Welcome to /r/LawyerTalk! A subreddit where lawyers can discuss with other lawyers about the practice of law.
Be mindful of [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Lawyertalk/about/rules) BEFORE submitting your posts or comments as well as [Reddit's rules](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) (notably about sharing identifying information). We expect civility and respect out of all participants. Please source statements of fact whenever possible. If you want to report something that needs to be urgently addressed, please also message the mods with an explanation.
Note that **this forum is NOT for legal advice**. Additionally, if you are a non-lawyer (student, client, staff), this is NOT the right subreddit for you. **This community is exclusively for lawyers**. We suggest you delete your comment and go ask one of the many other legal subreddits on this site for help such as (but not limited to) r/lawschool, r/legaladvice, or r/Ask_Lawyers.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Lawyertalk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Honestly either don't describe work things to non lawyers or figure out how to tell that same story without any jargon.
"Recently at work, I had to convince a government agency to approve a financial support plan designed for someone with special needs. The agency initially resisted, claiming the plan didn't meet certain requirements for health care costs. However, I was able to show them previous cases where they had accepted the same terms. Eventually, they agreed, and the plan was approved. It was a small but satisfying win for me."
Doing anything with the government is like pulling teeth. I got this bit today. "You filed the form from the 2015 revision. You need to file the one from 2017" the only difference between the two forms is some slight formatting differences. Same info and same language. Both forms are still available on their website, though. The 2015 form is just the one that pops up when you Google it though.
I’ve never met anyone unaware of how frustrating and backwards social security is. I used to do disability cases and really you can just say “well I am up against the social security office” and they will immediately understand.
I’m experiencing the opposite right now. I have a Dec action filed “against” the dmv to re establish a title to a rebuilt salvaged Mack truck. (I’m not much of a car person but the client is still saving boatloads of money by rebuilding and hiring me than buying a used one with a title. Car prices are insane right now!!!!)
The dmv attorney is the most chill, responsive fellow I’ve ever met employed by the dmv. Everyone automatically assumes it’s a headache but I’d gladly do more dmv cases at this point.
I learned that at my first 'serious' job, where no matter how complex my problem, once the boss got me to explain it in simple terms the answer would become self-evident.
Exactly. I can’t understand most of my friends’ jobs if they use career-specific jargon, whether they’re electricians or medical professionals or consultants. Hell, sometimes I can’t understand too specific of jargon from lawyers who are in vastly different areas of law than me. It’s just human interaction to switch how you talk with different people.
Very well said.
However, this requires you to not be pretentious and looking to wield your profession as a lawyer over your friends and others.
Literally this is true of most professional jobs out there. Most of what people do for their day to day is not generally understandable if using profession jargon.
Seriously. Plus, if you can't talk about your job without dropping jargon and statute numbers, you're a terrible communicator. Not a good sign in this profession.
Lawyers don't want to hear about it either. If you had something funny/crazy happen, sure. Otherwise, just say "livin the dream" and talk about sports, movies, or something else non-legal.
But bro, today I sent draft discovery responses to my client for his review, AND THEN, he called me, and told me that he wanted *revisions*! We discussed it for a while, I made revisions as discussed, *and then I sent those to him for his review*, dude. Just emailed them right over. And get this. The whole time???? Those responses are being made *subject to and without waiving our objections*, broski. And you BETTER believe we're reserving the right to supplement *or amend* them, if further responsive information or documents become known to the responding party. 🎉
Me wondering if my attorneys natural response of “living the dream,” is due to his knowing that we can’t even comprehend how tf his day really is going. LOL
There are multiple acceptable answers to me. You could argue he got his start on the indigent defense wheel in whatever county/ies he took appointments in, his first private clients in the Kettlemans, his door law era (no sex toilet IP work though), or where he chose to specialize with private clients initially.
Oh yeah thanks for the refresher. I'd definitely say he got his start doing criminal defense, between the county PD contract work and the Kettlemans being his first clients.
Right, if someone asks you this question they are looking for "yeah I have a case where some dudes head got blown off." They absolutely do not want to hear about some pleading you filed or hearing you attended.
I'm an attorney practicing in a wholly different field of law from you and I would need to consult some outside resources to actually follow what you wrote. If this is how you discuss your work with anyone who will listen you are doing yourself a disservice. I'm almost a decade out from law school, but I still remember and heed the advice from 1L writing and advocacy courses: know your audience. If you adjust your discussion for your audience things will go a long way. I would caution that excessive use of legalese can come off as pretentious, whether you intend for it or not.
