ILNews

DTCI: Practicing law can be gratifying, even in summertime

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

DTCI-Misha-Rabinowitch-sigRecently, in a moment of self-reflection, I found myself thinking about what I find gratifying about practicing law. I was distracted in my quest for an answer by sunshine and daydreams of what it would be like to be Gordon Hayward, to kick the winning goal in a World Cup game, to play a match at Wimbledon, or, humbly, just to play catch in the yard with my son. So, rather than let the fleeting moment pass, I decided to put pen to paper in the event that during these beautiful summer days others might need the same reminder.

They don’t call it fun; they call it work. So, finding gratification in what we do is sometimes difficult. After all, as litigators, we are charged with the responsibility to solve problems that our clients are unable to solve on their own. If it were an option, especially in difficult economic times, most clients would gladly avoid paying their attorneys to solve their problems.

Yet for me, nothing is more professionally satisfying than working extremely hard on a case and achieving a result that is meaningful to the client and justifies the expense. I find that one of the most difficult aspects of being an attorney is explaining to a client at the outset why litigation will be expensive. But when the hard work is done and a favorable result is achieved, the client more often than not recognizes that you served as a trusted soldier in the trenches during difficult times – sometimes after they have been abandoned by nearly everyone else. That is when I truly realize the rewards of practicing law.

I am convinced that law remains a profession that most people respect. My thought in this regard is perhaps best illustrated in the following way. When in conversation someone might say to me, “You’re an attorney so you know more about this than I do.” I return a blank stare as the person questions me about a topic about which I know nothing. The assumption is that because we are attorneys, we know everything about the law, which, at least in my case, could not be further from the truth. I know about the areas of law in which I practice and relatively little about most others, but I don’t mind that people assume that I know much more than I do.

Moreover, although research and writing are not the most glamorous aspects of law, I find it satisfying to fight through hours of wheel-spinning research, argument crafting, and revision of countless drafts to complete a document that I can be proud to present to a judge in court. Not akin to what Landon Donovan must have felt as he kicked the winning goal against Algeria, but gratifying nonetheless.

I enjoy the teaching aspects of law: the idea that we learn and analyze through precedent and we pass on to those who come after us the skills that were passed to us by the lawyers who taught us. I am lucky to have learned from hard-working, ethical lawyers who taught me to strive to practice law the same way that they do. It is also the case that often I learn just as much from opposing counsel as from the lawyers working on my side.

This brings me to question the distinction often made between lawyers who represent plaintiffs and those who represent defendants. Don’t all of us share the same objective: to advocate our client’s position as compellingly as possible within the confines of law and ethics? If that is so, then there really is no distinction. That is something else that I find gratifying about practicing law.•

__________

Misha Rabinowitch is a partner in the Indianapolis firm of Wooden & McLaughlin and serves on the board of the Defense Trial Counsel of Indiana. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. "Am I bugging you? I don't mean to bug ya." If what I wrote below is too much social philosophy for Indiana attorneys, just take ten this vacay to watch The Lego Movie with kiddies and sing along where appropriate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etzMjoH0rJw

  2. I've got some free speech to share here about who is at work via the cat's paw of the ACLU stamping out Christian observances.... 2 Thessalonians chap 2: "And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as a human word, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is indeed at work in you who believe. For you, brothers and sisters, became imitators of God’s churches in Judea, which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own people the same things those churches suffered from the Jews who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to everyone in their effort to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved. In this way they always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last."

  3. Did someone not tell people who have access to the Chevy Volts that it has a gas engine and will run just like a normal car? The batteries give the Volt approximately a 40 mile range, but after that the gas engine will propel the vehicle either directly through the transmission like any other car, or gas engine recharges the batteries depending on the conditions.

  4. Catholic, Lutheran, even the Baptists nuzzling the wolf! http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-documents-reveal-obama-hhs-paid-baptist-children-family-services-182129786-four-months-housing-illegal-alien-children/ YET where is the Progressivist outcry? Silent. I wonder why?

  5. Thank you, Honorable Ladies, and thank you, TIL, for this interesting interview. The most interesting question was the last one, which drew the least response. Could it be that NFP stamps are a threat to the very foundation of our common law American legal tradition, a throwback to the continental system that facilitated differing standards of justice? A throwback to Star Chamber’s protection of the landed gentry? If TIL ever again interviews this same panel, I would recommend inviting one known for voicing socio-legal dissent for the masses, maybe Welch, maybe Ogden, maybe our own John Smith? As demographics shift and our social cohesion precipitously drops, a consistent judicial core will become more and more important so that Justice and Equal Protection and Due Process are yet guiding stars. If those stars fall from our collective social horizon (and can they be seen even now through the haze of NFP opinions?) then what glue other than more NFP decisions and TRO’s and executive orders -- all backed by more and more lethally armed praetorians – will prop up our government institutions? And if and when we do arrive at such an end … will any then dare call that tyranny? Or will the cost of such dissent be too high to justify?

ADVERTISEMENT