It’s not often I disagree with Joe Patrice, who frequently writes for Above the Law. For one thing, he’s a lot smarter than me. For another, he’s a better writer. In fact, about the only thing I have on Joe is several more years of wear and tear in the trenches. That doesn’t make me right but maybe gives me a different perspective.
Joe recently wrote an article the premise of which, and I paraphrase, was that automation and technology are depriving junior lawyers of the training and experience lawyers used to get when they began practicing.
According to Joe: “Robots are not replacing elite litigators any time soon, but what they will do is grease the wheels of the legal process and alleviate all the mindless grind that typically occupies junior associates” . As a result, says Joe, “screwing up the most basic tasks is a critical part of becoming a well-seasoned attorney. What happens when we lose those tasks to throw at a first-year?”
Screwing up the most basic tasks is a critical part of becoming a well-seasoned attorney.
But the problem with Joe’s premise in my mind is the idea that the “mindless grind” as he calls it somehow translates into a better lawyer. I don’t necessarily think it does.
As a young lawyer, I certainly did my share of mindless document review and proof reading for hours on end. This no doubt increased my profitability. But what it didn’t do is teach me anything other than perhaps the financial power of leverage when your business model is the billable hour.
Granted, my experience prism is as a litigator and that may color my thinking. But I learned to be good lawyer not by doing work I was over qualified to do but by doing
