<p>I just started researching about law.. I never considered it, and I am now. I'm only in HS so I have a long way to go, but what are some possible jobs? I don't want to be the one who is in court cases defending people , its too much of a burden. Are there jobs dealing with law where you don't have to be in court? Do they get paid as well?</p>
<p>Thank you!</p>
<p>Just looking through some of the Economist's job ads...
-IRC Kazakhstan Corporate Governance Project: Project Manager
-In house lawyer to administer legal investment contracts: International INvestment Fund, Geneva, Switzerland</p>
<p>^ I dont exactly understand what kind of work those people do though.. in house lawyer?? Project manager??</p>
<p>Sorry.. I'm really, really new and clueless about this.. ^^;</p>
<p>Most lawyers don't go to court. There are a ton of legal jobs that don't involve court - but the responsibility element is there just the same. If you draw up a bad contract and your client loses money or a job or gets sued, it's still your doing (or lack thereof). Consider yesterday's Boston Legal, where the divorce settlement specified "cat care." The ex-wife then hosed her husband for a few grand a month in kitty support, which culminated in kitty life support. Bad contract. Probably a bad example, but what can I say. </p>
<p>Lawyers work in all types of fields - a (short) list would be environmental law, immigration law, corporate law, real estate, intellectual property, antitrust, criminal law, politics, administrative law, con law, health law - and I'm sure the others can add to that list. Obviously, within any of those sectors, there are a ton of different jobs. </p>
<p>My one question to you is why you want to go to law school. Passion for law? A desire to help others? A job that makes you money? Figure tht out first, and then try to see if the legal profession matches your goals.</p>
<p>A passion for taking abuse?</p>
<p>Pretty much. :)</p>
<p>These days, a lot of law students, especially from the elite schools, don't end up becoming practicing lawyers, but instead become consultants and investment bankers. For example, the largest single employer of graduates of Harvard Law in the past few years has not been a law firm. It's been the management consulting firm McKinsey. And no, they didn't hire them all for the legal department, most of them got hired to become fully-fledged consulting associates. Robert Rubin, former Secretary of the Treasury under Clinton, wrote in his autobiography that he didn't really know why he was going to Yale Law except that he thought that having a law degree would be useful for him later in life. Granted, he did work for a major law firm for a couple of years, but then jumped to Goldman Sachs to be a banker, eventually rising to Chairman. </p>
<p>{In fact, Rubin seemed unusually peripatetic and uncommitted as a young man. He graduated summa cum laude in econ from Harvard, and got admitted to the Harvard doctoral program in economics, but decided not to go. He also got admitted to Harvard Law and attended for a few days before dropping out and bumming around Europe for a year, including taking some classes at LSE, before going to Yale Law. He freely admits that at that time, he had no idea what he wanted to do with his life, and he basically chose law school 'for the heck of it'. Yet his lack of commitment obviously didn't hurt him.}</p>
<p>So the point is, some students treat law school as an alternative MBA program to getting into consulting and banking. I am not saying that I recommend this path, but it is out there.</p>
<p>Thats interesting.. I am considering studying law because I am strong in the humanities and I would like to have a well paying, stable and professional career.. Math and science bores the hell out of me and I enjoy reading & writing, debating & history is quite interesting to me too..</p>
<p>I was interested in international law - could anyone describe what that is? I love studying other cultures so it sounds appealing!</p>
<p>
[quote]
These days, a lot of law students, especially from the elite schools, don't end up becoming practicing lawyers, but instead become consultants and investment bankers.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is pretty misleading. It's not that easy for lawyers to become bankers or consultants. The vast majority of graduates at top schools go on to work in private firms. It's a really bad idea to think that you're going to have the same options with a JD that you'd have with an MBA.</p>
<p>for me, the most interesting type's the criminal lawyer. <em>shrugs</em> i read mum's review books... seems interesting...</p>
<p>
[quote]
This is pretty misleading. It's not that easy for lawyers to become bankers or consultants. The vast majority of graduates at top schools go on to work in private firms. It's a really bad idea to think that you're going to have the same options with a JD that you'd have with an MBA.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree that the majority of graduates at the top schools will go on to work as lawyers, and not consultants and bankers. I also agree that you will not have the same options with a JD than you will have with an MBA.</p>
<p>However, I don't think it is misleading in the least to point out the fact that a good number of law students, particularly the top schools, end up in consulting and banking. The point is that if you go to one of these schools, you don't have to work as a lawyer. There are other paths available for you.</p>
<p>sakky,</p>
<p>I am just wondering if you know why graduates from top-tier law schools are so appealing as candidates to work at places like Goldman Sachs. Clearly, they aren't employing these new graduates in regulatory capacities. Are they just convinced (perhaps through experience), that the top grads from top law schools have good intuitions about finding bull-markets? Do they just think that they have raw intellectual talent, and are thus very teachable? Picking the right stocks, seems to me at least, to involve a hollistic approach. So whereas a trained financial analyst might be stuck up on a company's great Price-Earnings ratio, a sharp, unsullied mind might be able to see the forest (and not just a tree), and realize, for example, that the new CFO did a terrible job at his last company. </p>
<p>Is this the kind of rationale behind recruiting top-tier talent? Or is it something completely different? I've been puzzled about this since I learned that investment firms try to grab HLS kids, and I would appreciate any insight.</p>
<p>-Big firm practice
-Inhouse corporate practice
-Investment banking
-District Attorney
-Individual practice
-Clerking for a judge
-Teaching history (if you're really a loser or like teaching snotty teenagers from rich suburbs of NYC.)
