Celebrating 10 years! 2007-2017

Go to a wedding, overbill, lose your job and get in trouble

This story so epitomizes everything that is wrong with this wolfman08/25/17
edited for those w/out access to law.com wolfman08/25/17
hourly billing is stupid. It doesn't reward or incentivize e uzername08/25/17
Other sources: http://www.americanlawyer.com/id=12 0279639 superttthero08/25/17
Law is for suckers. isthisit08/25/17
A few years later, Ms. Cook died and was met by St. Peter at wutwutwut08/25/17
LOL wolfman08/25/17
Too funny. Thanks for the laugh on Friday afternoon! defectoantesto08/25/17
This quote for me really take the cake though: "Cook’s wolfman08/25/17
Why would the firm report her? Fire her, but why put her la psusurf08/25/17
The person in the office next to me is living this out as we jd4hire08/25/17
He'll get promoted and you'll get an attaboy. isthisit08/25/17
jd4hire: I'm not sure how long you've been working in law bu williamdrayton08/25/17
Gunners gonna gun triplesix08/25/17
I hear you as I continually tell myself - "self, worry about jd4hire08/27/17
in your first post you gave the impression that your office williamdrayton08/28/17
No, held to the same standards. I have no evidence of fraud jd4hire08/28/17
I thought we were getting away from the singular "they" but perkinwarbeck08/25/17
Her mistake was billing the majority of her hours to one fil attorneyinct08/25/17
Her mistake was not working harder before her honeymoon. bucwild08/25/17
If the work ain't there when you have the time, there's noth superttthero08/27/17
If the work truly wasn't there, her making up the hours look bucwild08/27/17
I was fired for not hitting billable hour totals, so the pre acerimmer08/25/17
Such a great profession, as soon as you think youve cleared mtbislife08/27/17
As a second year, she would not have been fired for being 20 jdtrash08/27/17
I assumed a client found out somehow. bucwild08/27/17
According to the quote posted from the story, her hours neve loblawyer08/27/17
Well, she'll get a job before I ever will. notreallyalawyer08/27/17
I've read your thread and am rooting for you. But you need t loblawyer08/27/17
Garbage profession. Nuts that people put themselves through karlmarx08/27/17
Couldn't agree more. I'm in private practice but worrying ab loblawyer08/27/17
nobody in colorado gets taxed at that high a rate. Her comb dingbat08/28/17
I'm surprised they didn't sweep it under the rug as well. Wr mrtor08/28/17
as wolfman alluded, the dudes on this board are too smart to williamdrayton08/28/17
Credited headline but we both know that media will never wri triplesix08/28/17
I agree that the conversations bear considerable weight on t mrtor08/28/17
I feel for her. Think about what a tightrope a successful la onehell08/28/17
all that is true, but, it doesn't explain why she was hung o dingbat08/28/17
more highly credited posting by onehell. I can't imagine williamdrayton08/28/17
Unless the med student went to a Caribbean school. All my me spaghetti08/29/17
I repped a caribbean med school doc and he sure was doing al jd4hire08/29/17
the Caribbean med school issue crossed my mind while I was w williamdrayton08/29/17
Where you did your residency is much more important than whe onehell08/29/17
on the other hand, there are doctors who rack up a million d dingbat08/29/17
I'd imagine doctors have a lot more marketability than lawye notreallyalawyer08/29/17
Yeah, there's no such thing as an unemployed doctor or a doc onehell08/29/17
No one with 6-8 years in biglaw should need doc review. They loblawyer08/29/17

wolfman (Aug 25, 2017 - 1:41 pm)

This story so epitomizes everything that is wrong with this "profession,' I can't even begin to pick it apart and post choice quotes... it's all just so money (and I mean both the firms and the people who work in them LOL)

http://www.law.com/sites/almstaff/2017/08/24/after-wedding-an-associates-overbilling-leads-to-a-suspension/

EDIT: here are the relevant parts, for those w/out access:

Mary Jaclyn Cook spent nearly two weeks last December in Hawaii, getting married and honeymooning in the Pacific paradise. All the while, she knew she was short on hours.