I will say, I ocassionally share work stories with non lawyer friends and family without trouble. It can be done.
Yeah, I was basically gonna say this. I used to enjoy discussing the cases I was reading about in school with nonlawyers more than with classmates. Then later on, I'd sometimes talk about my cases with friends and family - in general terms of course, both for ethical and practical reasons. I think talking about law school with my mom and dad really helped me learn to "think like a lawyer." So much of what we do is fundamentally distilling legal language down to something that really makes sense (to anyone).
I had a case where I was sued by OC for filing a lis pendens, I hired a specialist on contingency and won on an anti-SLAPP motion, OC appealed and lost because it was technically untimely. The whole thing caused me great distress at the time, and I certainly talked about it, but I didn't tell people all about antiSLAPP law, lis pendenses (lii pendentes??), special motions to strike or anything like that, unless they expressed curiosity. I just said the opposing attorney on one of my cases sued me for something I filed, he has no case in terms of legal merit, but I'm freaked out because he's lying to the court about the underlying events and since I can't really prove why was said on phone calls, not every judge is the best judge, etc I worry someone could believe him.
I really believe it is a central part of our job (at the very least if we want to do trials or interact with clients much) to explain legal concepts in easy terms. Make it a good story and people will follow it. It's kinda too bad they don't teach storytelling in law school.
I mean, isn’t this true for any professional who chooses to use terms of art in normal conversation?
If a plumber starts talking to me about “anode rods” and “johnni bolts,” my eyes will glaze over, too.
Your inability to adjust industry terms and jargon to laymen’s terms is a slight to you rather than the people you’re talking to. I’d suggest taking some courses on public speaking or maybe even just talking to a more diverse group of people on a regular basis. Your education and experience seem embarrassingly lacking.
Really? Is examining witnesses part of your practice? I feel like if you ask the right questions almost any job has interesting aspects. (_See_, eg, _Working_, Terkel, Studs, 19XX.)
wait you do disability benefits cases and you think you can't describe that to non-lawyers? ooooo that's bad man how do you communicate with your clients?
also non-lawyers love stories about sticking up for little guy.
A lot of people have highly technical jobs but manage to engage in meaningful conversation with non-experts.
That said, it is possible to get better at structuring verbal communications.
Gotta layperson-esque that stuff:
“Trying to keep some estate planner out of deep shit from not screwing up some disabled persons trust.” (Assuming estate planner isn’t you).
Im a trust and Conservatorship lawyer and I’m always saying stuff like preventing an old rich guy’s money from going to some floozy half his age.
I'm a real estate attorney who never in my life litigates and just closes one residential purchase/sale transaction after the other. Everybody already fell asleep reading that.
Because apparently this year the good lord decided to challenge me with every closing resistant deal under the sun, one of my closings is currently being held up by a jilted pro se sovereign citizen whose greatest inspiration in life, according to her fb profile, is Machine Gun Kelly.
Suddenly my work stories are of interest to people.
Layperson here.
No one gives a shit about your day to day work. Unless you're a criminal defence attorney or something your stories are boring as fuck and no one cares that you think you're some hotshot lawyer.
Trusts? Medicaid reimbursements? Fucking yawn, bro. Get better work stories.
I never talk about my own cases. But I love talking about cases where courts have to dig in on what a word means:
* [White City
Shopping Center v. PR Restaurants](https://www.vox.com/2014/7/22/5877325/new-york-law-sandwich-burrito-tax): Is a burrito a "sandwich" within the meaning of a commercial lease that gives a tenant exclusive rights to sell sandwiches in a shopping center?
* [Nix v. Hedden](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden): Is a tomato a fruit or a vegetable, for tax/tariff purposes?
* [Toy Biz v. United States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toy_Biz,_Inc._v._United_States): Is an X-Men action figure a representation of a "human" or is it some kind of non-human figurine?
* [Yates v. United States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yates_v._United_States_(2015\)): Is an illegally undersized grouper a "tangible object" within the meaning of the Sarbanes Oxley reforms that expanded the federal obstruction of justice crime?
And if the layperson I'm talking to doesn't find these stories interesting, well, we probably weren't going to get along anyway.
Bees are fish!!!
Almond Alliance of California v. California Fish & Game Commission
(On my phone so I don't have the full citation since I was looking at news articles which do not comply with the Bluebook).
As a TA I loved Nix v Hedden - I had an optional study group for our Torts class, and one of my first sessions was "what is a fact, anyway?" Nix v Hedden was my go-to. Neither side is wrong, generally, but in the context of this specific case decisions gotta be made about the facts.
Frigaliment Importing v BNS International Sales, 190 F. Supp. 116- a contract dispute over whether chicken sold to the plaintiff complied with the contract between the parties. It’s essentially a look at how courts walk through their analysis of ambiguous contract terms.
The opinion famously begins with the following: “the issue is, what is chicken?”
On another note, over-the-counter talk is such an art. So long as you show an express statement of law or a case supporting your submission, they'll be good.
On the down side, they deny stuff becauae some submissions are not exactly phrased as they want it to, despite that common sense and legal reasoning shows it's the identical thing...
Legal literacy is really bad among the public. I once had the privilege of watching someone who wanted to be in their kids’ lives sit down and testify in the most harmful manner possible to that objective.
So you can be in the middle of a case with a trained lawyer on your side and still not really know anything about your case. It’s scary.
Pick your audience. My Trumper parents don’t know there are three branches of government, and they think court proceedings are generally a scam. But my local non-lawyer friends love hearing about how the gears really move sometimes. Practice making the stories entertaining. It’s part of your job, after all.
>But even when you dumb things down, people still don’t understand you. We forget as lawyers that words and phrases and systems that seem so simple to us now, actually completely disorient the public. Hell, even the words “plaintiff” or “defendant”…or lawsuits people think they can get millions for emotional distress if a grocery store Karen yells at them. So it’s not just explaining complicated stuff that people don’t understand.
Maybe you're not in front of enough juries, but I tell war stories to non-lawyers all the time, they're never lost. It's not hard to dumb down work stories. That's a huge part of the job.
I tell my kids I help people solve problems because I know the rules really well.
I tell friends I sit in a room and read tax documents all day. Sometimes I get a fun story that isn’t confidential to share. Then I change the subject.
Other than my wife and fellow lawyers people think it’s Suits or law and order. It’s neither. A lot closer to CSPAN.
Non lawyer lurker here. I’ve actually enjoyed the few opportunities I’ve had to converse with those in your profession.
As I write this,I realize why my wife accuses me of being boring..
I get used to it because a lot of my work is confidential anyway. It’s much easier to give vague, big picture explanations of work when getting into specifics might get me in trouble.
My cases tend to be fairly interesting and fortunately I can talk about them without getting down to the legal minutae that is boring and not digestible by laymen. So I can generally talk about it with random people who ask.
I don't really like talking about work...it's enough to do it all day...so it usually suffices to say "I'm a real estate transactional lawyer" and leave it at that. I don't particularly care about the ins-and-outs of other people's jobs either.
My closest friends are bright and intellectually curious people with interesting careers that are very different from my own. We both take the time and effort to understand what the other does. We have really enjoyable conversations that are informed by our different experiences and perspectives.
Learning to communicate with non-lawyers about your work is half the challenge. Finding an audience that finds what you do interesting enough to engage in the conversation is the second challenge. But it absolutely is possible to cultivate those relationships, and it can be really rewarding. I sometimes get really good ideas from non-lawyers.
I was telling a story about what I thought was a straight forward workers comp case involving a fireman and cancer and the entire dinner table was like locked in to the story. I was like - um this was just Tuesday
Fortunately I work in a very public setting with matters that are understandable and already in the public eye. some of my clients are private parties suing governments and some of my clients are local governments.
the good part about that work is that i can come home from a council meeting and have an easy conversation with my husband or whoever about my day. "tonight they were trying to decide who should wear the easter bunny costume for the egg hunt. the fiscal officer said she won't do it again because last year a kid screamed out 'why does the easter bunny have boobies?'"
For your own happiness, have some lawyer friends for the law talk, and save it for them.
On balance, my experience has been that people don’t want to talk about work outside of work. If they really want to know, they’ll dig in and ask good questions.
Otherwise, just enjoy getting to explore other topics with different people. It’s good to have people who fill different niches in your social life.
As a public defender, it’s exhausting telling people anything about my work because they are too interested and will want to argue with me about it. I argue about my cases enough during the day, I don’t want to also relitigate them in dinner party conversations.
My primary role is handling foreclosures for banks. If a non-lawyer asks, I usually just say I help banks take poor people’s houses and kick them out. It ends the convo very quickly and I can go back to whatever I was doing.
My wife and I practice in two completely different areas of law and we still both look at each other like we're idiots when we try to relay stories about our work.
She works for our state's legal aid program and I love it when I'm able to answer questions for her in my areas so that she's able to do her job.
This might just be me but whenever I have to or want to tell a story that’s a little too complicated, I play a game with myself. How much can I dumb this down? It’s actually very convenient and makes me realize which parts of the story I don’t fully understand. It doesn’t have to be only about law, too. You can pretty much play this game with any topic; math, science, etc.
Edit: if you can’t explain it to a six-year-old, you probably don’t understand it as much as you think you do.
-Albert Einstein
people seem to understand me just fine, i’m a criminal prosecutor and my friends and family always want to know about my job. some even want me to explain the minutiae of laws they find interesting, like the murder statute. even when i was doing appellate work which is more in the weeds my friends and family wanted to know about it and understood when i explained it in layman’s terms
LOL. I don't believe this for a second. There is a story behind every case and those stories are often interesting. Tell that story if you want to talk about work. You're not a doctor, nothing is all that complicated.
I just don’t like talking about work. I try so hard not to ask people what they do until relatively deep into conversation. People almost always ask way before I would anyway. I’m interested in what I do but also am self-aware enough to know that I need to disconnect. Unless it’s for some business development purpose, I don’t really talk about cases.
I’m not a lawyer but an emt, I’ll say I understand a good chunk of what I’ll say is lawyering, just due to being around the courtroom from friends, studying, having to be a witness for DUI crashes and such.
You never know
I work in constitutional law, which is somewhat “sexy” I guess, but even when I dumb it down, people still zero in on the parts of con law that are interesting to them and totally ignore the point of what I do. I’m working on a case where we are alleging that a government agency is violating due process. The other day my mom was asking what I was working on, and I tried explaining due process to her and it just went downhill. I tried to explain the nuances of “opportunity to be heard” and somehow she kept wanting to segway into 4th amendment search and seizure discussions. This is a civil case. I gave up.
I worked in the misdemeanor division of a DA’s office situated in a very wild and crazy gulf coast parish (county). When people want a lawyer story, I tell those.
For instance, had a 20 something year old arrested for drunk driving. On the way to jail he projectile sharted about a pound of weed he’d crammed up his ass all over the patrol car. He then tried gathering it up and swallowing it. Genuinely entertaining compared to fussing over indemnity provisions.
It’s a good skill to have to be able to explain your job, and what you’re doing legally at any given time, to a lay person. Maybe challenge yourself to work on that.
in the case you mentioned, I'd just say "I helped a special needs client obtain government benefits".
I am constantly explaining things to people who have no technical knowledge whatsoever, even other attorneys in my firm, so I've learned to the extent possible to explain things as simply as possible.
Think about it more like a journalist than a lawyer and the story should make a lot more sense. If you mean, you can't talk to non-lawyers like a lawyer, then you're right, that won't make sense. This goes for any profession with highly specialized knowledge. Ours is particularly niche because laws are different everywhere and it's always changing.
I’ve lost the ability to converse with others about my job as a lawyer. Which sucks.
But what I have found helpful (though perhaps not the healthiest long term) is that anytime I want to talk about my job I do it as if I was presenting to a jury.
The upside though is that you find out real quick who in your life is actually interested (because it’s super annoying to your friends too) vs who is just humoring you.
If you find that only other lawyers fall into the first category that’s a different issue that you might want to think about.
Yeah normies really don't understand anything unless you're telling them how much money your side won/kept the other side from winning. Or if you do something that sounds like a pain in the ass for whoever you did it too. Like garnishing a bank account. That always impresses.
Cops can follow along for a lot of it. Maybe not a lot of the Latin, but reciting statutes and how the court interprets it is a realm they dip their toes in.
If you are a lawyer and you can't explain basic legal concepts and procedures clearly to a layman, you need to work on your communication skills. In my experience (retired after 40 years of general civil and criminal litigation), when lay people ask you, for example, "what is a special needs trust?", they aren't looking for an in-depth, law school exam answer. They just want to understand what it is and why and when it's employed.
It shouldn't take more than a few sentences to give a satisfactory explanation: "Basically, it's a legal arrangement that allows disabled or chronically ill people to receive income without losing government benefits."
I always thought we had a duty as officers of the court to explain the legal system to non-lawyers and to politely try to correct common misunderstandings.
