Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
User avatar
spleenworship
Posts: 4421
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:08 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby spleenworship » Wed Feb 08, 2012 2:51 pm

mrloblaw wrote:HI GUYS, WHAT CAN I DO WITH MY MD DEGREE THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE BEING AROUND SICK PEOPLE? I HATE SICK PEOPLE.


Forensic Pathology, Radiology, Preventive Medicine... though all of these still involve sick people occasionally.

mrloblaw wrote:Sorry, OP. I see a career change in your future.


Yeah. I agree. I can't think of a single legal job, unlike the above medical specialties, that doesn't involve at least 75% of your time doing reading and/or writing.

Maybe get in shape and apply to the FBI or something. Still a lot of reading/writing though.

mrloblaw
Posts: 534
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby mrloblaw » Wed Feb 08, 2012 2:59 pm

D-hops wrote:
mrloblaw wrote:HI GUYS, WHAT CAN I DO WITH MY MD DEGREE THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE BEING AROUND SICK PEOPLE? I HATE SICK PEOPLE.

Sorry, OP. I see a career change in your future.



Pretty sure a lot of MDs don't deal with sick people. If you are going to bash the OP, at least do it well.




You're right; after you spend years practicing on sick people in med school, you may have the grades to move on to radiology, etc. You're still diagnosing disease. It's sort of like going to law school solely because you want to do ibanking after you quit Cravath.

In any case, they're both pretty poor career moves from the get-go.

Edit: Meh, I forgot pathology. I have no idea what the grade cutoff is for pathology.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273252
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Feb 08, 2012 3:31 pm

Anon because I agree completely with the OP.

I'm hoping to go into trusts & estates. I want to spend a good part of my time counseling clients and interacting with people and a minimal amount of time behind a computer.

User avatar
spleenworship
Posts: 4421
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:08 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby spleenworship » Wed Feb 08, 2012 3:31 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Anon because I agree completely with the OP.

I'm hoping to go into trusts & estates. I want to spend a good part of my time counseling clients and interacting with people and a minimal amount of time behind a computer.


Good luck with that.

mrloblaw
Posts: 534
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby mrloblaw » Wed Feb 08, 2012 4:25 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Anon because I agree completely with the OP.

I'm hoping to go into trusts & estates. I want to spend a good part of my time counseling clients and interacting with people and a minimal amount of time behind a computer.


Because staying up-to-date on federal and state tax law is far less research than other specialties require?

BeenDidThat
Posts: 704
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:18 am

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby BeenDidThat » Wed Feb 08, 2012 7:25 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Anon because I agree completely with the OP.

I'm hoping to go into trusts & estates. I want to spend a good part of my time counseling clients and interacting with people and a minimal amount of time behind a computer.


The fact of the matter is that lawyers are professional paper people. They do paperwork that other people aren't allowed to do. Will trust & estates give you a better shot at having interaction with clients sooner than, say, biglaw? Yes. Will you still have to spend the majority of your working time behind a computer? Yes.

If reading & writing irk you, you should not be a lawyer.

User avatar
NoleinNY
Posts: 1031
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby NoleinNY » Wed Feb 08, 2012 10:27 pm

If you do well, stand-up comedy doesn't require that much reading.

User avatar
20130312
Posts: 3842
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 8:53 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby 20130312 » Wed Feb 08, 2012 10:42 pm

NoleinNY wrote:If you do well, stand-up comedy doesn't require that much reading.


Just look at Greg Giraldo... oh wait.

BrianFellow
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 9:18 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby BrianFellow » Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:07 pm

You could be Mitt Romney. Didn't know he had a JD until I googled him. Being Mitt Romney pays well above market, but I'm pretty sure there's still some reading involved.

User avatar
Hjones33
Posts: 135
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 8:07 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby Hjones33 » Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:10 pm

NoleinNY wrote:If you do well, stand-up comedy doesn't require that much reading.



I got you Demetri Martin.

srfngdd6
Posts: 282
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 10:08 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby srfngdd6 » Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:12 pm

burger king and mcdonalds both pay market for their fields and don't require much reading at all plus they have "offices" in almost every market

seatown12
Posts: 614
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 9:16 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby seatown12 » Thu Feb 09, 2012 12:26 am

OP should look into a position in his school's Career Services office, where he won't need to read or really do anything at all.

P.S.
berkeleykel06 wrote:
Cupidity wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:Public Defender. I'm pretty sure you just wing it, and let the Innocent Project fix your mistakes in 20 years.