At the end of November, the then second-year associate with Faegre Baker Daniels in Denver was 368 hours shy of the firm’s annual 1,850-hour expectation for associates. Work had been slow in the Rocky Mountain outpost’s product liability practice, and wedding planning had taken its toll. A November meeting with her boss had failed to quell Cook’s fear that she would be fired if she missed the target.

On Jan. 3, 2017, when time logs were due, Cook wrote 60 entries totaling 135.7 hours. Thanks to the help of a December in which she billed more than 12 hours every day, despite her travel, Cook managed to end the year about an eight-hour workday over her firm’s expected hours for associates.

If only it were true.

This month, Cook and the Colorado Attorney Regulation Counsel agreed to a nine-month suspension from the practice of law for the now former Faegre Baker Daniels associate. In a stipulation with the disciplinary board, Cook admitted to inflating and fabricating time entries totaling nearly 140 hours, worth nearly $40,000. The firm never collected the money, having noticed Cook’s unusually high hourly totals in December before most of its bills went out to clients. She resigned from the firm in January.

In her stipulation, Cook took responsibility for her misconduct and expressed regret, stating that she is “gravely embarrassed” by the episode.

“As someone who has excelled her entire life and set high expectations for herself, words cannot express her feelings of shame and regret,” Cook said in her stipulation. Neither Cook nor her lawyer—Alec Rothrock of Burns, Figa & Will—returned requests for comment.

Michael Frisch, an ethics expert and professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, said that while there is no excuse for overbilling, Cook’s tale is symptomatic of the billable hour pressures that associates face and the inherent conflict they create within firms, their lawyers and clients.

“The whole idea of targeting billable hours, saying an attorney must work ‘X’ number of hours to stay employed, doesn’t encourage efficiency and it doesn’t encourage the most cost-conscious use of attorneys’ services for clients,” said Frisch, who spent 17 years as a grievance prosecutor for the District of Columbia’s Court of Appeals. “And that’s been widely recognized in the profession.”

Yet billable hour requirements exist virtually across the board in Big Law. With the average third-year associate at an Am Law 200 firm last year billing 2,005 hours per year, according to
the 2017 American Lawyer Midlevel Associate Survey, Cook may find scant sympathy among her harried peers.

And while hourly requirements on their own may be a fact of life for Big Law associates, survey responses to The American Lawyer show that young lawyers from many firms feel uncertain about what the billing expectations actually mean.

“More transparency on bonuses and how to meet expectations,” one associate requested. “Have clear expectations with respect to workload and bonuses,” another suggested. “It will be tough in the near future to keep top quality associates when the firm requires 2,000 billable hours but does not pay market bonus,” a third warned.

An associate at Faegre Baker Daniels commented, “I have no problem with the expectation for billable hours. I don’t like that associates are expected to bill more than the expectation.”

A spokeswoman for the firm said that failure to meet an annual billable hour expectation is not a basis for dismissal from Faegre Baker Daniels.

“We communicate regularly with associates on the standards and competencies by which they are evaluated, and offer many resources to help our lawyers build successful careers,” the firm said in a statement. “[Faegre Baker Daniels] also provides numerous outlets for associates who are concerned about their volume of work—high or low—including advisors, supervising partners, group leaders, office leaders and talent professionals.”

Cook’s stipulation shows she sought out the Denver office leader of the products liability practice, Heather Perkins, when the possibility of missing the firm’s hourly expectation arose in November.

“Ms. Perkins thought she had been reassuring, but her message failed to reassure respondent,” according to Cook’s stipulation. Whatever led to her overbilling, it was fairly easy for Faegre Baker Daniels to spot once it occurred.