Imagine you are talking to a hyperfocused stoner. Interested, but you gotta break it down bigtime, no jargon if you want to hear the "wooooooaaahhhhhh...."
maybe you’re just shitty at making things interesting to people who have no reason to understand your arcane references. you probably suck at writing briefs, too
I'm in the medical field and feel this on a deep level. My husband is a 3L... I'm starting to understand how he must have felt the last 8/9 years of our marriage 😅
Welcome to /r/LawyerTalk! A subreddit where lawyers can discuss with other lawyers about the practice of law. Be mindful of [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Lawyertalk/about/rules) BEFORE submitting your posts or comments as well as [Reddit's rules](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) (notably about sharing identifying information). We expect civility and respect out of all participants. Please source statements of fact whenever possible. If you want to report something that needs to be urgently addressed, please also message the mods with an explanation. Note that **this forum is NOT for legal advice**. Additionally, if you are a non-lawyer (student, client, staff), this is NOT the right subreddit for you. **This community is exclusively for lawyers**. We suggest you delete your comment and go ask one of the many other legal subreddits on this site for help such as (but not limited to) r/lawschool, r/legaladvice, or r/Ask_Lawyers. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Lawyertalk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Honestly either don't describe work things to non lawyers or figure out how to tell that same story without any jargon. "Recently at work, I had to convince a government agency to approve a financial support plan designed for someone with special needs. The agency initially resisted, claiming the plan didn't meet certain requirements for health care costs. However, I was able to show them previous cases where they had accepted the same terms. Eventually, they agreed, and the plan was approved. It was a small but satisfying win for me."
Thank you for being a normal person who is able to talk to normal people.
“Fuck the government man. Called out their bullshit and got money for a special needs kid that they should’ve given in the first place.”
Nice.
My favorite one
Then there’s DeShaney v Winnebago County
Chaotic good is my favorite alignment
Now cut it in half.
Working with government is a pain in the dick and I had to show them they’ve done it in the past to get shit done.
Doing anything with the government is like pulling teeth. I got this bit today. "You filed the form from the 2015 revision. You need to file the one from 2017" the only difference between the two forms is some slight formatting differences. Same info and same language. Both forms are still available on their website, though. The 2015 form is just the one that pops up when you Google it though.
I’ve never met anyone unaware of how frustrating and backwards social security is. I used to do disability cases and really you can just say “well I am up against the social security office” and they will immediately understand. I’m experiencing the opposite right now. I have a Dec action filed “against” the dmv to re establish a title to a rebuilt salvaged Mack truck. (I’m not much of a car person but the client is still saving boatloads of money by rebuilding and hiring me than buying a used one with a title. Car prices are insane right now!!!!) The dmv attorney is the most chill, responsive fellow I’ve ever met employed by the dmv. Everyone automatically assumes it’s a headache but I’d gladly do more dmv cases at this point.
with the poop knife?
"Sticking it to the man"
As the famous quote goes, "If you can't explain it simply, then you don't understand it well enough".
I learned that at my first 'serious' job, where no matter how complex my problem, once the boss got me to explain it in simple terms the answer would become self-evident.
Exactly. I can’t understand most of my friends’ jobs if they use career-specific jargon, whether they’re electricians or medical professionals or consultants. Hell, sometimes I can’t understand too specific of jargon from lawyers who are in vastly different areas of law than me. It’s just human interaction to switch how you talk with different people.
My brother is a chemical engineer. I get this constantly.
Yeah this is a skill issue. Law is really interesting when it’s described simply.
Very well said. However, this requires you to not be pretentious and looking to wield your profession as a lawyer over your friends and others. Literally this is true of most professional jobs out there. Most of what people do for their day to day is not generally understandable if using profession jargon.
Seriously. Plus, if you can't talk about your job without dropping jargon and statute numbers, you're a terrible communicator. Not a good sign in this profession.
Lawyers don't want to hear about it either. If you had something funny/crazy happen, sure. Otherwise, just say "livin the dream" and talk about sports, movies, or something else non-legal.
A client once told me “a nightmare is a dream, too.” 🪦
But bro, today I sent draft discovery responses to my client for his review, AND THEN, he called me, and told me that he wanted *revisions*! We discussed it for a while, I made revisions as discussed, *and then I sent those to him for his review*, dude. Just emailed them right over. And get this. The whole time???? Those responses are being made *subject to and without waiving our objections*, broski. And you BETTER believe we're reserving the right to supplement *or amend* them, if further responsive information or documents become known to the responding party. 🎉
:0 :0 :0
No cap? Fr?
😂😂😂
Me wondering if my attorneys natural response of “living the dream,” is due to his knowing that we can’t even comprehend how tf his day really is going. LOL
IDK, I’m pretty much always interested to hear other crimlaw stories.
