Top Law Schools

Flubbed a research project @ my firm and arrived at "no" when the right answer was "yes."

Issue was whether A applied to Z. I answered "No," it doesn't. That's correct. But, because Q is true, B (substantially similar to A) applies to Z. I did not know about Q, and, even if I did, I wouldn't have thought to research whether it triggered B. It was just a gap in my knowledge where I got spanked by the learning curve in a new practice area. Client caught the mistake before taking any action on the analysis.

I'm just venting. I know the lesson is simply "be better, and do the best work that you can."

But, if anyone is inclined to share stories or tips, I'd be grateful.

fobstory.jpeg

"Client caught the mistake...".

Anonymous User wrote:Flubbed a research project @ my firm and arrived at "no" when the right answer was "yes."

Issue was whether A applied to Z. I answered "No," it doesn't. That's correct. But, because Q is true, B (substantially similar to A) applies to Z. I did not know about Q, and, even if I did, I wouldn't have thought to research whether it triggered B. It was just a gap in my knowledge where I got spanked by the learning curve in a new practice area. Client caught the mistake before taking any action on the analysis.

I'm just venting. I know the lesson is simply "be better, and do the best work that you can."

But, if anyone is inclined to share stories or tips, I'd be grateful.

Chill out. It happens to every associate.

The answer to how to approach a mistake is always to own it and move on. The people you work for will likely realize that it was a "mistake" that's attributable to a lack of substantive knowledge. Nevertheless, they will respect you more for taking ownership of it.

That said, it's a good lesson. Think more broadly about your research projects and always be on the look out for alternative answers. While you won't necessarily get dinged for not doing so, you will impress people if you do. Remember, you're hired to solve problems, not answer academic questions. If the answer to a problem is not the exact same way it was framed to you, that's okay.

sounds like integration

Next time ask dat partner if there are any catches he wants you to be aware of when you get the project. Half the time they'll say they have no clue, and that's why they're asking you to look at it. Half the time they'll rattle off the gist of what they think the law is and a few exceptions you should investigate. I don't think I irk anybody by asking; if anything, they like that I don't run off and waste time when they can give me 30 seconds of guidance that saves two hours of research.

Also, this is one of the reasons I think it's useful to peruse good secondary sources if you can find them. I'm thinking law review articles looking at the development of that corner of law, not those no-shit treatises that quote verbatim two key cases that everybody knows about and you find within 20 min of looking at the topic. A good law review article can be gold for getting the verbiage down and giving you further research avenues.

If it comes up, just own it. I had a big mess up on my first assignment, and it came up during a performance review with the negative performance review because of it. It was like a private meeting version of a Comedy Central Roast. I owned it, and after that it was a non-issue. No one ever brought it up again. To the extent they care, they're more concerned with how you learn from it and take responsibility than the mistake itself. "Passing the test" when you're called out is more important than whether you do well on your made up assignment.

Thanks for these replies. They are really helpful. Gotta just keep grinding and do my best!