Cook’s final December log reflected 21 work days where she billed more than 12 hours. She did not bill for some of the days she was in Hawaii for her wedding and honeymoon. To make up for that, she billed more than 15 hours a day for a 12-day stretch at the beginning of the month, including back-to-back 18- and 19-hour days.

One red flag that Perkins spotted was Cook billing 175 hours for a single client, which was more than the 2014 graduate from the University of Denver Sturm College of Law averaged for all of her clients in a given month. (The disciplinary decision involving Cook was first spotted by the Legal Profession Blog.)

After Perkins spotted the hours and consulted the firm’s ethics counsel, on Jan. 24, Cook was called into a meeting she thought was a performance review. She met with Perkins, Joseph Tanner, the national head of Faegre Baker Daniels’ product liability group, and David Stark, the firm’s ethics counsel. Stark asked about Cook’s year-end surge in hours.

Cook “was caught off-guard, and she panicked. She claimed the hours were legitimate,” according to the stipulation. Stark countered by saying that a document management system her log claimed she used on certain days showed she never logged in those days. After the meeting ended, Cook confessed on the same day to Stark about the overbilling, stating she was afraid she would lose her job if she missed the firm’s hours requirement. Faegre Baker Daniels gave her the change to resign, which she accepted.

Frisch, the ethics professor from Georgetown, said that Cook’s future job prospects in the legal profession will be cast in doubt.

“It’s a profession that tends to give second chances and be forgiving, but it’s hard enough to be employed today when you don’t have something like this on your record,” Frisch said. “And in that sense, it’s sad. You go to your wedding. Come back, panic and this happens.”

While her law license is listed as suspended, Cook’s profile on professional networking website LinkedIn states that she is now a co-founder and executive director of a nonprofit organization near Denver called the National Cord Blood Initiative.

Reply Like (0)
wolfman (Aug 25, 2017 - 1:52 pm)

edited for those w/out access to law.com

Reply Like (0)
uzername (Aug 25, 2017 - 1:55 pm)

hourly billing is stupid. It doesn't reward or incentivize efficiency at all. in a 15 minute phone call a lawyer can save a company a billion dollars and get $100 for it.

Reply Like (0)
superttthero (Aug 25, 2017 - 1:56 pm)

Other sources:

http://www.americanlawyer.com/id=1202796398567/After-Wedding-An-Associates-Overbilling-Leads-to-a-Suspension?slreturn=20170725135547

Reply Like (0)
isthisit (Aug 25, 2017 - 2:08 pm)

Law is for suckers.

Reply Like (0)
wutwutwut (Aug 25, 2017 - 2:42 pm)

A few years later, Ms. Cook died and was met by St. Peter at the pearly gates.

“There must be some mistake,” she complained.

“Why is that?” asked St. Peter.

“Because I’m only thirty-five years old!” she exclaimed.

“Really?" said St. Peter, "Hang on a moment and I'll check on this".

"Oh, wait, here it is,", said St. Peter. "According to your billed hours, you are seventy-three."

Reply Like (0)
wolfman (Aug 25, 2017 - 2:43 pm)

LOL

Reply Like (0)
defectoantesto (Aug 25, 2017 - 6:36 pm)

Too funny. Thanks for the laugh on Friday afternoon!

Reply Like (0)
wolfman (Aug 25, 2017 - 2:44 pm)

This quote for me really take the cake though:

"Cook’s stipulation shows she sought out the Denver office leader of the products liability practice, Heather Perkins, when the possibility of missing the firm’s hourly expectation arose in November.

“Ms. Perkins thought she had been reassuring, but her message failed to reassure respondent,” according to Cook’s stipulation."

O rlly?

"A spokeswoman for the firm said that failure to meet an annual billable hour expectation is not a basis for dismissal from Faegre Baker Daniels.

“We communicate regularly with associates on the standards and competencies by which they are evaluated, and offer many resources to help our lawyers build successful careers,” the firm said in a statement. “[Faegre Baker Daniels] also provides numerous outlets for associates who are concerned about their volume of work—high or low—including advisors, supervising partners, group leaders, office leaders and talent professionals.”