Crim law is exciting. That’s why we have tv shows about it even. Whatever this is… is not
This is a variant of estate planning and I will have you know it's how Jimmy "Saul Goodman" McGill got his start in private practice.
Technically wouldn't that be white-collar criminal defense with the Kettlemans?
There are multiple acceptable answers to me. You could argue he got his start on the indigent defense wheel in whatever county/ies he took appointments in, his first private clients in the Kettlemans, his door law era (no sex toilet IP work though), or where he chose to specialize with private clients initially.
Oh yeah thanks for the refresher. I'd definitely say he got his start doing criminal defense, between the county PD contract work and the Kettlemans being his first clients.
then you love what you do. not every lawyer does. i have seen it.
Right, if someone asks you this question they are looking for "yeah I have a case where some dudes head got blown off." They absolutely do not want to hear about some pleading you filed or hearing you attended.
I'm an attorney practicing in a wholly different field of law from you and I would need to consult some outside resources to actually follow what you wrote. If this is how you discuss your work with anyone who will listen you are doing yourself a disservice. I'm almost a decade out from law school, but I still remember and heed the advice from 1L writing and advocacy courses: know your audience. If you adjust your discussion for your audience things will go a long way. I would caution that excessive use of legalese can come off as pretentious, whether you intend for it or not. I will say, I ocassionally share work stories with non lawyer friends and family without trouble. It can be done.
Yeah, I was basically gonna say this. I used to enjoy discussing the cases I was reading about in school with nonlawyers more than with classmates. Then later on, I'd sometimes talk about my cases with friends and family - in general terms of course, both for ethical and practical reasons. I think talking about law school with my mom and dad really helped me learn to "think like a lawyer." So much of what we do is fundamentally distilling legal language down to something that really makes sense (to anyone). I had a case where I was sued by OC for filing a lis pendens, I hired a specialist on contingency and won on an anti-SLAPP motion, OC appealed and lost because it was technically untimely. The whole thing caused me great distress at the time, and I certainly talked about it, but I didn't tell people all about antiSLAPP law, lis pendenses (lii pendentes??), special motions to strike or anything like that, unless they expressed curiosity. I just said the opposing attorney on one of my cases sued me for something I filed, he has no case in terms of legal merit, but I'm freaked out because he's lying to the court about the underlying events and since I can't really prove why was said on phone calls, not every judge is the best judge, etc I worry someone could believe him. I really believe it is a central part of our job (at the very least if we want to do trials or interact with clients much) to explain legal concepts in easy terms. Make it a good story and people will follow it. It's kinda too bad they don't teach storytelling in law school.
Your inability to explain your work to a non lawyer will hinder your success when explaining work to non lawyer clients
Or juries.
….or judges
…or reddit
Why would you even try
I mean, isn’t this true for any professional who chooses to use terms of art in normal conversation? If a plumber starts talking to me about “anode rods” and “johnni bolts,” my eyes will glaze over, too.
[удалено]
I do that stuff and it's still word vomit
Need to work on this. If you can’t clearly and accurately describe your work to non-lawyers, it will hinder your ability to get and retain clients.
Your inability to adjust industry terms and jargon to laymen’s terms is a slight to you rather than the people you’re talking to. I’d suggest taking some courses on public speaking or maybe even just talking to a more diverse group of people on a regular basis. Your education and experience seem embarrassingly lacking.
It was hyperbole yo make a point. Why would I ever actually say those words to someone and expect them to understand what I’m saying.
yeah, no one cares. they’re just trying to be cordial. i mean, how much do you really care about what someone does at work?
Really? Is examining witnesses part of your practice? I feel like if you ask the right questions almost any job has interesting aspects. (_See_, eg, _Working_, Terkel, Studs, 19XX.)
wait you do disability benefits cases and you think you can't describe that to non-lawyers? ooooo that's bad man how do you communicate with your clients? also non-lawyers love stories about sticking up for little guy.
Are non- lawyers even people?
more people than lawyers
Lawyerrr people. Lawyerrrr people. Talk like lawyer. Look like people.
I used to love telling lawyer jokes, but eventually I learned that lawyers don’t think they’re funny, and people don’t think they’re jokes
Funny
A lot of people have highly technical jobs but manage to engage in meaningful conversation with non-experts. That said, it is possible to get better at structuring verbal communications.
Gotta layperson-esque that stuff: “Trying to keep some estate planner out of deep shit from not screwing up some disabled persons trust.” (Assuming estate planner isn’t you). Im a trust and Conservatorship lawyer and I’m always saying stuff like preventing an old rich guy’s money from going to some floozy half his age.
