Top Law Schools

I'm worried, I had my first real day at my SA today after orientation and a lit partner called me in at 10am and gave me some research to do (no writing). It was pretty basic and he told me to take a few hours but it ended up taking most of the day and going in to see him three times and getting sent back to do more until it was done. Everytime I saw him he'd bust my balls about my research skills (which are admittedly not good, this is my first lit research experience since the bullshit of legal writing class), tell me he's looking for something else. Sometimes he'd backtrack and say something positive, I don't know. I feel like he thinks I'm an idiot and I'm worried.

It's really difficult to say without knowing the particulars of the assignment and what you're doing to research it. I don't believe this have ever happened to me. I mean, research is not that complicated. Type search terms into westlaw and then use your brain to determine what is relevant and go from there. For now, I'd chalk this up to you being a neurotic law student and not worry.

You can also call westlaw/lexis and have a reference attorney build a search for you. I did that a lot.

Something I learned during my first summer was that when presented with a research or writing assignment, unless the partner specifically says time is of the essence, he or she does not need an answer right away, or even that day. If the partner is asking you to do research, it's because they don't know the answer and they want you to go find it, but they'll know generally how long it should take you. If they believe it'll take a day, of course they'll send you back a couple times if you come back too quickly.

Take your time, work on something else, and then bring your results to them.

Don't go back to him three times. Really do your best to think the assignment through, do some preliminary research, etc. If you have questions, try and collect them so you can present them to him all at once. He was probably just getting annoyed you kept popping into the office.

Probably bad. World of difference between having your tie made fun of, and having your competency made fun of.

This is probably bad.

Op here, wanted to clarify that I didn't go back 3 times to ask for help, I went three times with what I had (which I though was the entirety of the assignment) and he would say "oh that's interesting, can you look into that more" so I'd do that and go back and he'd say the same thing for something else.

I guess Im worried that I should have gotten in to all of those things without being prompted to do so? And the fact that I didn't is a reflection of my research skills?

Also I wanted to be more specific about the nature of the criticism, which was that he was concerned my sources were not authoritative. He said "show me the statute that says this instead of a secondary source"...which makes sense now that I think about it but at the time I feel like I just looked like a idiot for not knowing that is obviously what he wanted. Like I said, this is pretty much my first time doing research of this sort.

I finished the assignment after finding all of the statutes he was looking for, he was busy so I didn't get a chance to discuss it with him so we'll see what happen tomorrow.

are you a 1L or a 2L?

edited to be less of a dick: this sounds pretty bad bro.

I'm a 2L...where do I go from here? I don't know how to improve my research skills without doing more work for people, but that's just more people finding out I'm bad at it. I don't know how to intuitively know that when someone tells me to do some research of topic X and topic X is often followed by topic Y that I should do all the research for topic Y as well but not topic Z or whatever. I'm stressing out.

Don't worry, you will get better. I'm going against the grain and saying it is nbd. I don't expect shit out of Summer's except enthusiasm and typo free work. Research gets easier once you know more law and facts. A lot of time you won't get the facts, but just knowing the general law and terms of art the court uses makes it way easier to find what the partner or associate wants and the entirety of what they want. It's the first assignment, don't stress.

Most people here are likely trolling you. That being said, a few questions you need to answer for a thorough response. What kind of firm? How big is the class size? Was the question something urgent for a client?

Lots of times partners make shit up for summer. Also, firms tend to leave non-pressing and abstract questions without answers to summers as well. So it's not surprising you didn't get it all your first go.

Obviously it's not a great thing, but individual partners and firms are too idiosyncratic for anyone to give you meaningful feedback here, and it wouldn't affect what you do going forward even if anyone could. The last thing you need feeding your neuroticism is everyone else's neuroticism.

I don't mean to be part of a pile on so I'll elaborate. I would probably chalk it up to neuroticism except anon said he/she turned in a memo citing secondary sources when the guy was looking for statutes. To me that seems a bit beyond the pale but Serrett's right and that could just be my own neuroticism at work.

I do empathize with the "where do I stop" dilemma of being thorough vs being concise.

pancakes3 wrote:I don't mean to be part of a pile on so I'll elaborate. I would probably chalk it up to neuroticism except anon said he/she turned in a memo citing secondary sources when the guy was looking for statutes. To me that seems a bit beyond the pale but Serrett's right and that could just be my own neuroticism at work.