-Et Cetera</p>
<p>
[quote]
Is this the kind of rationale behind recruiting top-tier talent? Or is it something completely different? I've been puzzled about this since I learned that investment firms try to grab HLS kids, and I would appreciate any insight.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think the real rationale is the fact that they're top-tier talent. That's it. Just like how the banks like to recruit kids from Harvard and Wharton undergrad, they probably don't see anything too wrong with doing the same by getting kids from the top-top law schools, they know that they're incredibly intelligent and hard working so they'd be suited for the profession. I don't think it really has anything too much to do with their legal knowledge of 'intuition' its merely another way to recruit some top talent.</p>
<p>"I think the real rationale is the fact that they're top-tier talent."</p>
<p>If that's the case, would this apply to other Harvard Graduates, say those pursuing grad studies in a foreign language or political science or history?</p>
<p>What do you think, Sakky? Is I-Banking open to grad students --not business, law or Economics-- from the top schools?</p>
<p>
[quote]
"I think the real rationale is the fact that they're top-tier talent."</p>
<p>If that's the case, would this apply to other Harvard Graduates, say those pursuing grad studies in a foreign language or political science or history?</p>
<p>What do you think, Sakky? Is I-Banking open to grad students --not business, law or Economics-- from the top schools?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think it's probably even more rare for these types of people to be picked up. The fact remains that the people that Goldman Sachs for instances picks up for HLS are only a few. The numbers fail to compare to those of wich come from MBA programs.</p>
<p>On another note, a field that usually has individuals with masters degrees in diverse fields is Consulting. If you actually go to some of their consulting websites you can look at the educational backgrounds of some of their employees. The Boston Consulting group for instance has one man who received a Masters in Philosophy from Stanford. Another a Masters in Public Policy from Harvard. One has a Masters in Architecture from Harvard. I think one of the main reasons Consulting firms choose to do this is in order to get a mix of individuals who are knowledgeable in a variety of subjects so that their different strengths can compliment each other when they're sent out as teams to work on projects.</p>
<p>There'd probably be a better chance getting a job at a Consulting firm with the degrees like you're talking about Wildflower versus an i-bank</p>
<p>Thanks for the input, dcfca. :D</p>
<p>I agree with dcfca that it has a lot to do with these companies simply wanting to pick up top talent wherever they can find it. The truth is, these companies are going to train you on whatever you need to know anyway. But you can't really teach somebody raw intelligence or a work ethic, they either have it or they don't. </p>
<p>I also agree with dfca that it is more common for consulting firms to recruit from a wider range of people than do banks. However, I would point out that super-quantitative skills are highly prized in the financial industry. For example, a significant number of people with Phd's in physics, mathematics, or computer science end up in banking, usually in the research side, coming up with new financial models. A number of high-prestige hedge funds and private equity firms were founded by quant jocks. For example, D.E. Shaw was founded by David E. Shaw, who got his PhD in computer science at Stanford and taught at Columbia. Jim Simons, founder of Renaissance Technologies (a large hedge fund), holds a PhD in math from Berkeley and is former chair of the math department at SUNY-Stony Brook. </p>
<p>However, in addition to looking for hard-working superstars, banks and consulting firms are also shopping for big-name, prestigious schools. That's because they are customer focused. Basically, what the banks and consulting firms are selling to clients are the skills of their people. It's far easier to attract clients when you can say that your people come from the biggest-name schools. For example, it just makes the customer more assured when he hears that he is going to have a Harvard guy or an MIT guy working on his account, rather than a guy who came from a school nobody ever heard of. Whether that's fair or not fair, that is part of the game.</p>
<p>What does one do in these fields:</p>
<p>Big firm practice
-Inhouse corporate practice
-Investment banking
-Individual practice</p>
<p>do these people just draw up contracts?</p>
<p>try to be the president of the united states of america!!
i will be a nice job...
its gonna be hard to be one, but its not a bed job..</p>