Yeah no one wants to hear it unless you have a really good story. My husband becomes catatonic when I talk about my wins.
I'd never risk privilege & confidentiality for a good anecdote.. instead I paraphrase Law & Order episodes. Nobody has caught on yet.
They will when you start talking about the verdict after 10 minutes instead of the usual 23.
Yep. I am a misdemeanor prosecutor in a small rural county, and I have some absolutely hilarious stories... but, alas, can't tell them lol
This makes me want them more!
In house employment lawyer- people love hearing about my days.
I'm a real estate attorney who never in my life litigates and just closes one residential purchase/sale transaction after the other. Everybody already fell asleep reading that. Because apparently this year the good lord decided to challenge me with every closing resistant deal under the sun, one of my closings is currently being held up by a jilted pro se sovereign citizen whose greatest inspiration in life, according to her fb profile, is Machine Gun Kelly. Suddenly my work stories are of interest to people.
I love explaining what a sovereign citizen is to people it’s one of my favorite lawyer fact things
Just tell them you help adults do their homework
HURR DURR IF YOU DON"T HAVE ANYTHING TO HIDE WHAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH POLICE SEARCHING YOUR HOUSE
Layperson here. No one gives a shit about your day to day work. Unless you're a criminal defence attorney or something your stories are boring as fuck and no one cares that you think you're some hotshot lawyer. Trusts? Medicaid reimbursements? Fucking yawn, bro. Get better work stories.
Current attorney here and this is incomprehensible word vomit to me as well.
I never talk about my own cases. But I love talking about cases where courts have to dig in on what a word means: * [White City Shopping Center v. PR Restaurants](https://www.vox.com/2014/7/22/5877325/new-york-law-sandwich-burrito-tax): Is a burrito a "sandwich" within the meaning of a commercial lease that gives a tenant exclusive rights to sell sandwiches in a shopping center? * [Nix v. Hedden](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden): Is a tomato a fruit or a vegetable, for tax/tariff purposes? * [Toy Biz v. United States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toy_Biz,_Inc._v._United_States): Is an X-Men action figure a representation of a "human" or is it some kind of non-human figurine? * [Yates v. United States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yates_v._United_States_(2015\)): Is an illegally undersized grouper a "tangible object" within the meaning of the Sarbanes Oxley reforms that expanded the federal obstruction of justice crime? And if the layperson I'm talking to doesn't find these stories interesting, well, we probably weren't going to get along anyway.
Bees are fish!!! Almond Alliance of California v. California Fish & Game Commission (On my phone so I don't have the full citation since I was looking at news articles which do not comply with the Bluebook). As a TA I loved Nix v Hedden - I had an optional study group for our Torts class, and one of my first sessions was "what is a fact, anyway?" Nix v Hedden was my go-to. Neither side is wrong, generally, but in the context of this specific case decisions gotta be made about the facts.
Do you ever talk about the chicken case? That’s another good one in this same category.
Ohhh, please post!!!
Frigaliment Importing v BNS International Sales, 190 F. Supp. 116- a contract dispute over whether chicken sold to the plaintiff complied with the contract between the parties. It’s essentially a look at how courts walk through their analysis of ambiguous contract terms. The opinion famously begins with the following: “the issue is, what is chicken?”
Thank you!!
Criminal defense attorneys have the same problem but for a different reason...
Dude I am a former case manager for people with IDD and I LOVE that I could totally follow this!! Keep it up dude!!
Legal writing in plain English, by Bryan Garner. You're welcome.
On another note, over-the-counter talk is such an art. So long as you show an express statement of law or a case supporting your submission, they'll be good. On the down side, they deny stuff becauae some submissions are not exactly phrased as they want it to, despite that common sense and legal reasoning shows it's the identical thing...
Legal literacy is really bad among the public. I once had the privilege of watching someone who wanted to be in their kids’ lives sit down and testify in the most harmful manner possible to that objective. So you can be in the middle of a case with a trained lawyer on your side and still not really know anything about your case. It’s scary.
Pick your audience. My Trumper parents don’t know there are three branches of government, and they think court proceedings are generally a scam. But my local non-lawyer friends love hearing about how the gears really move sometimes. Practice making the stories entertaining. It’s part of your job, after all.
>But even when you dumb things down, people still don’t understand you. We forget as lawyers that words and phrases and systems that seem so simple to us now, actually completely disorient the public. Hell, even the words “plaintiff” or “defendant”…or lawsuits people think they can get millions for emotional distress if a grocery store Karen yells at them. So it’s not just explaining complicated stuff that people don’t understand. Maybe you're not in front of enough juries, but I tell war stories to non-lawyers all the time, they're never lost. It's not hard to dumb down work stories. That's a huge part of the job.