Not sure if serious.

Based on my work with the Innocence Project I'm afraid that this too often does appear to be the case.

:roll:

Pretty sure Desert Fox was not serious. The Innocence Project takes on only the few most egregious cases that are out there, but even still ineffective defense counsel isn't one of the most common problems they encounter. From their website:

Many wrongful convictions overturned with DNA testing involve multiple causes: 75% involve eyewitness misidentification; in 50%, unvalidated or improper forensic science played a role; a false confession or admission contributed to 25%; in 15% of the cases, unreliable informants played a role. Prosecutorial misconduct, ineffective defense, police misconduct and racism are harder to quantify but were also factors in many of the wrongful convictions that have been overturned with DNA testing.


Sorry for that brief derail...

User avatar
TaipeiMort
Posts: 874
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby TaipeiMort » Thu Feb 09, 2012 11:17 am

law777 wrote:
TaipeiMort wrote:You guys do know that there is more to law than litigation right? I don't know if you can refer to the legal due diligence involved in M&A and capital market transactions as "reading."



Could you expound on how much reading is involved in M&A and capital market work?


You are reading generally to find important pieces of information, not to understand opposing arguments, and less of what you are reading is dense. Your may also be to understand the operating effect of particular agreement languange, and the type of legal risks and practical effect it has. Reading is more about either die diligence (scanning), or recognizing the meaning if agreement terms (generally less reading than lit, but deeper reading).

berkeleykel06
Posts: 292
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 3:39 am

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby berkeleykel06 » Thu Feb 09, 2012 3:11 pm

seatown12 wrote:OP should look into a position in his school's Career Services office, where he won't need to read or really do anything at all.

P.S.
berkeleykel06 wrote:
Cupidity wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:Public Defender. I'm pretty sure you just wing it, and let the Innocent Project fix your mistakes in 20 years.

Not sure if serious.

Based on my work with the Innocence Project I'm afraid that this too often does appear to be the case.

:roll:

Pretty sure Desert Fox was not serious. The Innocence Project takes on only the few most egregious cases that are out there, but even still ineffective defense counsel isn't one of the most common problems they encounter. From their website:

Many wrongful convictions overturned with DNA testing involve multiple causes: 75% involve eyewitness misidentification; in 50%, unvalidated or improper forensic science played a role; a false confession or admission contributed to 25%; in 15% of the cases, unreliable informants played a role. Prosecutorial misconduct, ineffective defense, police misconduct and racism are harder to quantify but were also factors in many of the wrongful convictions that have been overturned with DNA testing.


Sorry for that brief derail...


Thanks for the eye roll dear, and the Innocent Project briefer (I had no idea what the organization did even though I did work for it).

Regardless of whether DF was aiming for sarcasm or not, the point is from what I've seen what he said isn't too far off. The Innocence Project only takes the most egregious cases, but I worked in INTAKE for the Innocence Project. So I looked through cases that wouldn't qualify for Innocence as well as ones that would. Even in the cases that would not qualify to be picked up for the Innocence Project, the briefs I read were one step above incompetence: clear copy and paste jobs, conclusory statements without even attempting to make arguments to back then up, briefs in murder cases that read like they took an hour max to write. No errors substantial enough to overturn conviction, but they clearly did not take significant amounts of reading and writing to construct.

Edit--In sum, to make it clear for you what I was trying to say: they did seem like they were winging it and just trying to get the cases out of their hands.

User avatar
spleenworship
Posts: 4421
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:08 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby spleenworship » Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:39 pm

seatown12 wrote:OP should look into a position in his school's Career Services office, where he won't need to read or really do anything at all.


I lol'd

berkeleykel06 wrote:
Thanks for the eye roll dear, and the Innocent Project briefer (I had no idea what the organization did even though I did work for it).

Regardless of whether DF was aiming for sarcasm or not, the point is from what I've seen what he said isn't too far off. The Innocence Project only takes the most egregious cases, but I worked in INTAKE for the Innocence Project. So I looked through cases that wouldn't qualify for Innocence as well as ones that would. Even in the cases that would not qualify to be picked up for the Innocence Project, the briefs I read were one step above incompetence: clear copy and paste jobs, conclusory statements without even attempting to make arguments to back then up, briefs in murder cases that read like they took an hour max to write. No errors substantial enough to overturn conviction, but they clearly did not take significant amounts of reading and writing to construct.

