1967) the kids of UNC Law came running out of class on Wednesday. It’s Fall Break for us and based on the looks of desperation on the faces I saw people are in serious need of some R&R.

2. Riley smiled at me for the first time this week. It was really gratifying to see her recognize me, and on some level be amused enough to give me a little grin. Maybe, she just finds the bags under my eyes, and vein throbbing on my forehead from lack of sleep funny. Either way, I’ll take it.

3. Yesterday I spent four hours reading and taking notes for Property. There was only 13 pages of reading! To cut myself a little slack I will admit that the first case in that reading was by the professor’s own admission one of the toughest of the year. Still, I wish I could work faster while still retaining all the material. My current setup is to read the case, highlight it, and take notes in the margins. Next I hammer out case briefs into my note taking software. The initial step gives me a detailed view of the material (facts, procedural history), and the second step is where I really make sure I understand everything that’s going on a higher level (issue, rule, analysis).

4. Having been immersed into the educational system again after a reprieve of about five years it has been interesting to look objectively at just how it all works. The law school classroom is sort of two-faced. On the one hand the professors ask for opinions on the cases we study and the concepts we cover. You’re given time to make your case, but then the professor swoops in with:

a. more questions;

b. outright disagreement; or

c. a blank stare that tells you nothing before moving on.

So while you’re given the chance to participate the professor is still left holding all of the cards. It is very rare that in a purely Socratic classroom you will ever be told that you’re “right.” There’s a strong case to be made that this is in fact a good thing. In a courtroom you’re very seldom 100% “right.” There’s a spectrum and I suppose this experience prepares you for that. I think I’ll be rereading The Glass Bead Game again soon, and thinking more about just what role law school should hold in the academic and “real” world.

5. There’s impending doom on the horizon. My mother in-law has been living with us since Riley was born, and assisting us with the late nights, early mornings, and all the chores around the house. She’s a saint. However, she’s heading home to Long Island at the start of next month. I can’t say that she hasn’t earned it.

The problem is that I’m a full time law student, and my wife is starting her full-time job again soon. On a positive note she works from home. I just don’t see how she can do both without someone to be here in the house helping her out with the baby, and cleaning. Sara is adamantly against hiring a nanny or a cleaning lady. She’d prefer it if I kicked in, and picked up the slack. The problem is that I’m 45 minutes away from campus, and I typically am out of the house from 6:00 am – 7:30 pm. Then I have more reading to do when I get home. That doesn’t leave much time. We’ll figure it out, but it’s going to be tough.

Somewhere in this image is Dean Boger...

Hell Week

I learned more about myself this week than in any other time period so far in law school. It was filled with highs and lows. Here are five things I want to share with you.

1. The reading assignments got much more voluminous this week. It wasn’t unusual to get 20 + pages per class. For most of the classes this was about double what we normally have. This meant that from Monday-Wednesday I was up until 1:30 am on average studying. By Thursday night I had thrown in the towel and book briefed my reading for that night. I imagine that now that many of our professors have fallen behind on the syllabus we’ll be picking up the pace moving ahead.

2. On Wednesday I had an interview for the position of 1L Coordinator for the Pro Bono Board. It was an odd setup with the meeting lasting only 15 minutes, and each member of the board asking me one question. It was without a doubt my worst performance in an interview. My answers weren’t to the point, and I didn’t articulate the overall themes I had hoped to touch on. Sloppy. The highlight was at the end of the meeting when I attempted to exit the room by walking through a closet. Nothing screams leadership material like the inability to identify a proper exit.

3. The worst apart about spending so much time at the library is that it detracts from my time at home with my ladies. I worry that Riley isn’t seeing me enough. Finding a balance is challenging, but I’m going through this to give her the kind of life she deserves. I hope she understands.

4. I forgot to mention this before, but our class elected a president. He looks like someone else in the executive branch, but at a higher level. You be the judge. Judson is a great guy, and I’m pleased that he’ll be representing our class.

5. The main source of anxiety this week for my fellow 1Ls at UNC was our practice exams. They count for exactly zilch. It’s just a dry run for our finals later in the year. Going through the process of making rough outlines, and reviewing some of what we’ve covered already was fairly helpful. I feel good about my answers, and regardless of the results I’m glad it kicked my butt into gear with regard to pulling together outlines. The best question was created by my property professor and it centered around Carlos Boozer of the Utah Jazz and Prince. The fact pattern included painting a house purple, installing purple rugs, and beauty salon chairs on the premises. Of course the title of this case was “Purple Pain.” Amazing.

