What is the easiest law specialty, with the most MONEY?

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
deucethejuice
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 7:31 pm

What is the easiest law specialty, with the most MONEY?

Postby deucethejuice » Wed Jul 04, 2007 10:31 pm

I was talking to a family member who is a doctor regarding medicine sub specialties...that there are certain physician fields that definitely are less work/hours AND earn substantially more money than others. Example: Radiologists have less hours, no on-call or patients to round on, can work from a laptop at home, and earn triple the money compared to Family Practice physicians who work long hours, have lots of on-call and patients to see, and earn significantly less money.

So, my question is this.. is there a parallel to this in terms of the law profession? Does anyone know what law specialty is considered to be the "easiest" when factoring in the intensive labor hours/time away from home, etc, and still provide a great income potential? I heard from someone that it was entertainment law... ?

I would hate to go a certain path in law, and then a few years down the road realize that there is another specialty of law that would have been much easier and still have a high compensation...[/b]

typical1L
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 3:51 pm

Postby typical1L » Thu Jul 05, 2007 12:26 am

If you're looking at big firms, all of the positions require lots of hours, although something like M&A probably demands a more inconsistent schedule compared to something like trusts and estates. Some practice groups surely have more work and put in more hours than others. That said, I don't think it's a decision that needs to, or even can be, made at this point.

Rambiggler
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 7:05 pm

Postby Rambiggler » Thu Jul 05, 2007 2:04 am

You're asking the wrong crowd... for a number of reasons.

User avatar
aguacaliente
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 8:44 pm

Postby aguacaliente » Thu Jul 05, 2007 2:54 am

Money doesn't mean much. If you are interested in law because you think it will be easy and make you automatically rich, get out now. You will eat the barrel of a gun before you know what hit you if you don't actually enjoy it.

User avatar
ktlulu1
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 7:40 pm

Postby ktlulu1 » Thu Jul 05, 2007 2:59 am

^ yikes!

typical1L
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 3:51 pm

Postby typical1L » Thu Jul 05, 2007 8:26 am

I don't think a determination like "money doesn't mean much" helps the op. [shrugs] There's nothing wrong with considering the earning potential of different specialties if it could play some role in determining what you decide to do. As I said earlier, however, it's not a decision that can be made in an informed manner at this time.

randomposter
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:20 pm

Postby randomposter » Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:21 pm

Law firms pay the same salary to all associates no matter what area of law they are in (with the exception of some firms who pay a small bonus for patent law).

I'm not sure if as much what TYPE of law as it is what type of environment you work in. Like I said, salary is consistent within a firm across all legal specialties. If you want to work less (but also earn less), in-house counsel is a good option. Government jobs pay much less and you aren't guaranteed to work fewer hours. If you go solo, it's all up in the air, depending on your skills and your luck.

User avatar
DelDad
Posts: 234
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 5:26 pm

Postby DelDad » Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:31 pm

" in-house counsel is a good option."

Very true, but you cannot really get hired for it without some firm experience in hand.

randomposter
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:20 pm

Postby randomposter » Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:56 pm

Yeah that's true - I think a few companies interviewed on campus, but it was only a handful. You are going to have to lateral over if you want to work in-house.

ArkansasFan
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 9:39 pm

Postby ArkansasFan » Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:58 pm

I've always heard of real estate law, and real estate interests me. That said, why does one need a whole attorney to deal with real estate? I mean, what do realty lawyers do?

User avatar
DelDad
Posts: 234
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 5:26 pm

Postby DelDad » Sun Jul 08, 2007 11:58 am

One of the most common things they do is handle settlements and closings - drafting the contracts, making sure the titles are clean (no suits/judgments pending on the property), etc. In some states an attorney is involved with virtually every settlement. In others (CA, for example) many transactions are handled by the title companies, and the average homebuyer doesn't involve a lawyer. DE, where we live now, involves a real estate lawyer in every real estate transaction.

User avatar
iammyid
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 9:49 pm

Postby iammyid » Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:48 am

Real estate law = zoning.

Think zoning might be interesting? Talk to someone who graduated with a degree in city planning for five minutes and be prepared to get bored.

On the other hand, it can be profitable: My professor took a client who didn't want to and didn't have the space to build the extra parking spots it would take to build an apartment complex. My professor got a variance for the apartment complex and charged $80k for one day of work.

I second what was said above. The story I've told happened in California. But I've worked for a real estate development company and there was a real estate attorney around for every step of the process. He had to go over the most tedious and long-winded documents but he seemed pretty happy doing it.

User avatar
Reinhardt
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 2:27 am

Postby Reinhardt » Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:55 am

I know a real estate lawyer who's in his 50s. He makes significantly less than his doctor wife. For whatever that's worth.

User avatar
micahtaylor
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 1:22 am

Postby micahtaylor » Tue Jul 17, 2007 5:12 pm

^

not much

awesomepossum
Posts: 928
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 12:49 am

Postby awesomepossum » Tue Jul 17, 2007 5:26 pm

So....as opposed to requesting info about BIGLAW, this is a quest for information about LAZYLAW?

User avatar
Oklahoma Mike
Posts: 116
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 7:48 am

Postby Oklahoma Mike » Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:43 am

man, lazylaw sounds pretty good.

When is that recruiter on campus?

User avatar
Justin71
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 11:35 pm

Postby Justin71 » Wed Jul 18, 2007 10:51 pm

I think that there is a higher demand for attorneys who practice the more boring forms of law, if you will. Think "boring" and "complicated," as there will likely be a decreased supply of labor in those markets, economically speaking. Tax law is an example of a potentially "boring" and "complicated" area of specialization. But this is just a guess, not a fact.

randomposter
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:20 pm

Postby randomposter » Thu Jul 19, 2007 9:41 pm

I don't think tax law is boring at all. All types of law are potentially interesting; it's just that there are very boring parts to each and every type of law. Those boring parts, such as document review, go to (at least in my firm) young associates, of counsel, or contracted attorneys (who don't get paid much at all).




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests