Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Business Insider)   Here are a list of states that will allow one to practice law without a law degree   (businessinsider.com) divider line 46
    More: PSA, in-laws, practice of laws, OBE, law schools, American Bar Association, law degrees  
•       •       •

8510 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Aug 2014 at 3:49 AM (25 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



46 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-08-02 10:56:02 PM  
If you can manage to pass the bar that way, good for you. You just saved yourself $100,000 in debt
 
2014-08-02 11:24:17 PM  
So people with a GED in law wasted tens of dollars?
 
2014-08-02 11:28:51 PM  
I've met lawyers who could pass anything BUT a bar
 
2014-08-02 11:31:18 PM  

ArkAngel: If you can manage to pass the bar that way, good for you. You just saved yourself $100,000 in debt


law school should not be required in any state
the WHOLE point of the bar is to anoint the chosen ones ...
while school could prepare you, so could just studying for the bar ...
 
2014-08-02 11:37:19 PM  

namatad: ArkAngel: If you can manage to pass the bar that way, good for you. You just saved yourself $100,000 in debt

law school should not be required in any state
the WHOLE point of the bar is to anoint the chosen ones ...
while school could prepare you, so could just studying for the bar ...


It takes more than knowing how to pass a test to practice a profession.  The bar is supposed to certify that you know and understand the proper application of the law, but craming for however long and then passing a test doesn't actually accomplish the goal of making sure you know and understand the proper applicaiton of the law.
 
2014-08-02 11:55:43 PM  
Real lawyers don't dress that way. Look at that: he's even wearing a belt.
 
2014-08-03 01:15:21 AM  
i1282.photobucket.com
 
2014-08-03 01:16:59 AM  

Ambivalence: It takes more than knowing how to pass a test to practice a profession. The bar is supposed to certify that you know and understand the proper application of the law, but craming for however long and then passing a test doesn't actually accomplish the goal of making sure you know and understand the proper applicaiton of the law.


And neither law school nor cramming for the bar teach you anything about how to practice law as a profession.
 
2014-08-03 01:24:18 AM  

Theaetetus: And neither law school nor cramming for the bar teach you anything about how to practice law as a profession.


If that's true, the place to address that is in the law school curriculum.
 
2014-08-03 01:33:07 AM  

Ambivalence: Theaetetus: And neither law school nor cramming for the bar teach you anything about how to practice law as a profession.

If that's true, the place to address that is in the law school curriculum.


Quite possibly. Much of the 3rd (or 4th, if you're evening) year is a waste, particularly as lawyers get more specialized. Few lawyers do both criminal and civil litigation practice, and fewer still combine those with things like tax, bankruptcy, real estate, or even transactional business law... or vice versa. Shiat, I've never set foot in a courtroom, and likely never will.
At large law firms, junior associates learn the actual practice of their specialty under the guidance of senior associates or partners. That effectively gives a 4th, 5th, 6th, etc. year of law 'education' before you ever practice on your own.

But sole practitioners? Unless they're lucky enough to find a mentor, they learn proper practice by screwing up their first dozen clients, filing and re-filing motions over and over when they get rejected for formalities, etc. It's a huge failing of the educational system, and has the result of protecting the wealthy and connected while screwing over the poors - and that goes for both the attorneys and their clients.
 
2014-08-03 01:42:01 AM  
Isn't passing the Bar supposed to prove you know your law stuff?  Does it matter if you went to Bob's Upstairs Lawyerin' School or you learned it being an overworked paralegal for a handsy greek dude with a degree from Bob's Upstairs Lawyerin' School?

Would be pretty funny seeing the results of giving the Bar to every lawyer every 5 years...
 
2014-08-03 02:46:11 AM  

Theaetetus: Ambivalence: Theaetetus: And neither law school nor cramming for the bar teach you anything about how to practice law as a profession.

If that's true, the place to address that is in the law school curriculum.

