I'm working at the Office of the Appellate Defender in Durham, NC this summer. Our office takes care of indigent folks' general criminal appeals from all across the state, and works closely with other offices on the issue capital defense. I've gotten the chance to work with the Office of Parent Representation on family law issues as well.

It's an interesting experience so far in many ways. Mostly, it's been nice to see how the office operates. During a discussion this past Friday a lawyer expressed his appreciation for being allowed to defend his clients in the way he best saw fit, that he was given free reign of his practice. It's also been neat to see how people work as a part of the system of criminal justice, they try their best to win the cases the can, and take their job of keeping the police and the courts more or less in check very seriously. However, there are a certain amount of cases they know will lose, and watching the work put into even those cases has got me convinced that for everything wrong with the system, there are people out there trying their best to make it work, and make it right if possible. This summer has (so far) given me valuable insight into how working in this profession doesn't have to be such a negative experience, even if the client you're defending is less than scrupulous.

Also, Judge Lynch wasn't kidding, NC has some frightening criminal laws/theory.

-- MichaelHilton - 20 Jun 2010

I'm working at the National Institutes of Health doing Technology Transfer for their Neuroscience division. Basically, my job is to work through the regulatory jungle to help a certain technology get to market, usually by commodifying the NIH's IP rights and finding a third party bio-tech firm willing to invest.

What struck me the most was how many different types of individuals I had to work with to get something done.

There is the investigator (scientist) who only wants to do research for the sake of doing research, and doesn't really care about it translating into the real world.

There is the FDA reviewer who has to abide by the regulatory red tape in every facet of the process, making me take detours to circumvent irrelevant concerns in order to arrive at the same destination.

And then there is the actual office bureaucracy, where massaging egos goes alot further than a good idea or some new insight.

It's not that I don't get anything done, but the top-down regulatory system is, in my opinion, inherently inefficient. In a perfect world (i.e. a world Eben would be satisfied in), these barriers would not exist. But, as we learned, we do not live in anything close to a perfect world.

-- MikeAbend - 20 Jun 2010

Hi all---

Can we make this topic private?

I'm working in the General Counsel's office at Thirteen. It has been very humbling after a year of school where people care about your opinion and/or where you come down on an issue to a place where you're given the side for which to advocate. I'm sure that's pretty much a universal experience for everyone - maybe except those working for judges.

-- JessicaCohen - 20 Jun 2010

Much of my summer has been about navigating Indian politics, of my office, of certain local state governments, and of the country at large.

There are about 60 or so people at my office, including lawyers, social workers, grant writers, interns, IT staff, secretaries, chai brewers, cleaners, security guards, etc. Work, particularly legal work, isn’t just handed to interns, especially for a gora like me. You have to have the right amount of assertiveness to breach the communication and cultural barriers, and a month into the job I’m still getting the hang of it.

This week, I went on a fact-finding mission concerning sex trafficking in a very poor and rural state bordering Delhi. Our informants turned out to be aspiring politicians, they led us to certain areas of the village to kind of get a sense of the problem, but not to get any substantive information for effective public interest litigation; essentially, these politicians just wanted to get good press and drum up demagogic support. The level of exploitation of these poor trafficked women, directly and indirectly, is still difficult to process.

Much of the work that my organization does is direct impact litigation. Since the 1980s, in India, any person (including non-lawyers) may sue the government on behalf of an individual or group who has been deprived of fundamental or legal rights (e.g. standing is not required). On most issues, the High and Supreme courts are very progressive, but the trouble is that pro-human rights decisions fail to get implemented by the proper authorities, so NGOs continue to sue in order to hold officials accountable and slowly progress is made, or at the very least, awareness is raised.

It’s been really interesting reading about everyone’s experiences, and I hope everyone updates at the end of the summer. David, you may want to try working in India, lawyers and judges value the verbose here. An opinion I read the other day, which upheld a challenge to the death penalty (Bachan Singh), had references to Albert Camus, Harvey Milk, various deceased US Supreme Court Justices, and Jean Valjean (of Les Mis).

-- EricaSelig - 19 Jun 2010

I'm working for a federal District Court judge in Northern California. I love it. Each assignment I've had has taken me into a different area of the law, and I agree with Rory that I wish my research skills had been better when I first started. I also agree that practice makes perfect, and while I haven't exactly mastered a terms and connectors search, I'm able to find what I need.

I think the most thrilling moments for me have been briefing my judge and watching him in court. Civ pro comes to life! In law school exams we point to the issues and argue both sides, but now it's all about making that hard decision and coming down conclusively on one side or the other. One party will win and the other will lose, and the disappointed party deserves a well-reasoned, thoughtful, and fair discussion of the issues on the part of the judge.

I agree with Nona that watching lawyers in court has been eye-opening (and eye-popping). One lawyer was being sanctioned for failing to file an opposition, and he tried to blame it on his secretary. For future reference, never do this. Fall on your sword.

In just a few short weeks I have begun to understand the kind of lawyer I want to be as well as the kind of lawyer I don't want to be. There are a lot of bad laywers out there: they don't listen to their clients, they don't return client phone calls, they miss deadlines and blow statutes of limitations, they file poorly written, incomprehensible complaints. There are great lawyers out there too, on both sides, and some go on to become great judges. It's an honor to work for one.

I hope everyone is enjoying their summer. I miss this class!

-- CarolineFerrisWhite - 18 Jun 2010