I do empathize with the "where do I stop" dilemma of being thorough vs being concise.

Frankly, as a junior, you're almost always better off being too thorough at the risk of not being concise. It's much easier for a senior to cut your bs down if you've been too thorough than it is to create new content if you haven't been thorough enough.

pancakes3 wrote:I don't mean to be part of a pile on so I'll elaborate. I would probably chalk it up to neuroticism except anon said he/she turned in a memo citing secondary sources when the guy was looking for statutes. To me that seems a bit beyond the pale but Serrett's right and that could just be my own neuroticism at work.

I do empathize with the "where do I stop" dilemma of being thorough vs being concise.

To clarify, I did not turn in a memo citing secondary sources...even I know that's nuts.

He wanted me to do some research and then give him a run down of what I found orally, and when I started doing that he started pressing me on sources like "yeah but what law governs that?" about minor aspect of the thing I was talking about (I had brought copies of relevant statutes for the major things). So I go back and find those statutes and bring them to him, and then he'll press me on something else related to THAT thing that I read in a secondary source about that thing. Like I said in the title, it felt like he was busting my balls with how many times I just looked like an idiot who didn't do the research properly. Like...where do I stop so I don't get sent back for more research?

I feel like my system is to read the secondary material to get a good idea of what's going on and then pull of the law to double check that everythings on the nose, but that I've just been doing it backwards and gaining useless information.

It doesn't sound like you're doing anything wrong substantively, but meeting with a partner three times in a day sounds exceptionally unusual and way too demanding of the guys time, unless he specifically told you to come back with more info ASAP.

Anonymous User wrote:

pancakes3 wrote:I don't mean to be part of a pile on so I'll elaborate. I would probably chalk it up to neuroticism except anon said he/she turned in a memo citing secondary sources when the guy was looking for statutes. To me that seems a bit beyond the pale but Serrett's right and that could just be my own neuroticism at work.

I do empathize with the "where do I stop" dilemma of being thorough vs being concise.

To clarify, I did not turn in a memo citing secondary sources...even I know that's nuts.

He wanted me to do some research and then give him a run down of what I found orally, and when I started doing that he started pressing me on sources like "yeah but what law governs that?" about minor aspect of the thing I was talking about (I had brought copies of relevant statutes for the major things). So I go back and find those statutes and bring them to him, and then he'll press me on something else related to THAT thing that I read in a secondary source about that thing. Like I said in the title, it felt like he was busting my balls with how many times I just looked like an idiot who didn't do the research properly. Like...where do I stop so I don't get sent back for more research?

I feel like my system is to read the secondary material to get a good idea of what's going on and then pull of the law to double check that everythings on the nose, but that I've just been doing it backwards and gaining useless information.

Before you started, did you confirm exactly what he wanted? Basically, did you go to his office or call him, go over the assignment with him (based on what was given to you), and ask him if there was anything else you needed to know?

If you did and he didn't say anything about the sub-issues, I wouldn't worry. If you didn't, I'd do that next time.(if he has time to meet with you)

Either ways, I doubt this is a big deal. It's Day 1.

Anonymous User wrote:

pancakes3 wrote:I don't mean to be part of a pile on so I'll elaborate. I would probably chalk it up to neuroticism except anon said he/she turned in a memo citing secondary sources when the guy was looking for statutes. To me that seems a bit beyond the pale but Serrett's right and that could just be my own neuroticism at work.

I do empathize with the "where do I stop" dilemma of being thorough vs being concise.

To clarify, I did not turn in a memo citing secondary sources...even I know that's nuts.

He wanted me to do some research and then give him a run down of what I found orally, and when I started doing that he started pressing me on sources like "yeah but what law governs that?" about minor aspect of the thing I was talking about (I had brought copies of relevant statutes for the major things). So I go back and find those statutes and bring them to him, and then he'll press me on something else related to THAT thing that I read in a secondary source about that thing. Like I said in the title, it felt like he was busting my balls with how many times I just looked like an idiot who didn't do the research properly. Like...where do I stop so I don't get sent back for more research?