We know they are not stupid. Do they think we are stupid?

Reply Like (0)
psusurf (Aug 25, 2017 - 3:04 pm)

Why would the firm report her? Fire her, but why put her law license in jeopardy, especially when this is happening everywhere with people who are just smarter at it and never get caught. The bills never went out, they never got paid, I don't understand why they reported her.

Reply Like (0)
jd4hire (Aug 25, 2017 - 3:12 pm)

The person in the office next to me is living this out as we speak, except they don't have a wedding and isn't leaving for a honeymoon. They simply took tons of half days, "work from home days," and other BS throughout the year.

With three months to go for our billable year, they had to bill approximately 800 hours. They'll get it done even though they show up later and leave earlier than I. It's complete BS.

I'm leaving on a two-week vacation and am nervous about the gap in my hours, but am coming in early, staying late, and working weekends to be in a good spot. I'm curious if my firm will do anything about it.

Reply Like (0)
isthisit (Aug 25, 2017 - 3:23 pm)

He'll get promoted and you'll get an attaboy.

Reply Like (0)
williamdrayton (Aug 25, 2017 - 4:13 pm)

jd4hire: I'm not sure how long you've been working in law but do yourself a favor - please don't spend your days keeping track of your office neighbor's hours. the only thing you will accomplish is making yourself miserable.

it's nice to think that every law firm is a strict meritocracy where all promotion decisions are made strictly on the raw number of billed hours. unfortunately, all kinds of consideration come into play, such as practice area (billing rates may vary wildly within the same firm); personal connections/office politics.

I notice you were careful not to use a gendered pronoun when describing your neighbor.

It leads me to wonder if you were really thinking: "the hot chick in the office next to me barely bills any hours but gets to keep her job while I toil like a slave and have sleepless nights wondering if I will still be employed come January 1".

that's just the way the world works. the sooner you accept that, the sooner you can just put your head down and worry only about the things within your control.

Reply Like (0)
triplesix (Aug 25, 2017 - 5:36 pm)

Gunners gonna gun

Reply Like (0)
jd4hire (Aug 27, 2017 - 12:47 pm)

I hear you as I continually tell myself - "self, worry about your own issues and deal with matters within your control." I'm only out 6 years. My concerns for others' billable hours started this year and with this person alone.

This constraint is difficult for a few reasons. First, the firm circulates a monthly hours report clearly showing each individual's progress in their respective march to bonus prosperity. Second, it's tough as "they" are in the office directly next to me. It's tough to ignore that they come in later and leave before our office closes, but will say a good bye to me such as "I can't believe I only billed 11 hours today, I have 6 more to meet my goal." That stings especially when they haven't been in the office for 7 hours. Or, it is real annoying when they "work from home" upwards of 8 days a month and they tell you "work from home" means relaxing watching TV.

This issue could impact the firm and result in some real negative consequences. Further, their take of the bonus pie diminishes what is left for everyone else. I don't like sharing my pie with people who lie and cheat. The issue has caused quite a stir amongst other associates as well. This has led to a general decrease in morale, lack of motivation, lots of small talk among all other associates and how upset they'll be come bonus time, and their intention to leave if some worst case scenarios occur, i.e., the offending associate is handsomely rewarded with others getting less.

As to gender neutral, that was deliberate as I wouldn't want someone putting two and two together, as unlikely that is. Their attractiveness, or lack thereof, does not feed into my annoyance with the issue. It's simple - all other associates put in time and bust their butt for their salary and bonus, this individual does not. And if it helps, they are attractive, but certainly not hot.

And I hear you on it being the way the world works. IT's just terribly frustrating. My only solace is that partners are starting to make open comments about it.