Freak Out via bunchofpants on Flickr CC

Riding the Whirlwind

I’ve been very, very busy since the start of school, but what’s the point of a blog that never updates? Here are five things I’ve learned since last we spoke.

1. Law school is a lot of fun. I’ve been out in the work world for the past five years, and returning to an academic setting has been refreshing. The stimulating work has pushed me to grow intellectually, and that really appeals to me. I’ve really begun to see what an intricate blend of philosophy, economics, policy and compassion the study of law is.

2. There are great restaurants in Chapel Hill. Two of my favorites are the Spotted Dog and Butternut Squash.

3. The Socratic method is a blessing and a curse. It really does hone your thinking and force you to stand and deliver. The analogy to being in a courtroom with a judge is an apt one. The professor and judge each have a profound understanding of the law and want you to clarify your positions in a coherent fashion. I enjoy the process of active learning that it presents. Being taught via the Socratic method is a curse when you have unprepared classmates, particularly obtuse material, a condescending professor, or a tendency to run off on unrelated tangents. It can be easy to zero in on inconsequential details and miss the big picture.

4. Being a father is amazing. I operate on almost no sleep most days but holding my little girl is worth it. She’s going to change the world, just wait.

5. UNC Law is full of special people. When my wife went into labor, numerous people offered to help me by supplying notes. My civil procedure professor gave me a UNC onesie as a gift. I’ve already forged friendships with a collection of superb folks. Everyday I’m inspired by how hard everyone works here and the extent they’re willing to go to help each other.

My wife Sara and our daughter Riley Quinn Miller.

On the Precipice

So tomorrow starts the end of one era of my life and the start of another. When I walk into Van Hecke-Wettach Hall for orientation I’m going to have a smile on my face. It’s been a hard road but it has been enlightening so far.

The Old Era:

• Table for two
• Free time taken up by graphic novels (Sandman, Powers, Lucifer, Fables, etc.), movies of the thriller and drama variety and Internet tomfoolery (boingboing.net, mashable.com, offworld.com, etc.)
• A financial cushion
• Two weeks of vacation
• Working 9-6 five days a week

The New Era:

• Table for three
• Free time is a thing of the past
• Financial instability
• More vacation time but less relaxing
• Class from 9-5 five days a week and nights and weekends full of studying

That being said, I can’t wait. Bring on the baby, law school and everything else. Life is good.

What’s Left?

So last night I polished off Reading Like a Lawyer. It was a satisfying experience with some really quirky cases thrown in to read. The advice was solid and forced me to think about something I don’t usually focus on: How can I read more efficiently? What makes the book even more intriguing is that I’m going to have the opportunity to meet the writer in person later this month. She’s a Clinical Professor of Law and Assistant Dean for Legal Writing and Academic Success at UNC Law. Her book was the last one I had set aside to read as a pre-1L. I’ve still got three weeks left and so I’m left with spare time to prep prior to school kicking off. So what exactly is left for me to do?

1. Purchase a few of these hot little apps for my iPod Touch. The feedback I’ve heard about them has largely been positive and interesting. I’m thinking that I’ll be able to use them to study on the go and fill up some of the spare time I might waste in waiting rooms. (Also, there’s a certain nerdiness about them that I find irresistible.)

Law in a Flash: Civil Procedure Part One (iPhone/iPod Touch Application)

2. Searching out and reading blogs by UNC professors. So far I’ve found Voiceless and Is That Legal?. Hoping to find a few more.

3. I’ll be be attending the Law School Edge Course put on by Kaplan at Chapel Hill. Now I’m sure that many of you are scoffing at the idea of paying for a prep course like this. I feel the same way and that’s why I wasn’t sold on it until I realized it was free. That works for me. I just hope I don’t end up owning a time share at the end of it. 😉

Where do I sign?

4. Having a little fun. I’m trying to pack in a bunch of dinners out with my wife, walks with my dogs, beers with friends and some reading for pleasure. In the next year I’m going to become a law school student and a father for the first time. There won’t be much time for anything else besides that!

First sonogram of Riley Quinn Miller.