Quite possibly. Much of the 3rd (or 4th, if you're evening) year is a waste, particularly as lawyers get more specialized. Few lawyers do both criminal and civil litigation practice, and fewer still combine those with things like tax, bankruptcy, real estate, or even transactional business law... or vice versa. Shiat, I've never set foot in a courtroom, and likely never will.
At large law firms, junior associates learn the actual practice of their specialty under the guidance of senior associates or partners. That effectively gives a 4th, 5th, 6th, etc. year of law 'education' before you ever practice on your own.

But sole practitioners? Unless they're lucky enough to find a mentor, they learn proper practice by screwing up their first dozen clients, filing and re-filing motions over and over when they get rejected for formalities, etc. It's a huge failing of the educational system, and has the result of protecting the wealthy and connected while screwing over the poors - and that goes for both the attorneys and their clients.


So pretty much invalidating the whole law school and bar process.
On the other hand, what this article talks about are the states which allow apprentices to take the bar after completing a number of years of apprenticeship.  
Which would you rather have defending you?

med school at least seems to have moved into the proper direction.
a year of books
a year of dead bodies
couple years of live bodies
licensing tests
more practice or more specialty training
neverending continuing education

/damn I really should have done anything to have kept my skillz up to date or close ...
 
2014-08-03 03:50:51 AM  
So all of them then, because you can always defend yourself even if you don't have a law degree?

/That was fun.
 
2014-08-03 03:57:28 AM  
What could possibly go wrong?
 
2014-08-03 04:00:09 AM  

Aquapope: Isn't passing the Bar supposed to prove you know your law stuff?  Does it matter if you went to Bob's Upstairs Lawyerin' School or you learned it being an overworked paralegal for a handsy greek dude with a degree from Bob's Upstairs Lawyerin' School?

Would be pretty funny seeing the results of giving the Bar to every lawyer every 5 years...


I'd like to see people have to retake their driving test every 5 years.
 
2014-08-03 04:01:00 AM  
Law is one of the many, many professions that can be done through an apprenticeship instead of formalized education. It really is a scam that states don't allow it.
 
2014-08-03 04:01:13 AM  

Ambivalence: namatad: ArkAngel: If you can manage to pass the bar that way, good for you. You just saved yourself $100,000 in debt

law school should not be required in any state
the WHOLE point of the bar is to anoint the chosen ones ...
while school could prepare you, so could just studying for the bar ...

It takes more than knowing how to pass a test to practice a profession.  The bar is supposed to certify that you know and understand the proper application of the law, but craming for however long and then passing a test doesn't actually accomplish the goal of making sure you know and understand the proper applicaiton of the law.


Hey, congratulations, you just figured out that every single method of trying to determine if someone is good at something is complete BS. Every test ever given fails to take into account if the person taking the test has other factors the test can't measure.

Tests provide the most basic service of figuring out if the test taker has any knowledge of the subject matter. They can't tell if the test takers dad died an hour before, if the test taker is constipated, on their period, just got dumped, was raped the night before, didn't get enough sleep, geared their studies with the goal of passing the test only, or any other of the hundreds of thousands of other things that might effect the outcome of the test taken by the individual on that particular day.

Tests are pretty much farking worthless, except that they give the illusion of being a measurement of how well someone is doing at something. We Americans love our worthless measurements, sadly we come up short a lot of the time, especially in education, when compared to other 1st world countries.
 
2014-08-03 04:05:28 AM  

www.ssdress.com

"Now this is relevant to my interests."

 
2014-08-03 04:13:59 AM  
*rubbing my eyes and making sure Florida isn't on the list*
 
2014-08-03 04:19:34 AM  

Apos: "Now this is relevant to my interests."


Dammit. Didn't think I'd get beat to the punch for a Suits reference this early
 
2014-08-03 04:21:10 AM  
Am I really the first? I mean, he WAS practicing without a license.
thraeryn.org
 
2014-08-03 04:21:20 AM  
Lawyers run for political office and make the law.  Is it any surprise that they protect their hide while screaming about "the tort system"?  Unreal.
 