I feel like my system is to read the secondary material to get a good idea of what's going on and then pull of the law to double check that everythings on the nose, but that I've just been doing it backwards and gaining useless information.

I'm no expert and an SA myself, so please, take this with a grain of salt. But I think you may have an issue with clearly articulating the information to the partner. In this thread alone, you have had to clarify you original post 2 or 3 separate times.. i.e. "I cited to a secondary source"..."well no, actually, I didn't cite to a secondary source," etc. If we are having trouble understanding what went wrong, I doubt the partner could understand the information you were relaying to him.

ETA: This forum has saved my ass on numerous occasions, but it also has a tendency to make oneself INCREDIBLY paranoid.

Anonymous User wrote:

pancakes3 wrote:I don't mean to be part of a pile on so I'll elaborate. I would probably chalk it up to neuroticism except anon said he/she turned in a memo citing secondary sources when the guy was looking for statutes. To me that seems a bit beyond the pale but Serrett's right and that could just be my own neuroticism at work.

I do empathize with the "where do I stop" dilemma of being thorough vs being concise.

To clarify, I did not turn in a memo citing secondary sources...even I know that's nuts.

He wanted me to do some research and then give him a run down of what I found orally, and when I started doing that he started pressing me on sources like "yeah but what law governs that?" about minor aspect of the thing I was talking about (I had brought copies of relevant statutes for the major things). So I go back and find those statutes and bring them to him, and then he'll press me on something else related to THAT thing that I read in a secondary source about that thing. Like I said in the title, it felt like he was busting my balls with how many times I just looked like an idiot who didn't do the research properly. Like...where do I stop so I don't get sent back for more research?

I feel like my system is to read the secondary material to get a good idea of what's going on and then pull of the law to double check that everythings on the nose, but that I've just been doing it backwards and gaining useless information.

you need to relax. you are fine. most lawyers that want to talk something out rather than read a memo know it takes 3 or 4 trips to the well to get the desired info. i work with a partner that has this same method and if hes working on a brief well be back and forth all day. like 20 times not 3. you're fine.

I just had this conversation with my SA mentee yesterday. Bringing a work product to a partner 3 times as an associate might be problematic but as a SA you're probably fine - most partners who are willing to give work to a Summer recognize that it's a teaching/learning experience as much as it is an opportunity to get any real assistance.

One of the hardest things to learn when transitioning from law school to practice is that there is no professor and there is no answer key. The partner's job is to think macro. S/he may not know the nitty gritty of the question which is why primary sources are so important. Presenting what the law says helps them to think about follow up questions applicable to their unique client matter. As you get more familiar, you'll start anticipating these follow-up questions. Regardless of your situation, a Summer can get by with a lot by having a good attitude, writing clearly, learning from mistakes, and keeping your paranoia from leaking out too often.

The partner might also like busting your balls. I know I do. That's part of the fun of having excited new blood walk in the doors.

Welcome to the constant passive aggressive tap dance of working at a law firm!

One of the challenges as a SA is that people give you ad hoc assignments with little to no factual or case context -- unless you specifically ask. A lot of times, the assigning attorney will give you a narrow task to research issue X. You'll find the answer to X, but because you don't know anything about the case, you won't realize the answer to issue X as applied to the instant facts also raises issues Y and Z and that the motion will require citations to authoritative sources A, B, and C. You come back with your narrow answer, and you look dumb because you didn't get to any of the other questions that are obvious to anyone who knows the case -- which you don't, but the assigning attorney does.

The advice here is to ask more questions when accepting the assignment so that you can predict what additional lines of inquiry will be most helpful to the assigning attorney as you conduct your research. They won't mind spending an extra few minutes to explain the assignment to you at the outset, but they won't be thrilled if you come back three times interrupting to ask questions that you could have asked up front.

If you go anywhere in the office this summer without a legal pad, you're doing it wrong.

didntretake wrote:You can also call westlaw/lexis and have a reference attorney build a search for you. I did that a lot.

1000x this.

Also, make sure you're listening to what he's asking for. Take notes in meetings so you're not getting stuck going down rabbit holes.

They expect you to suck, but you need to listen and put forth good effort. As long as you do that, you're going to be fine.