Five Funniest Fictional Attorneys

1. Barry Zuckerkorn What’s not to love about Barry? He’s very good. Too bad the Bluths weren’t a real family. They kept Barry living the high life and probably could support an entire practice of out-of-work attorneys.

WATCH: Barry gets fired.

2. Lionel Hutz Voiced by the vocally gifted Phil Hartman, he first appeared on the Simpsons in Season 2. His ineptitude and desperation fits our times quite nicely I think.

WATCH: Lionel Hutz pulls babysitting duty.

3. Single Female Lawyer I’ll be honest with you. I just threw this one in for the reference factor. Obscure enough?

WATCH: Remember Ally McBeal?

4. Jackie Chiles Jackie has all the swagger of Magnum P.I. and the loquaciousness of Matlock. We the jury, find him to be hilarious.

WATCH:

5. Johann Scott Scrimshire Oh man, this guy is the best! The best scene is where he rides a bike down the street and he’s hanging out for all the world to see and… *pause* Wait, this guy is real?

READ: Apparently riding a bike naked takes a little practice but once you’ve done it once it’s like, well riding a bicycle.

Future Primitive: My Vision of the Law Firm of the Future

*Disclaimer* I’m a neophyte in the legal world. The following ideas may be half-baked, ill-conceived and/or starry-eyed. I’m a dreamer and I like to share what’s on my mind. If you see holes in my logic or ideas please let me know in the comments section.

I’ve been thinking about how I would run a law firm if I was in charge. With the wave of recent layoffs, the threat of outsourced legal solutions and technological innovations changing the way everyone does business it seems that change might be coming for many folks whether they like it or not.

Basic Concept: Small, scalable litigation shop focused on balancing quality of life, excellent service and superior usage of available technology. The firm would be run like a dot-com start-up.

Why small? Given the ballooning salaries of the past few years it seems logical to make every effort to keep overhead low. This would be accomplished by running a virtual office utilizing apps built on the cloud like Google Wave. Staying lean gives us a larger margin and allows profits to go to partners instead of office space. It also provides an opportunity to avoid wasteful bureaucracy and insures we’re agile enough to outmaneuver competitors.

Why scalable? Litigation often comes in spurts and goes through tough times (like now) when the economy hits the skids. Rather than retaining full-scale support on a permanent basis we would employ contract attorneys for document intensive review, overseas e-discovery, coding and forensics help as necessary and virtual assistants to handle much of the paralegal work. The core team of 5-10 partners/members would always be in place but would still work virtually.

Quality of Life

From a professional perspective the firm would be run using an open business model that stressed transparency and equity in making business decisions. Each partner would have an equal say in what cases we chose to work on and the distribution of work would be influenced by the methodology suggested in the theory of participatory economics as viewed through the lens of people like Michael Albert. The firm would not offer benefits such as health care, retirement or other perks but would opt for a higher profit per partner instead. This is based on the assumption that intelligent individuals know best what to do with their earnings. Time off and work hours would be very flexible and based on current work-flow.

There would be a distinct effort to inspire firm morale through pro bono work and community involvement through projects like Lawyers Without Borders, Legal Aid and other worthy causes. The firm would vote on which projects to pursue and the quantity of resources to allot to these efforts.

Excellent Service

There would be an emphasis on keeping the firm customer-centric. Zappos would serve as an inspiration and measuring stick. E-commerce is clearly not the same as the legal world but putting clients first makes good business sense across seemingly disparate boundaries.

Our partners would be free of billable hour requirements. This would allow them to focus on providing the service that each client requires instead of meeting an arbitrary quota. Before the start of cases there would be a planning phase where clients would discuss their goals and where our team would plan a strategy to attain those goals through litigation. Obviously boundaries and reality checks would be in order but our focus would be on attaining the goals set forth in the preliminary meetings.

These tactics would hopefully lead to an upsurge in client referrals and repeat business. By outperforming our competitors in meeting expectation and keeping cost low through the methods discussed above our firm will begin to build a nice book of business.

Superior Usage of Technology

1. E-discovery Rather than shying away from large volumes of data we would embrace it. Using the outsourced solutions outlined above we’ll embrace ESI as a leveler. Culling the data aggrisively and lobbying hard for cost-sharing of the discovery cost will be an important factor to our success.