Reply Like (0)
williamdrayton (Aug 28, 2017 - 10:06 am)

in your first post you gave the impression that your office neighbor was simply not being held to the same billing requirements as you and other colleagues. now in the second paragraph of your follow-up post, you strongly imply that the chick is committing fraud against clients - that's a major leap from the first scenario to the second. if the second is true - that's grounds for dismissal

and associates would really quit their jobs because some chick who wasn't pulling her weight got a bonus? I certainly believe that there is some whispered resentment and bitterness but you sound a bit dramatic when claiming that people would quit.

While the co-worker's attractiveness may not be an issue for you personally, the scenario you describe certainly sounds like someone is getting a "poosy pass" for serving as office eye candy.

for what its' worth, that firm in Denver that filed the ethics complaint are douchebags - demanding a resignation with no severance would have been adequate punishment given that the fraudulent bills were caught before being sent to a client.

Reply Like (0)
jd4hire (Aug 28, 2017 - 11:47 am)

No, held to the same standards. I have no evidence of fraud other than the fact that three months will net 800 billable hours when office time is less than 9-5, M-F. What happens after hours, I have no clue about, but I certainly would be crazy if I were posting double digit days five days in a row with hours such as 12, 18, 13, 11, 10.

I've never said I'd quit, but others have noted that how this places out will impact their actions moving forward. I think it would be a more, I'm looking elsewhere based on what just happened. I don't think there would be a dramatic line of associates leaving. I certainly wouldn't as I need that cash money.

They are not getting a "poosy pass." The same standards apply to all, regardless of gender and attractiveness. I see your point, but that isn't an issue. Plus there are plenty of females in the partnership. I just don't have that concern here.

I genuinely like the person and find them to be a lot of fun. I consider them a friend. I'm bitter how things are playing out. But as you said, worry about myself. I saw the article and saw some direct parallels.

Reply Like (0)
perkinwarbeck (Aug 25, 2017 - 9:15 pm)

I thought we were getting away from the singular "they" but perhaps not.

Reply Like (0)
attorneyinct (Aug 25, 2017 - 8:07 pm)

Her mistake was billing the majority of her hours to one file.

Reply Like (0)
bucwild (Aug 25, 2017 - 8:30 pm)

Her mistake was not working harder before her honeymoon.

"At the end of November, the then second-year associate with Faegre Baker Daniels in Denver was 368 hours shy of the firm’s annual 1,850-hour expectation for associates."

Even if she didn't get married, she wasn't making up 358 hours in 1 month.

Reply Like (0)
superttthero (Aug 27, 2017 - 11:08 am)

If the work ain't there when you have the time, there's nothing you can do.

Reply Like (0)
bucwild (Aug 27, 2017 - 2:50 pm)

If the work truly wasn't there, her making up the hours looks even stupider. I'm sure she would have been fine as a second year, if there truly wasn't enough work to do. The article even suggests her superior told her not worry about her hours.

Reply Like (0)
acerimmer (Aug 25, 2017 - 11:26 pm)

I was fired for not hitting billable hour totals, so the pressure is very real.

Reply Like (0)
mtbislife (Aug 27, 2017 - 10:32 am)

Such a great profession, as soon as you think youve cleared all the hoops 20 more resurface.

Reply Like (0)
jdtrash (Aug 27, 2017 - 4:21 pm)

As a second year, she would not have been fired for being 200-300 hours low. She really screwed up. I don't even know what the hell went through her mind. Even if they fire her at the end of the year, they will likely give her 3-6 months severance. If she is pregnant, they will likely let her stay for another year.

Secondly, I thought it was strange that the firm would out her. This not only destroys her chances of getting another job but also makes the firm look really really bad. It would make me hesitant to use them if I were a client. The partner in charge should have gave her a lecture and a strong warning or told her to leave within 3 months and sweep everything under the rug. It was terrible all around.

Reply Like (0)
bucwild (Aug 27, 2017 - 6:50 pm)

I assumed a client found out somehow.