2014-08-03 04:23:44 AM  
Law school is all theory. Working for a firm allows you to learn who does what, and what to file when, you know, the real ins-n-outs of the system. My wife was lucky enough to get enough training and recommendations (as well as doing outside work) to hang her shingle pretty quick. It was tough, though. You get lots of golden tickets (here's your pro-bono work!) and was at the law library and picking brains at every CLE...it's really about getting friends that have some experience so you can cover your ass on all the tiny bits...that being said, after a couple years of being a paralegal for her I could destroy my first attorney...yay. Custody business, then family, them swooping down into criminal defense...every day is an adventure...
 
2014-08-03 05:20:10 AM  

squirrelflavoredyogurt: Ambivalence: namatad: ArkAngel: If you can manage to pass the bar that way, good for you. You just saved yourself $100,000 in debt

law school should not be required in any state
the WHOLE point of the bar is to anoint the chosen ones ...
while school could prepare you, so could just studying for the bar ...

It takes more than knowing how to pass a test to practice a profession.  The bar is supposed to certify that you know and understand the proper application of the law, but craming for however long and then passing a test doesn't actually accomplish the goal of making sure you know and understand the proper applicaiton of the law.

Hey, congratulations, you just figured out that every single method of trying to determine if someone is good at something is complete BS. Every test ever given fails to take into account if the person taking the test has other factors the test can't measure.

Tests provide the most basic service of figuring out if the test taker has any knowledge of the subject matter. They can't tell if the test takers dad died an hour before, if the test taker is constipated, on their period, just got dumped, was raped the night before, didn't get enough sleep, geared their studies with the goal of passing the test only, or any other of the hundreds of thousands of other things that might effect the outcome of the test taken by the individual on that particular day.

Tests are pretty much farking worthless, except that they give the illusion of being a measurement of how well someone is doing at something. We Americans love our worthless measurements, sadly we come up short a lot of the time, especially in education, when compared to other 1st world countries.


People that "have trouble with tests" are generally dumber than a bag of hammers but good at sounding like they know what they are talking about.

For lawyers that may actually be more important.
 
2014-08-03 06:22:09 AM  

Dr J Zoidberg: Apos: "Now this is relevant to my interests."

Dammit. Didn't think I'd get beat to the punch for a Suits reference this early


I'm just glad someone made the reference. Too bad Mike would need at least a year of law school...

/Am now four episodes behind...
 
2014-08-03 07:24:47 AM  

Theaetetus: Ambivalence: It takes more than knowing how to pass a test to practice a profession. The bar is supposed to certify that you know and understand the proper application of the law, but craming for however long and then passing a test doesn't actually accomplish the goal of making sure you know and understand the proper applicaiton of the law.

And neither law school nor cramming for the bar teach you anything about how to practice law as a profession.


Why it's called law school and not lawyer school.
 
2014-08-03 07:30:13 AM  

namatad: ArkAngel: If you can manage to pass the bar that way, good for you. You just saved yourself $100,000 in debt

law school should not be required in any state
the WHOLE point of the bar is to anoint the chosen ones ...
while school could prepare you, so could just studying for the bar ...


anti-semite!
 
2014-08-03 07:40:54 AM  

Bigdogdaddy: Lawyers run for political office and make the law.  Is it any surprise that they protect their hide while screaming about "the tort system"?  Unreal.

  Democracy in action.

FTFY.  Why do you hate voters so?
 
2014-08-03 07:48:57 AM  

Theaetetus: Ambivalence: Theaetetus: And neither law school nor cramming for the bar teach you anything about how to practice law as a profession.

If that's true, the place to address that is in the law school curriculum.

Quite possibly. Much of the 3rd (or 4th, if you're evening) year is a waste, particularly as lawyers get more specialized. Few lawyers do both criminal and civil litigation practice, and fewer still combine those with things like tax, bankruptcy, real estate, or even transactional business law... or vice versa. Shiat, I've never set foot in a courtroom, and likely never will.
At large law firms, junior associates learn the actual practice of their specialty under the guidance of senior associates or partners. That effectively gives a 4th, 5th, 6th, etc. year of law 'education' before you ever practice on your own.

But sole practitioners? Unless they're lucky enough to find a mentor, they learn proper practice by screwing up their first dozen clients, filing and re-filing motions over and over when they get rejected for formalities, etc. It's a huge failing of the educational system, and has the result of protecting the wealthy and connected while screwing over the poors - and that goes for both the attorneys and their clients.