2. Social Sourced Solutions As a small firm, we’ll lack expertise on some important issues that other larger firms might have at their disposal. We’ll lean on an active online community to fill in the gaps. By leveraging social media like blogs, social networks and wikis our firm will attempt to find highly specialized knowledge where it lives online. It might be advantageous to eventually host this conversation via a lawyer-driven social site that we would maintain. This active community would be useful as a free repository of information, testing ground for tactics and a forum for public debate on unclear issues.

3. Collaborative and Enterprise Tools We would emphasize the utilization of free tools provided by companies like Google to share and communicate with clients and co-workers. As often as possible these tools should be open source and we would seek to improve them and share our work with the community. Partnering with other small out of market firms to work on open source document review software, VOIP systems and other DIY fixes would be a good start. We would lead a community movement and would use the social capital we accumulated through our pro bono and communal aid to resolve some of our technical issues at a reduced cost. The firm would offer to share our solutions with non-profits if we worked in tandem with these organizations to create useful legal tools.

Clients

Our ideal clients would be small to mid-sized start-up firms. In general, people like to do business with companies that are similar to their own. We’d strive to match their culture and values. The work we would do for them would be IP litigation, tech law and various other odds and ends. Our focus would be on being their de facto GC until they’re ready to grow beyond us. Eventually one might blossom into a Google or Facebook and in that case we would scale up to meet their needs.

We would never centralize too much risk in one client and would seek to keep our client list diversified and long. In addition to the traditional legal services we would offer there would be a selection of packages that clients could select. Some examples might be “Corporate Start-Up,” “Small Scale Litigation,” and so on. These projects would be farmed out to a pre-approved list of contract attorneys and be charged at a set rate. It would commoditize our less valuable services and provide an additional revenue stream.

The Case Against the Abolition of Intellectual Property

I’ve been taking a break from my regularly scheduled program of reading books designed to make me a lean, mean law student machine and have been digesting Michael Boldrin and David K. Levine’s book Against Intellectual Monopoly. Essentially they advocate for completely wiping the slate clean and getting rid of all intellectual property including copyright, trademark and patents. Their argument is that these devices discourage competition, don’t foster growth, amount to monopolies and don’t serve their intended purposes. 

Some caveats before I get down to my thoughts so far on this controversial work. First, the book was penned by economists and not by attorneys and thus their analysis primarily looks at factors like competitive theory, cost-benefit and so on.  Second, I’m new to the IP game so if something I say is pure buffoonery feel free to light me up in the comments section. Third, I’m over halfway through this book but have not finished it.

1. After knocking out about 100 pages of the book I suddenly became curious about whether this particular piece of intellectual property was copyrighted. Sure enough when I flipped to the front  of the book there was a circled “c” waiting there for me. 

Now I’m sure the authors would make the case that their publisher refused to listen to their requests to abolish the copyright protection. Then why didn’t they release the book themselves? I have a theory on that.

2. Musicians, authors and their ilk generally don’t publish their own works because they lack the means of distribution and printing. You might say that these opportunities are monopolized by those that own them. Eliminating one monopoly really won’t solve the larger issues outlined in the book if you aren’t able to create equity across the board.

3. The radical realignment of property to create a level playing field only can take place if every country decides to play ball. Can you imagine the chaos we’d have with a variety of countries all doing what they wanted with regard to copyright law. Oh wait, that’s what we have now and it has lead to rampant piracy in many Asian countries.

As far as I can tell the “advantage of being first” described in the book hasn’t disuaded pirates from taking a large chunk of the media industries profits. Levine and Boldrin suggest that the companies in question should cede this revenue for the larger good. I’m not sure that I really see this as a valid argument for someone copying a work they didn’t assist in marketing, finnancing or writing. With greater risk comes greater reward and I personally think it might be in the interest of the greater good to protect this right.

4. With regard to patents I became concerned when reading this book about unscruplous people creating knock-off products with exactly the same packaging as reputable manufacturers. If this were merely Gucci bags this wouldn’t be much of an issue but if we’re talking about medication, children’s toys or food that’s a whole other matter. Without IP how would brands differentiate their products and protect their identities? The consumer ends up paying the highest price since they can’t tell a dangerous product from a safe one. 

5. This one is a gut reaction but I can’t help but fear that in the absence of legal protections smaller companies with great ideas would somehow be ripped off anyway. The sans-patent process I envisioned goes something like this:

A. Micro-Tech has a swell new idea regarding widgets.

B. Micro-Tech lacks resources and operates in a heavily leveraged state with VC money that the investors are eager to recoup. 