Edit--In sum, to make it clear for you what I was trying to say: they did seem like they were winging it and just trying to get the cases out of their hands.


I have heard from several PDs that the reason stuff like this happens is that they are so profoundly overworked, mostly due to underfunding (especially in red states, but even in the blue). They often end up balancing a couple hundred cases... and so the sometimes let one go because they think they can't win it and it is easier to get it off their plate so they can take the five new ones they got today.

Not saying it is right, but you gotta feel for them... I would hate to have hundreds of cases. Constantly working my butt off, knowing that while most of my clients were scum... that some of them were innocent and their lives depended on me, but not having the time to figure out which clients were which... ugh. What a job.

seatown12
Posts: 614
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 9:16 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby seatown12 » Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:55 pm

berkeleykel06 wrote:Regardless of whether DF was aiming for sarcasm or not, the point is from what I've seen what he said isn't too far off. The Innocence Project only takes the most egregious cases, but I worked in INTAKE for the Innocence Project. So I looked through cases that wouldn't qualify for Innocence as well as ones that would. Even in the cases that would not qualify to be picked up for the Innocence Project, the briefs I read were one step above incompetence: clear copy and paste jobs, conclusory statements without even attempting to make arguments to back then up, briefs in murder cases that read like they took an hour max to write. No errors substantial enough to overturn conviction, but they clearly did not take significant amounts of reading and writing to construct.

Even working intake you were only exposed to an egregious subset of cases, so I don't think it's fair to make such a broad disparaging statement. The vast majority of PDs bust their ass for their clients and in return get low pay and disrespect even from those who are ostensibly on their side.

I'm also curious as to how many of those [I'm assuming appellate] briefs were written by PDs as opposed to private defense attorneys, because in my experience the former are much more likely to actually care about their clients while the latter sometimes are just collecting a check. Without having stats in front of me I think the majority of overturned convictions were not PD cases.

In sum, to make it clear for you what I was trying to say: thanks for your work with the Innocence Project, but before you speak on attorneys who have dedicated their lives to a largely thankless cause you should make sure you are in a position to know what you're talking about.

berkeleykel06
Posts: 292
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 3:39 am

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby berkeleykel06 » Thu Feb 09, 2012 6:53 pm

Good God people. Couple of things before I peace out of this ridiculous argument.
-Intake involved anything that people decided to send to us. So I don't see why this would necessarily mean I happened to see a subset of egregious cases. I suppose I didn't see cases where the defendant was found innocent, for obvious reasons, but beyond that anyone can send their materials into the Innocence Project.
-I read stuff by PDs, court-appointed defense attorneys, and paid attorneys.
-I didn't mean to single out PDs. DF said PDs. In my response I should have indicated that this was my experience dealing with defense attorneys in general, not necessarily solely PDs.
-I respect PDs and realize that they are vastly overworked and underpaid. I realize they would like to spend more time on their cases than is physically possible for them to. Never said that they didn't have a reason for spending little time on their cases. In fact, this is the reason that I wrote off going into PD myself. I knew it would suck not to feel like I had the ability to give every case my all.
-You can attack me all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that I read some pretty half-assed briefs in very serious cases.

/my two cents on the subject. Sorry as hell I ever mentioned it.

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby vanwinkle » Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:04 pm

Hey guys, I want to win an Olympic medal but I hate sweating. Which Olympic sports don't involve physical exertion?

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby 09042014 » Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:10 pm

vanwinkle wrote:Hey guys, I want to win an Olympic medal but I hate sweating. Which Olympic sports don't involve physical exertion?


Curling, Skeet Shooting, Archery, and Equestrian Dressage.

User avatar
AreJay711
Posts: 3406
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:51 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby AreJay711 » Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:45 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
vanwinkle wrote:Hey guys, I want to win an Olympic medal but I hate sweating. Which Olympic sports don't involve physical exertion?


Curling, Skeet Shooting, Archery, and Equestrian Dressage.

Also, swimming.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Market paying jobs that DON'T require copious reading

Postby 09042014 » Thu Feb 09, 2012 8:05 pm

AreJay711 wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
vanwinkle wrote:Hey guys, I want to win an Olympic medal but I hate sweating. Which Olympic sports don't involve physical exertion?


Curling, Skeet Shooting, Archery, and Equestrian Dressage.

Also, swimming.


I'm pretty sure that is every physically demanding.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.