Some solo practitioners, sure.  But I've never seen one submit a leather-bound brief with at least seven figures worth of engineering consulting behind it, five minutes before deadline...where they only managed to print the odd-numbered pages.  That was a big Boston firm :)   As my judge said, "This is best half of a legal brief I've ever seen..."

/personally, I avoided the "re-filing motions" thing by...get this...asking the court clerk what the proper procedure was
//amazing how friendly they are when you don't act like the other jerks
///picked up a case file at a different large firm, found parts of three other cases inside it...but not the one I needed.
////pity about one of them...they probably could've used that affidavit BEFORE they lost the case.
//or so I gathered from the pretty lady attorney swearing like a longshoreman
 
2014-08-03 07:53:55 AM  
cdn.thewire.com
 
2014-08-03 08:10:07 AM  
Farkistan didn't make the list?
 
2014-08-03 08:15:13 AM  

squirrelflavoredyogurt: Ambivalence: namatad: ArkAngel: If you can manage to pass the bar that way, good for you. You just saved yourself $100,000 in debt

law school should not be required in any state
the WHOLE point of the bar is to anoint the chosen ones ...
while school could prepare you, so could just studying for the bar ...

It takes more than knowing how to pass a test to practice a profession.  The bar is supposed to certify that you know and understand the proper application of the law, but craming for however long and then passing a test doesn't actually accomplish the goal of making sure you know and understand the proper applicaiton of the law.

Hey, congratulations, you just figured out that every single method of trying to determine if someone is good at something is complete BS. Every test ever given fails to take into account if the person taking the test has other factors the test can't measure.

Tests provide the most basic service of figuring out if the test taker has any knowledge of the subject matter. They can't tell if the test takers dad died an hour before, if the test taker is constipated, on their period, just got dumped, was raped the night before, didn't get enough sleep, geared their studies with the goal of passing the test only, or any other of the hundreds of thousands of other things that might effect the outcome of the test taken by the individual on that particular day.

Tests are pretty much farking worthless, except that they give the illusion of being a measurement of how well someone is doing at something. We Americans love our worthless measurements, sadly we come up short a lot of the time, especially in education, when compared to other 1st world countries.


Tests establish minimum competency, not absolute competency. Bar exams can be retaken (for $$$) as many times as necessary; hell, even Orly Taitz eventually managed to pass. Funny thing about California's requirements, every one of them can be waived aside from passing the bar exam.

Objectively identifying a lawyer's intelligence and skill is probably impossible. You take what you can get.
 
2014-08-03 08:19:08 AM  
Please explain why some of these unemployed lawyers can't just get together and hang out their own shingle? As a pharmacist, if I found a partner to share the hours, I could do it just for filing forms and paying 25k or so startup costs. If there were more lawyers out there practicing, maybe regular people could actually afford the prices. Starting fees at $400 an hour when you should be able to look up briefs and precedents on the internet and fill out standard forms in seconds is just silly. Starting a firm that provides simpler services at low rates would seem to be a great business.
 
2014-08-03 08:29:44 AM  

tarheel07: Theaetetus: Ambivalence: It takes more than knowing how to pass a test to practice a profession. The bar is supposed to certify that you know and understand the proper application of the law, but craming for however long and then passing a test doesn't actually accomplish the goal of making sure you know and understand the proper applicaiton of the law.

And neither law school nor cramming for the bar teach you anything about how to practice law as a profession.

Why it's called law school and not lawyer school.


Ahh thanks. Thankfully, pharmacy schools, the older more established ones, not necessarily the newer, for profit ones, actually teach how to practice the profession and require you to have 1600 hours of actual experience while in school.
 
2014-08-03 09:16:27 AM  

Ambivalence: namatad: ArkAngel: If you can manage to pass the bar that way, good for you. You just saved yourself $100,000 in debt

law school should not be required in any state
the WHOLE point of the bar is to anoint the chosen ones ...
while school could prepare you, so could just studying for the bar ...

