Twitter is a fun and interesting networking site where you “hear” or “tweet” the most amazing things: people tell you exactly what they’re doing at any given moment; advertise and promote their own work; lend support to others; discuss ideas or others’ publications; and take firm stands, either for or against the ideas of others. I enjoy singing with these twittering birds. I laugh, I'm bewildered; I'm torn, which makes me think. And it's all in 140 characters or less.

Your Unemployed Lawyer has had three such interactions over the past two days; and, as they’ve all struck me so differently, I’d like to write about them here.

First, there was an exchange between me and a most delightful seeming enterprise out of New Jersey, known as Little Jimmy’s Italian Ice, which, for reasons I cannot fathom, signed up to “follow” the Unemployed Lawyer on Twitter. How intriguing! I still don’t know why an Italian Ice company wants to receive all the notices an out-of-work attorney posts on Twitter, but I was happy to tell Jim, when he wrote to me directly, that my favorite flavor was lemon. I’m still smiling about it.

Then there’s Susan Cartier Liebel, long a supporter of this website and a champion of the solo practitioner. In addition, she is getting ready to open Solo Practice University. Susan “tweeted” that she “didn’t understand how a lawyer could be unemployed”. Susan is a bold and enterprising spirit, with seemingly endless energy and a true passion for what she does. And she does it extremely well. Of course she doesn’t understand.

She doesn’t understand that some of us are afraid to practice alone or would simply miss the presence of colleagues and the excitement of brainstorming. She doesn’t understand that, even for those who have overcome this obstacle, the banks which have received so much money are not exactly putting it back in circulation right now, and that some lack the start-up funds to get an office going. Some can’t find partners that make them feel comfortable. Some have practiced for 10-15 years in areas that simply don’t transfer to solo practice (e.g., M&A, corporate bankruptcy, securities, corporate governance) and have no idea how to do a real estate closing, a will, or any of the more personal tasks a sole practitioner likely performs. I won’t say such are not more personally rewarding; but I am saying that to take them up means throwing your entire prior career away.

Add to this mix that small firms, including solo practices, are no different from BigLaw firms, in that they have to bring in business or fold. It seems to me that if every unemployed lawyer (and they number in the thousands with widely varied levels of experience) now opened a solo practice, we’d soon have a glut on the market, Darwinian selection would begin, banks would call in loans, and we would soon be back to a large number of unemployed lawyers. Just my opinion.

Finally, there is the great debate over a new public law school to be opened in Dallas, Texas at the University of North Texas. This school is due to begin classes in Fall 2010.

Your Unemployed Lawyer has been mulling over a piece on law schools for some time, but Brian Cuban (The Cuban Revolution) and Chuck Newton (Chuck Rides the Rides the Third Wave) have gotten the first licks in. I am extremely interested in this debate because I can’t imagine why anybody would willingly matriculate at any law school at this time. Not only are BigLaw firms getting rid of people, but mid size firms, and small firms, too. They just don’t get as much attention.

Brian writes persuasively, but painfully, that the proposed public law school will create only more unemployed lawyers from the minute that the first graduates receive their diplomas. He reasons that if Yale, Harvard, U of C, etc., graduates are presently unemployable, then graduates from the supposed public school will, per se, be unemployable. Unfortunately, I agree. Why make more of what nobody wants, either at Yale or at UNT?

Now, the automatic distinction between UNT and Harvard or Yale is one to which I take great exception. I have worked with many stupid, sloppy, careless, indifferent lawyers from “top” schools. Some could not even spell or write a normal sentence. I will, however, save that for another day.

Chuck writes that the UNT Law School will offer “the opportunity for a good, more cost effective, legal education in a major metropolitan area that is not served by a public law school”.  I agree with that as well. I agree that education should be available to all who wish to receive it. I agree with Chuck that, in principle, this new law school, the only one of its kind in a major metropolitan area, is likely to do much good. At another time. We don’t need more lawyers right now, when many of the lawyers we have are already suffering. My opinion.

I have had the fantasy that we could put all law schools on hiatus for three years, and instantly thought of the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, let alone how many statutes, common law precedents and other legal barriers. However, if we could swing it, we could put the professors to work determining what has happened to get us here and why. They could make recommendations for change. There would be no more heartrending letters from recent grads fired before they even started work. Law firms might develop openings that would have to be filled by lawyers already out there. We could contemplate the professorial findings. My friends and I could pay our bills. Life wouldn’t have to feel so sad. We could all go out for Italian Ice at Little Jimmy’s and eat our treats on a sunny day with our feet paddling in the blue Atlantic. We could even try the blue ice. I wonder what that tastes like.

_____________________________________________________________________

[1] Universal Pictures, 1963, directed by Alfred Hitchcock, starring Rod Taylor and Tippi Hedren.