In 1973 I graduated from the University of Iowa law school, passed the Bar, and began practicing law with a small general civil practice firm in Clayton Missouri. I cannot believe fifty years have passed and I am still practicing! I remember going downtown in 1973 to answer a docket navigating the dreaded Vandeventer overpass (one lane each way) in a car that for some reason did not have air conditioning. When I got to Court lawyers would announce to the Magistrate Judge “dwopc” (dismissed without prejudice plaintiff’s costs). Took me a while to figure that out. One of the many things I learned on the fly that was not addressed in law school.
Looking back, I think of the major changes or disrupters in the law practice from then to now. There are several of what I consider sea changes and the foremost is the effect of technology on the law practice.
1. The March of Technology.
In 1973 secretaries did use carbon paper to produce multiple copies of documents. Accuracy in typing was at a premium and when mistakes were made correction was difficult and often was done by hand and initialed. Documents were much shorter then. Lawyers dictated to their secretaries who were proficient in dictation. Corrections were made by lawyers by hand and transcribed by their secretaries. In a few years, we got transcription equipment, tape machines, which made dictation easier. Technology marched on with the advent of electronic typewriters and then Wang machines that could produce documents from forms. Documents got longer but still much was produced by hand.
In the nineties desktop computers were introduced which started the process of document production that has improved over time. Lawyers are able to produce many of their own documents and secretaries are administrative assistants. Spelling is much improved with spell check although proof reading is still required.
Libraries became obsolete with the advent of computerized research such as Westlaw. In my initial years, every firm had shelves of books in their law library which sometimes was used as a conference room. A system known as Shepards was used to check cases to be sure that they were not overruled or distinguished. This system provided a monthly update that you had to have in your library. For federal cases you often had to go the County library, the federal library downtown or one of the law school libraries. Libraries were expensive so most firms did not have everything you needed for legal research. Computerized research started in the late eighties and early nineties and by the turn of the century libraries became computerized and books obsolete. Some legal research is even done by Google and similar systems and of course now you have AI which may present significant challenges along with its technology benefits. The effect of technology is so pronounced that lawyers now have an ethical duty to be familiar with technology in their practice.
The effect of technology was even more pronounced in legal communication. When I started you communicated with clients by letter or telephone, almost always after a face-to-face
office meeting. We were told of the importance of returning phone calls. The receptionist took calls and left call slips on your desk to remind you to return the call. These forms of communication are still used but have been eclipsed almost entirely by the use of emails. The email explosion was preceded by the use of facsimile transmission. I remember the advent of facsimile messages in the early nineties. You had to have a fax machine to keep up with clients who used them. This began the process of nearly instant written communication enabling you to review and reply to written communications within minutes instead of hours or days. No longer did you have to use delivery services and cabs to deliver messages or documents within the same day. After a time, the courts began to accept filing by facsimile thus reducing the need to race to the courthouse to file a pleading due that day before the courts closed.
Electronic communication became prevalent after the turn of the century with the rise of the internet. Now most legal communication is by email. The Courts eventually accepted email filing and adopted electronic case management systems such as Pacer on the federal level and Case net in Missouri. Instead of walking to the courthouse to check out a file to see what has been filed, you can review most of any court file at your desktop. This ease of access has made the legal system more user friendly. There are issues with this access such as increased vulnerability to interception but on balance this technology has made the practice of law less time consuming and more efficient.
2. Women Join the Legal Profession.
The second major change started quickly after I entered the law practice in 1973. My graduation class at the University of Iowa had about ten women out of about 180. I do not remember any women law professors in law school in 1973. Admittance of women to law school increased dramatically after that and about five years later the percentage of women in law school classes increased significantly and quickly grew to about 50%. The emergence of women in the law during the last 50 years was not an easy path as my female colleagues know much better that I. I did witness mistreatment early in my career. As an example, I was quite surprised when a federal judge refused to give a female attorney a continuance due to her imminent delivery. Get someone else in the firm to handle the trial was his response. Fortunately, this treatment has for the most part not continued into the current years. The road for women to advance in the legal profession has been much slower that the entry to law schools. I do not remember any female judges in the first years of my law practice but gradually that improved. The same slow trajectory occurred in law firms and corporate departments.