It takes more than knowing how to pass a test to practice a profession.  The bar is supposed to certify that you know and understand the proper application of the law, but craming for however long and then passing a test doesn't actually accomplish the goal of making sure you know and understand the proper applicaiton of the law.


Circular. The test is worthless then by that reasoning.
 
2014-08-03 09:32:47 AM  
img.fark.net

Illinois?  DNRTFA
 
2014-08-03 10:16:27 AM  

Ambivalence: namatad: ArkAngel: If you can manage to pass the bar that way, good for you. You just saved yourself $100,000 in debt

law school should not be required in any state
the WHOLE point of the bar is to anoint the chosen ones ...
while school could prepare you, so could just studying for the bar ...

It takes more than knowing how to pass a test to practice a profession.  The bar is supposed to certify that you know and understand the proper application of the law, but craming for however long and then passing a test doesn't actually accomplish the goal of making sure you know and understand the proper applicaiton of the law.



So...create and promulgate a system so complicated that you need someone special to listen to.  Sounds like IT certifications.
 
2014-08-03 10:22:34 AM  

Pharmdawg: Please explain why some of these unemployed lawyers can't just get together and hang out their own shingle? As a pharmacist, if I found a partner to share the hours, I could do it just for filing forms and paying 25k or so startup costs. If there were more lawyers out there practicing, maybe regular people could actually afford the prices. Starting fees at $400 an hour when you should be able to look up briefs and precedents on the internet and fill out standard forms in seconds is just silly. Starting a firm that provides simpler services at low rates would seem to be a great business.



Of course they can, that's what a PA is
 
2014-08-03 11:14:58 AM  
I recognize that someone who works in a law office gradually picks up much the same knowledge that law student obtains in the class room.  Sure a law student may be more proficient in some areas, based on their experience, but a legal secretary or paralegal would be more proficient in others.

I also note many practice areas amount to little more than pushing paperwork and shouldn't even require a law degree.  Filing bankruptcies, real estate closings, trusts & estates, filing corporate paperwork, copyright, etc...  The reality is most of the work in those areas are completed by paralegals or legal secretaries and the attorney merely signs off on the documents, so why should an attorney be required for the garden variety case.  The only time an attorney is really needed is if the matter resulted in actual litigation.

If you can pass the bar exam without having attended law school, than that is OK with me.

/Attorney
 
2014-08-03 11:27:06 AM  

JeffreyScott: I recognize that someone who works in a law office gradually picks up much the same knowledge that law student obtains in the class room.  Sure a law student may be more proficient in some areas, based on their experience, but a legal secretary or paralegal would be more proficient in others.

I also note many practice areas amount to little more than pushing paperwork and shouldn't even require a law degree.  Filing bankruptcies, real estate closings, trusts & estates, filing corporate paperwork, copyright, etc...  The reality is most of the work in those areas are completed by paralegals or legal secretaries and the attorney merely signs off on the documents, so why should an attorney be required for the garden variety case.  The only time an attorney is really needed is if the matter resulted in actual litigation.

If you can pass the bar exam without having attended law school, than that is OK with me.

/Attorney


I approve of this message. My mother paid an attorney who went to law school (granted, this is Louisiana) to close her house purchase seven years ago. Fees for that were tantamount to highway robbery.

Now, some may say "Well, if lawyers don't always have to go to law school, why can't doctors do the same?" Which you and I and sane people everywhere knows is bullshiat. Yeah, a nurse may know a lot after years of working in a hospital, but med school teaches a lot more than you can pick up on the job.

/Wanted to go pre-med
//For a year
///Decided history was more my interest
 
2014-08-03 11:41:13 AM  

www.movpins.com


How'd you do it, Frank?

 
2014-08-03 12:16:02 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-08-03 04:04:56 PM  

wambu: What could possibly go wrong?


Actually, nothing.

A good friend of mine has done this with his daughter, and his son is doing it in another attorney's office. It is NOT easier than going to law school, and in fact requires probably more self-discipline and effort than law school. The ABA and (in California, at least) requires the aspiring attorney to train under a licensed attorney who is willing to sign off on his or her assignments (under penalty of perjury and loss of the mentor's own bar card), develop their own study curriculum, design their own writing assignments that have to be handed in to the bar examiners, and pass the baby bar (a six-subject pre-bar test) and the bar exam itself.

