ILNews

Non-firm job options: Recent law grads share advice

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
When considering law school, students may have the idea that getting a law degree will equal a large salary or a lifestyle similar to television shows that portray lawyers in spacious apartments, wearing designer clothes, and hosting large events.

The reality is that may be true for some. For those who would rather work in politics, as in-house counsel, or start their own business, the salary may be smaller, but depending on one's interests and career goals, it could be more rewarding.

Liane Groth,  who graduated from Indiana University School of Law - Bloomington in May 2005, said while in law school the job search wasn't a priority.

She knew a law degree would help her in so many different jobs that she wasn't quite sure what would be her best fit.

She accepted a job at Bingham McHale because as a summer associate, she was able to work in different practice areas.

While at the firm, Groth accepted an offer to be assistant majority counsel the Indiana House of Representatives for the 2007 and 2008 legislative sessions, which took her out of the office much of that time and made it more difficult for her to keep up with the firm demands.

She worked in the firm's litigation department until earlier this year, leaving to pursue a career with more emphasis on government work. As an employee of the Indiana House Democratic Caucus, she is the campaign manager for attorney Ed DeLaney, the Democratic candidate for District 86 in the Indiana House of Representatives.

Sometimes, she said, "I joke with Ed that I made more at the firm in a week than I do in a month working for the campaign."

She said the job has led to other opportunities, such as work with Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign and the opportunity to network with attorneys and people in the community.

While "it's a lot of phone calls and knocking on doors," she said, she has seen the impact her law degree has in terms of the respect she receives.

Groth hasn't yet thought about what she'll do after the Nov. 4 election because she's been focusing on her work for the campaign. She does miss some aspects of firm work and stays in touch with her friends and mentors at the firm.

Another attorney who started at a firm and later left for another job is Scott Dillon, in-house counsel to Indiana Live! Casino, in Shelbyville.

Dillon graduated from IU School of Law - Bloomington and the Kelly School of Business MBA Program with a JD/MBA in 2003. While in law school, he wanted to be a prosecutor. Instead, his first year out of law school, he worked for Threlkeld-Reynolds doing insurance defense work. After that, he started his own practice representing plaintiffs in employment matters.

He started at Indiana Live! Casino in March 2008. The work is "invigorating and inspiring," he wrote via e-mail.

"My position implicates a broad swath of legal disciplines including gaming law, employment law, contract law, sales law, alcohol and tobacco law, and administrative law," he said.

A lawyer who finished IU School of Law - Indianapolis this year who decided not to consider a firm job is Jennifer Wagner. Formerly a journalist, she decided to go to law school because she wanted another degree.

While she has an interest in criminal law and may some day try for a job as a prosecutor or public defender, she has since helped with political campaigns. She is also a contributor to Capitol WatchBlog.

She took the suggestion from her husband, Gordon Hendry, to start a media and communications consulting business for clients in politics and in the private sector.

Hendry, who previously worked for Ice Miller and the office of former Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson, and is now in real estate, has encouraged her to consider working for a firm. But due to the time commitment, Wagner said that isn't likely until her daughter, and any other children she may have are much older.

As for other young attorneys looking for work, Groth suggested young attorneys consider government work. She added jobs are more satisfying when they fit one's interests more than when it's just working for a paycheck.

Dillon advises people to remember to make a good impression on coworkers, opposing counsel, and the judges they appear before in case an opportunity presents itself.

Wagner suggested attorneys volunteer for political offices, even if it's in addition to a full-time job. She also suggested attorneys keep in touch with their law school classmates, because "you never know where they'll end up." •
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  2. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  3. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  4. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

  5. "No one is safe when the Legislature is in session."

ADVERTISEMENT