In the early days of my career, there were few legal protections for women and families. There was no Family Medical Leave Act and discrimination laws were in their infancy. Women negotiated with their firms for maternity leave on a case-by-case basis. Paternity leave was unheard of. It was not a family friendly profession, and we did not know better. It is much better now. There are now four women on the US Supreme Court and a woman is the presiding judge of the majority women Missouri Supreme Court.
Women have made the profession more like the population it serves which is a benefit to the profession and the public. In addition, women have dramatically increased the talent pool of
the profession and provided needed perspective on the rights of women and other groups that have been disadvantaged. Women as a group have different perspectives than men as a group (of course individuals vary and may not conform to the group perspective). Such differences enhance the profession.
3. The Rise of Specialization.
When my career started, most attorneys practiced in small firms or were solo. The largest firms had 25-30 attorneys and were local. The practice was divided into civil and criminal law and the only specialty I remember was patent law. I started in a civil practice law firm of five attorneys, and we did everything except criminal law. I did divorces, probate, bankruptcy, real estate, corporate and civil litigation, and everything in between. Most other lawyers I knew did the same. As years went by, we dropped some of the areas that we were not comfortable with or could get others to do. In the late eighty’s and beyond, the mega firms (Big Law) developed, and attorneys were slotted into narrow fields of practice for efficiency purposes. Boutique practices also developed for fields such as domestic relations, bankruptcy, employment, and others.
Over the years the complexity of the law has increased significantly with countless new laws, cases and areas of law that did not exist when I started fifty years ago. This has led to the rise of specialization (I am using the lay definition of specialize, not the legal definition with its restrictions). In addition, larger firms are able to slot lawyers into narrow fields to develop expertise and efficiency in those fields. That sometimes leads to problems for those lawyers when the business in that field contracts. We do not yet have same level of specialization as the medical profession with its board certifications and internships, but the trend continues in step with the complexity of the law and the development of new practice areas.
4. Advertising, Advertising, Advertising.
This development is not on the same level as the first three, but I have to mention it. Lately I am barraged by radio and television ads of a few law firms primarily in the personal injury field. When I started, the US Supreme Court had issued a decision that provided that Bar Associations could not prohibit advertising by lawyers although certain restrictions remained. In my early years I was told that word of mouth was the primary way to develop a practice and any public advertising was frowned upon. We did not even advertise in the yellow pages although other firms did. For many years legal advertising was confined to the yellow pages and sometimes billboards. Personal injury, bankruptcy and divorces led the way. For example, a billboard blasts: “Are you ready to be happy? Flat Rate Divorces.”! Firms would market to referral sources in many ways but not by direct advertising to the general public.
Lately we are bombarded by a small number of personal injury firms on radio and TV. The expense of such advertising must pay off as these firms grow and continue the ad blitz. In addition, if you get a traffic ticket, you might get 2-3 letters from law firms offering to represent you. The regulation of such advertising is insignificant. In the clash between unbridled speech and professionalism, we know which is winning.
Some things remain the same.
Lawyers still construe statutes, review, and analyze the holdings of cases and present their arguments in much the same way as when I started the practice. Research technology and word processing has made this much easier, but the principles of legal analysis and advocacy remain. We still need to meet and interview clients to determine their goals and the legal issues that must be resolved. Once again technology allows us to do this in diverse ways although I still like the face-to-face approach whenever possible. Facts still need to be developed and evidence gathered to support your positions. On the transactional side, contracts need to be clear, concise, and inclusive of all possible areas to protect the client and avoid unexpected issues. Estate plans still need to cover the intention of the client in disposing of his estate. This is now done in fifty plus pages as opposed to ten. The ten pages did not cover everything and may have had some spelling mistakes and improper grammar, now weeded out by technology. Professionalism and legal ethics are also much the same in principle as when I started. There are more nuances due to increased conflicts caused by larger firms and multiple parties involved in some cases. Professionalism is now emphasized which is an improvement to the times when advocacy and winning were all that mattered.
I cannot imagine the next fifty years of the legal profession, but my guess is that these trends will continue. The legal profession will need to keep up and manage technology and continue to improve its diversity and inclusion. To be relevant in the future, Lawyers will need continue to maintain high quality in all of their services. This includes writing, interviewing, developing, and analyzing a multiplicity of facts and legal authorities and the ability to recognize client needs and goals. It includes basic knowledge and use of technology. As long as we continue to be a rules-based society, in which laws, courts and institutions are respected, our profession will adjust to these trends and continue its role of service to the public.
.png)
member center