It still takes three to five years, and you still need to pass the bar, the MPRE, the background check, and all the other pixie-ass stuff the bar requires to take money out of your pocket. Still, if you know an attorney in good standing who will mentor you through the four+ years, go for it. If I'd known that, I would not have gone to law school, and I recommend it highly IF you have a good attorney to guide you through it.

The bar only requires a supervising attorney of 5 years standing; but really, you shouldn't even try unless he/she has 15-20 under his belt.
 
2014-08-03 08:33:58 PM  

maram500: JeffreyScott: I recognize that someone who works in a law office gradually picks up much the same knowledge that law student obtains in the class room.  Sure a law student may be more proficient in some areas, based on their experience, but a legal secretary or paralegal would be more proficient in others.

I also note many practice areas amount to little more than pushing paperwork and shouldn't even require a law degree.  Filing bankruptcies, real estate closings, trusts & estates, filing corporate paperwork, copyright, etc...  The reality is most of the work in those areas are completed by paralegals or legal secretaries and the attorney merely signs off on the documents, so why should an attorney be required for the garden variety case.  The only time an attorney is really needed is if the matter resulted in actual litigation.

If you can pass the bar exam without having attended law school, than that is OK with me.

/Attorney

I approve of this message. My mother paid an attorney who went to law school (granted, this is Louisiana) to close her house purchase seven years ago. Fees for that were tantamount to highway robbery.

Now, some may say "Well, if lawyers don't always have to go to law school, why can't doctors do the same?" Which you and I and sane people everywhere knows is bullshiat. Yeah, a nurse may know a lot after years of working in a hospital, but med school teaches a lot more than you can pick up on the job.

/Wanted to go pre-med
//For a year
///Decided history was more my interest


Yeah, but doctors learn how to be a doctor during the internship not really in med school.  Maybe lawyers should be the same.
 
2014-08-03 08:41:40 PM  

Benjimin_Dover: maram500: JeffreyScott: I recognize that someone who works in a law office gradually picks up much the same knowledge that law student obtains in the class room.  Sure a law student may be more proficient in some areas, based on their experience, but a legal secretary or paralegal would be more proficient in others.

I also note many practice areas amount to little more than pushing paperwork and shouldn't even require a law degree.  Filing bankruptcies, real estate closings, trusts & estates, filing corporate paperwork, copyright, etc...  The reality is most of the work in those areas are completed by paralegals or legal secretaries and the attorney merely signs off on the documents, so why should an attorney be required for the garden variety case.  The only time an attorney is really needed is if the matter resulted in actual litigation.

If you can pass the bar exam without having attended law school, than that is OK with me.

/Attorney

I approve of this message. My mother paid an attorney who went to law school (granted, this is Louisiana) to close her house purchase seven years ago. Fees for that were tantamount to highway robbery.

Now, some may say "Well, if lawyers don't always have to go to law school, why can't doctors do the same?" Which you and I and sane people everywhere knows is bullshiat. Yeah, a nurse may know a lot after years of working in a hospital, but med school teaches a lot more than you can pick up on the job.

/Wanted to go pre-med
//For a year
///Decided history was more my interest

Yeah, but doctors learn how to be a doctor during the internship not really in med school.  Maybe lawyers should be the same.


In patent law, many of us worked our way through law school as patent agents or technical specialists at a law firm. It's like a pseudo-internship, since you're supervised on everything you work on. And for us, it means that law school is free, plus a decent salary. Firms should probably do the same in other transactional areas, honestly.
 
2014-08-04 07:04:54 AM  

Aquapope: Isn't passing the Bar supposed to prove you know your law stuff?  Does it matter if you went to Bob's Upstairs Lawyerin' School or you learned it being an overworked paralegal for a handsy greek dude with a degree from Bob's Upstairs Lawyerin' School?

Would be pretty funny seeing the results of giving the Bar to every lawyer every 5 years...


Passing the bar exam proves you know how to pass the bar exam.
 
Displayed 46 of 46 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report