Law Students

Choosing What You?re Good At

By Casebook Sherpa

T-minus 7 days until our first exam. Torts. I have the requisite intent of making it my b&%ch. The question is whether that intent will be transferred to a C or lower. Ugh.

Actually, during breaks from outlining and when I’m not working, I’ve been thinking more about what I want to do with the law. Not so much: “work at a law firm” or “get up on the Hill” or “make my current job even cooler”. But rather: what area of the law am I really interested in?

I’ll tell you one thing, it’d be a lot easier to answer this question if I would just quit my job like some who shall remain nameless, but who, nonetheless should be waterboarded and then beaten with my torts casebook. But seeing as I have 50(ish) fewer hours per week than my unemployed colleagues to ponder the future (and, oh yeah, study), I’ve returned to a question that helps me get past gut feelings and hone in on the choices at hand: what am I good at?

So far, I’ve been good at Civil Procedure, writing, and oral arguments. I’ve been, and suspect I’ll continue to be, okay at Property and Contracts. I’ll likely be just okay with Torts. So… I can write. I can grasp procedural rules and apply them to hypos in an exam setting. And I can make a judge believe my client should win on appeal. Sounds like I should consider litigation. And for the first time, I’m not opposed to the idea.

I came to law school thinking that, if a career in law meant leaving my current job someday, that it would lead me to a federal agency, think tank, lobbying firm, or the Hill for policy and legislative work. Now… well, I’m at least a little interested in this litigation thing I keep hearing so much about.

So… how do you make the call? Any 2Ls, 3Ls, grads, lawyers out there have any advice? Or is it like most other things: go with what seems best given all the facts you have and trust that it’ll work out?

ShareThis

Full post as published by Fight The Hypo on April 23, 2008 (boomark / email).