C. Mega-Tech takes notice of the widget idea and ask Micro-Tech to pitch their idea to them as they are interested in acquiring it.

D. Micro-Tech gives away as few ideas as possible in the pitch as the creditors and VC folks cross their fingers on a big payday from Mega-Tech via a buyout.

E.  Mega-Tech agrees in principle to purchase Micro-Tech. Bottles pop and everyone rejoices. Oh but there’s just one catch. “Our people need to kick the tires on your idea a little bit more prior to plunking down the hard cash.” 

F. The process of wooing Mega-Tech has taken time and money away from Micro-Tech’s core business. Everyone is impatient to turn a profit. Under pressure from mounting bills and investors chomping at the bit they acquiesce to Mega-Tech’s demands.

G. The offer falls through six months later after lots of bureaucratic red tape. Having taken a good long look at Micro-Tech’s idea the R&D team of Mega-Tech is well on their way to copying it in the next three months. 

H. Facing competition from a rival with vastly superior resources, time lost while wooing Mega-Tech and jaded investors Micro-Tech folds.

Am I just being cynical? Perhaps. Would the market work out the inequities described above? Maybe. The system of IP needs to reform but I don’t think throwing out the baby with the bathwater is necessarily the best way to approach this. Once I’m more savvy and do some additional reading I’ll suggest what I think might work.

Starting To Get It

So I’ve been MIA for a bit. There have been posts that I started but died before they got off the ground and for the most part I’ve just been reading my collection of law blogs and working my way through One L, How To Succeed in Law School and now Getting To Maybe. I’m about halfway through GTM and I feel that I’m definitely starting to get some of the concepts I’ve been reading about.

The law is not unlike an onion with increasingly complex layers. Also like an onion as you progress deeper there are likely to be tears. Between the forks in the facts, forks in the law and twin forks you’ll be searching for an etiquette handbook to see which fork is which.

While all of this felt intimidating it was also comforting. I can see the basic outline of how we’ll be approaching cases and exams. There’s no magic formula. You memorize as much as possible and then you try to see both sides of the argument. There will be snags and ambiguities put in place by the professors to trip you up. I was expecting that much. 

The key to me seems to be seeing the world in the most nuanced way possible. I actually find this sort of comforting. It’s a world of possibilities. If you can see the pattern then you’ve got a shot. I’m not saying it will be easy but I think it can be done. Check back with me once I start to see if I retain my optimism.

Tech, Law School and a 0L In Love with Gadgets

I’ve been trying to cobble together posts here for the last few weeks. Part of the problem is that I’m a lowly 0L with very little to offer. One thing I thought might be interesting would be to share some of my plans to incorporate technology into my law school experience at UNC.

1. Video– I’ve been toying with the idea of live streaming particularly entertaining moments from my classes via a service like Ustream.TV or recording them for later consumption at Seesmic.com or YouTube.com. I plan on accomplishing this by using my laptop and webcam. Shouldn’t be too tricky but there are numerous interesting legal issues associated with the process. Does it violate intellectual property or privacy laws to capture and share content from my professors/classmates?

2. Audio– I’ve got a handy little digital audio recorder I will be using. This will allow me to reference parts of the lecture that were particularly confusing and/or share it with friends/classmates. I’d like to create an online file sharing area where people could grab the MP3 from whichever day they’d like.  

3. Kindle 2– Now I haven’t scored one yet and I don’t think most textbook publishers have content available for them yet but wouldn’t it be great just to carry THIS instead of a huge bag of books. You could even use the text to speech speech feature if you commuted to school in the morning. That would be great! Maybe this will all come together by the time I’m a 3L.

4. Social Media– I plan to network extensively prior to graduating. My primary vehicles for accomplishing this will be this blog, my Twitter profile and my LinkedIn. Each will serve a slightly different purpose. The blog is a place for me to share ideas and highlight projects I’m engrossed in. Twitter is my favorite place to “listen” to communities and provides the chance for quick one on one interaction. LinkedIn is best used to create meaningful connections and ask for recommendations. I also like that they offer you the opportunity to ask questions of the members and even answer some yourself as well.

Does all of that sound plausible? Feel free to chime in with your thoughts, objections or questions.