Reply Like (0)
loblawyer (Aug 27, 2017 - 10:42 pm)

According to the quote posted from the story, her hours never made it on to the bill.

Reply Like (0)
notreallyalawyer (Aug 27, 2017 - 8:26 pm)

Well, she'll get a job before I ever will.

Reply Like (0)
loblawyer (Aug 27, 2017 - 10:43 pm)

I've read your thread and am rooting for you. But you need to change your attitude and gain some confidence. Fake it until you make it if need be.

Reply Like (0)
karlmarx (Aug 27, 2017 - 5:23 pm)

Garbage profession. Nuts that people put themselves through this just to make a little bit more and get taxed at 50%.

I enjoy my vacations don't think for a second about work.

Reply Like (0)
loblawyer (Aug 27, 2017 - 10:45 pm)

Couldn't agree more. I'm in private practice but worrying about hours on vacation is foreign to me. I have traded money for that to be sure.

Reply Like (0)
dingbat (Aug 28, 2017 - 1:56 pm)

nobody in colorado gets taxed at that high a rate. Her combined taxes (federal and state) is 32%

Reply Like (0)
mrtor (Aug 28, 2017 - 10:24 am)

I'm surprised they didn't sweep it under the rug as well. Write off the hours, quietly show her the door, and carry on as usual. Perhaps the in-house ethics counsel refused to play ball?

Sad story. I've felt the pressures billable hours, but I've always been careful to consistently bill each month to avoid an end-of-the-year panic. If the associate truly didn't have the work to meet the requirement (as opposed to focusing more on her wedding than doing her job), she probably would have received a pass this year. That would have given her time to see whether work picked up or whether it was time to lateral to another firm.

Ultimately, it sounds like she landed on her feet and will probably be happier outside of practice. Just terrible to be marked by this story for the rest of her life.

Reply Like (0)
williamdrayton (Aug 28, 2017 - 10:51 am)

as wolfman alluded, the dudes on this board are too smart to take the firm's prepared statements at face value. can anyone really believe that this girl talked to the partner about her hours shortage, was reassured that everything would be fine, yet STILL ahead went and submitted a bunch of fraudulent entries?

the great mystery here is what exactly the associate was told or not told by the partner(s)

the headlines are just click-bait by focusing on the wedding: a true, but less catchy headline would have been, "Biglaw Firm Doesn't Have Enough Work to Meet Strict Billable Hour Requirements; Fearing for Her Job, Young Associate Takes Matters Into Her Own Hands"

Reply Like (0)
triplesix (Aug 28, 2017 - 10:55 am)

Credited headline but we both know that media will never write something like that about those shysters otherwise the billable hours scum couldn't continue as it does.

Reply Like (0)
mrtor (Aug 28, 2017 - 11:14 am)

I agree that the conversations bear considerable weight on the situation and we will probably never know the truth. However, some people are batty -- especially in law. I know attorneys who are wound so tightly that no degree of reassurance would reduce their fears in a situation like this. It sounds like she had never really failed before and wasn't going to risk failing now, regardless of the cost.

Reply Like (0)
onehell (Aug 28, 2017 - 1:31 pm)

I feel for her. Think about what a tightrope a successful lawyer has walked.

If she had scored like 3 points less on the LSAT, the door would have closed forever. If she had done just a little bit worse in 1L, the door would have closed forever. a bad week during those 2 weeks of OCI, the door closes forever. Get no-offered, the door closes forever. Get "the talk" before you've got just the right number of years to go in-house or to a boutique, the door closes forever.

The path to a successful legal career is very, very narrow. A single misstep and you're doing doc review in some basement or divorces in some strip mall. Can hardly blame someone for being terrified, particularly in an environment where everyone knows that the "official" expectation and the real expectation are often two different things.

