Top Law Schools

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]

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.

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

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.

^ yikes!

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.

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.

" in-house counsel is a good option."

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

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.

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?

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.

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.

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

^

not much

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

man, lazylaw sounds pretty good.

When is that recruiter on campus?

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.

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).