IndyBar: A Collaborative Column: Has Practicing Law Really Changed?

A. Scott Chinn, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, IndyBar Masters Division Chair; Monica McCoskey, Paganelli Law Group, IndyBar Young Lawyers Division Chair

This is a joint column co-written monthly by the Chairs of the Masters Division and Young Lawyers Division to compare, contrast, and relate practicing law 25+ years ago to practicing law today. Each column will examine a new general subject.

IN-PERSON OR VIRTUAL CONNECTION: PICK YOUR SPOT

On August 5, we presented a CLE program at the IndyBar Office titled “Back in My Day” to explore the differences for a new lawyer beginning law practice in 1994 versus 2021 and to talk about what senior and newer lawyers can offer each other to navigate the current legal practice environment given those differences. It went well – if we do say so ourselves – and was certainly fun. We had the opportunity to speak with the attendees – a mix of junior and senior lawyers – at a reception following the program and asked them to give us their ideas for future columns. They came through. We received a host of good ideas, and we thank the participants for offering them. We tackle one of the suggestions today.

One of the program attendees asked us to consider the dynamic of avoiding in-person interactions, which at least stereotypically is associated with a penchant for new lawyers to communicate by email and text instead of by phone or in-person meeting. For example, is there a benefit to lawyers calling opposing counsel on the phone to discuss a sensitive or contested matter rather than resorting to email exchanges?

It seems young lawyers are eager to have in-person/actual speaking exchanges with their more senior colleagues, clients, opposing counsel and the like, but they are reluctant to do so to ensure they appear efficient and less bothersome. This is compounded by the fact that in many instances, those with the years of experience want to do the talking, especially from their remote office (see more on that below). A recommendation for senior attorneys: if you want to be the lead speaker, at least invite the young lawyer to listen and learn. Not only does this create an opportunity for the new attorney to absorb the skills, but it promotes interpersonal interaction between senior and junior lawyers. And of course, remember that many young lawyers are the product of COVID law school, clerkships, and internships, having had their initial formative training solely behind a screen. Senior attorneys may enjoy the latest convenience of the virtual world, while new attorneys are longing to shake a hand, see the inside of a courtroom, and actually wear the dusty suit everyone promised you’d need hanging in the back of the closet.

Whether or not young lawyers are less inclined to seek the in-person interactions than more senior lawyers, we think it is most likely true that it is now the “industry standard” for most lawyers, including senior lawyers, to choose the more impersonal outreach efforts with opposing lawyers or other professionals. If it is true that the vitriol and snark that is a part of social media posting could not flourish were the interactions in person, then surely the same holds true for the choice of the email versus in-person (e.g., telephone) communication to opposing counsel. Not that all or even most communications need to by phone or over a cup of coffee. But perhaps if the most significant one were, the relationship building that senior lawyers believe was the standard in past decades would have something to offer newer lawyers – and all of us.

Which also brings us to the concept of proximity in our relationships. Where are lawyers in the same organization spending time in relation to each other? And this raises the important question of remote work. We won’t rehash in depth the causes of why most of us find ourselves more often in virtual meetings than in-person ones – you know: viruses, social fragmentation, the primary of technology. But suffice-it-to-say that we all should think about the consequences of the phenomenon. For a lot of more senior lawyers in organizations that are struggling with what amount of in-office time is desirable and enforceable, one important question is what the long-term effect on younger lawyers on their professional and business development growth. Can you build and/or manage a successful law practice without intentionally fostering more intimate personal relationships with colleagues and clients that most easily come from in-person interaction? The jury is out on that.

One way to think about these issues is through the concept of value. At least for most people, the more intimate the medium of communication, the more we appear to value the person with whom we are communicating – and, ostensibly, the more benefits both participants receive, especially over the long-term as relationship strength is tested. So, where should our professional interactions sit in that regard in relation to ones with our significant others, children, and closest friends? Are lawyers in our organizations and other organizations more like family or more like customer service representatives (that are now mainly chat-bots). Most will likely say “somewhere in the middle” of those two extremes. But on which side of that continuum should we err in deciding how intimate the outreach to our professional colleagues should be? To reprise the theme of our CLE program, “back in the old days Scott grew up in” it was closer to family than chat-bots, because the culture promoted those more personal interactions. Without appealing to the notion that we should or even could return to those “good old days,” perhaps we could agree that it is worth us all – junior and senior lawyers alike – to be more thoughtful and intentional about picking our spots to use more intimate means of communication with colleagues and opponents in service of more durable relationships.•

A. Scott Chinn is a partner at Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP where he represents public and private clients in state, municipal, and public sector legal matters. He provides advisory, transactional, and general counsel representation for public finance, procurement, regulatory, infrastructure, environmental, and economic development matters. Prior to joining the firm, he served as counsel to Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson and as Corporation Counsel to the City of Indianapolis. Chinn currently serves as the Chair of the Masters Division, is a member of the IndyBar Board of Directors, and is a past president. Chinn is also a Distinguished and Life Fellow of the IndyBar Foundation. He earned his B.A. from Indiana University and his J.D. from the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law.

Monica McCoskey is an attorney with Paganelli Law Group where her practice concentrates on business and real estate litigation. Prior to joining Paganelli Law Group, McCoskey was an associate attorney with a law firm in Northern Indiana, where she practiced securities litigation and represented plaintiffs and defendants in various legal matters. She is the Chair of the Young Lawyers Division, a member of the IndyBar Board of Directors, and Co-Chair of the Social Subcommittee for the Litigation Section’s Executive Committee. She earned her bachelor’s degree from the University of Michigan and her J.D. from the Indiana University Maurer School of Law.