Reply Like (0)
dingbat (Aug 28, 2017 - 2:09 pm)

all that is true, but, it doesn't explain why she was hung out to dry.

there must have been something else going on for the firm to publicly trash her and ruin her career

Reply Like (0)
williamdrayton (Aug 28, 2017 - 2:12 pm)

more highly credited posting by onehell.

I can't imagine a profession in which the margin for error is so narrow as in law.

even in medicine, the mediocre student from the middling medical school might not get the residency at Mayo or Weill Cornell, but he is almost guaranteed a half decent outcome. Even if he is working the night shift ER at East Bumblefook General Hospital, he will make an upper-middle-class living.

one of the things laypeople don't get about law is that with rare exception, you can't "work your way up" to biglaw. you better get that summer position during 2L OCI or you will be locked out forever, as onehell notes.

Reply Like (0)
spaghetti (Aug 29, 2017 - 2:11 am)

Unless the med student went to a Caribbean school. All my med school friends say that is a scarlet letter that can't be washed away.

Reply Like (0)
jd4hire (Aug 29, 2017 - 9:18 am)

I repped a caribbean med school doc and he sure was doing alright by all visible indicia.

Reply Like (0)
williamdrayton (Aug 29, 2017 - 10:53 am)

the Caribbean med school issue crossed my mind while I was writing my post but honestly I don't know enough about the graduate outcomes to opine one way or the other. would love to see some comparative data (Caribbean vs. US med schools)

Reply Like (0)
onehell (Aug 29, 2017 - 1:17 pm)

Where you did your residency is much more important than where you went to med school.

The problem with the caribs is that it is harder to get a good residency. If you manage to match out of a Carib school you'll be fine. But the chances of failing to match are higher and if you do fail to match, then you're really screwed.

At some Carib schools, the match rate can be as low as around 50%. That's a big risk, but still better than most law schools. Imagine if 50% of 4th tier law grads got OCI jobs. I'd certainly rather flip a coin than bank on winning a lottery!

Reply Like (0)
dingbat (Aug 29, 2017 - 11:47 am)

on the other hand, there are doctors who rack up a million dollars in student loans. Some of the less glamorous specialties aren't all that great.

The mean salary for pediatricians ($156k) and general practitioners ($158k) is barely higher than the mean salary for lawyers ($136k). Internists and Psychiatrists are not much better.

On the other hand, I think a lot more law school graduates end up not becoming lawyers than medical school graduates not becoming doctors, so that does screw the charts a bit.

Reply Like (0)
notreallyalawyer (Aug 29, 2017 - 12:02 pm)

I'd imagine doctors have a lot more marketability than lawyers do. I used to work with people on doc review assignments who had been associates in biglaw. They couldn't get back into it, or anything. Recall if you are even an associate in big law, and you don't become partner, you are screwed.. What is that 6-8 years? Doctors have more options, unless they make a huge huge error in malpractice I think they have it better than lawyers do, and there's a physical need for doctors, whereas lawyers, not so much.

Reply Like (0)
onehell (Aug 29, 2017 - 12:57 pm)

Yeah, there's no such thing as an unemployed doctor or a doctor who makes less than 6 figures involuntarily, if they are licensed and boarded in something. Yes the lower-paid specialties could still end up on IBR with the levels of debt they carry, but you'll never make less than 6 figs and there's plenty of PSLF and National Health Core Service jobs you can get easily at a nonprofit/gov't hospital or FQHC (plus by the time you finish residency you're likely more than halfway to forgiveness if you were smart enough not to defer your loans). If you're willing to move to a rural area they will really roll out the red carpet for you. Also, with the proliferation of telemedicine there's an increasing number of docs who can live wherever they want and work from home.

Reply Like (0)
loblawyer (Aug 29, 2017 - 1:25 pm)

No one with 6-8 years in biglaw should need doc review. They generally will be able to lateral in house, midlaw or even small law (yes, it happens by choice) before getting shown the door. If failing that, should still be financially set even with paying off loans after that many years in biglaw.

Reply Like (0)
Post a message in this thread