<p>I'm about to get a MS in engineering and I was just wondering what the situation is out there for lawyers with technical backgrounds? I've never really considered law school until recently, when I met a lawyer who's in a great position with low working hours and a great salary. He was a PhD in physical science, worked for a few years, and was sent to law school at night by his company.</p>
<p>Is there a big demand for these types of people? Or would you say his situation is more of an isolated case?</p>
<p>Most companies are not going to pay for an employee to go to school, whether it is for a JD, MBA or any other degree, until that employee has worked for many years for that company and has proven themselves (though many companies do have tuition reimbursement programs for employees who have worked there for as little as a year or two, though these programs are typically designed more for someone who is taking a class or two, not getting a JD in an evening program). Even then, there is never any guarantee that any given company is going to offer such a program generally, or to a particular individual, or that the company will continue to offer a program that was in the employee manual when an employee signed on to work for that company.</p>
<p>The situation is an occasional one but typically companies are not willing to pay for tuition that involves a career change, say from scientist to attorney, unless the company's department in the new career (say legal or patent department) supports it. But that can happen, for example if the employee is going to be allowed to transfer into that department in a trainee or technical advisor slot.</p>
<p>On the general question, in addition to patent or intellectual property law, enginering-trained attorneys can use their technical experience in fields such as environmental law, product liability, construction law, and engineering contracts.</p>
<p>Los mentioned that the friend is working in a nice job with reasonable hours and a good salary. What kind of job is this? Many on this forum have repeatedly commented on how terrible the job hours are and how relatively low the salaries are for new lawyers. Do the tech-to-law people not fit this workaholic mold?</p>
<p>The guy is a generation above me so we're not as close "friends" as I'd like to be lol. He had a PhD in chemistry, worked at a chemical company for several years, really excelled there with promotions & such, before getting sent to law school. That's about all I know & I'll probably never see him again. His son is around my age and he said his dad plays bridge at work :) From their tone and attitude, I would guess not much more than 50 hr weeks, sometimes much less.</p>
<p>So, I just talked to another patent lawyer who's consulting a professor at my school for assistance on a case. He said he works around 60 hrs / week and that there is a demand for people with advanced degrees. He does recommend work experience, however.</p>
<p>BTW, when you say "workaholic mold", what is that? 60 hrs/week?
And for those working 60 hr weeks, do you do it in 12hr weekdays or do you work weekends, too?</p>
<p>There have been many threads in which posters have said that new lawyers sometimes are consumed by work, putting in as much as 70-80 hours per week :eek: . I guess that's what you have to do to get ahead in some areas of law, but I sure wouldn't want to do it!</p>
<p>Like i-banking, it'll be a good choice if it's short-term and leads to other opportunities. If not, then spending your entire career like that is kind of like voluntary slavery (opinion).</p>