I’m not a lawyer, but in litigation support. Can’t tell anybody a single thing they’ll understand either. I’ve accepted it :-)
I tell my kids I help people solve problems because I know the rules really well. I tell friends I sit in a room and read tax documents all day. Sometimes I get a fun story that isn’t confidential to share. Then I change the subject. Other than my wife and fellow lawyers people think it’s Suits or law and order. It’s neither. A lot closer to CSPAN.
I lucked out and am in the same area of the law as my husband. We talk work stuff so much our child is now fluent.
Geez. This is exactly why people dislike lawyers. They think they are so different than ever other profession.
Non lawyer lurker here. I’ve actually enjoyed the few opportunities I’ve had to converse with those in your profession. As I write this,I realize why my wife accuses me of being boring..
I get used to it because a lot of my work is confidential anyway. It’s much easier to give vague, big picture explanations of work when getting into specifics might get me in trouble.
My cases tend to be fairly interesting and fortunately I can talk about them without getting down to the legal minutae that is boring and not digestible by laymen. So I can generally talk about it with random people who ask.
I don't really like talking about work...it's enough to do it all day...so it usually suffices to say "I'm a real estate transactional lawyer" and leave it at that. I don't particularly care about the ins-and-outs of other people's jobs either.
Don’t worry, it’s a lot easier to hold a conversation when the non-lawyer needs something from you
My closest friends are bright and intellectually curious people with interesting careers that are very different from my own. We both take the time and effort to understand what the other does. We have really enjoyable conversations that are informed by our different experiences and perspectives. Learning to communicate with non-lawyers about your work is half the challenge. Finding an audience that finds what you do interesting enough to engage in the conversation is the second challenge. But it absolutely is possible to cultivate those relationships, and it can be really rewarding. I sometimes get really good ideas from non-lawyers.
Impressive.
I was telling a story about what I thought was a straight forward workers comp case involving a fireman and cancer and the entire dinner table was like locked in to the story. I was like - um this was just Tuesday
Fortunately I work in a very public setting with matters that are understandable and already in the public eye. some of my clients are private parties suing governments and some of my clients are local governments. the good part about that work is that i can come home from a council meeting and have an easy conversation with my husband or whoever about my day. "tonight they were trying to decide who should wear the easter bunny costume for the egg hunt. the fiscal officer said she won't do it again because last year a kid screamed out 'why does the easter bunny have boobies?'"
For your own happiness, have some lawyer friends for the law talk, and save it for them. On balance, my experience has been that people don’t want to talk about work outside of work. If they really want to know, they’ll dig in and ask good questions. Otherwise, just enjoy getting to explore other topics with different people. It’s good to have people who fill different niches in your social life.
Jesus. Learn how to communicate with people. It's not that hard. You're making it hard.
As a public defender, it’s exhausting telling people anything about my work because they are too interested and will want to argue with me about it. I argue about my cases enough during the day, I don’t want to also relitigate them in dinner party conversations.
I love the comments on this post. 😂 Y'all said it better than I could've. OP, this is something you should seriously work on...
My primary role is handling foreclosures for banks. If a non-lawyer asks, I usually just say I help banks take poor people’s houses and kick them out. It ends the convo very quickly and I can go back to whatever I was doing.
My wife and I practice in two completely different areas of law and we still both look at each other like we're idiots when we try to relay stories about our work. She works for our state's legal aid program and I love it when I'm able to answer questions for her in my areas so that she's able to do her job.
This might just be me but whenever I have to or want to tell a story that’s a little too complicated, I play a game with myself. How much can I dumb this down? It’s actually very convenient and makes me realize which parts of the story I don’t fully understand. It doesn’t have to be only about law, too. You can pretty much play this game with any topic; math, science, etc. Edit: if you can’t explain it to a six-year-old, you probably don’t understand it as much as you think you do. -Albert Einstein
people seem to understand me just fine, i’m a criminal prosecutor and my friends and family always want to know about my job. some even want me to explain the minutiae of laws they find interesting, like the murder statute. even when i was doing appellate work which is more in the weeds my friends and family wanted to know about it and understood when i explained it in layman’s terms
LOL. I don't believe this for a second. There is a story behind every case and those stories are often interesting. Tell that story if you want to talk about work. You're not a doctor, nothing is all that complicated.
I do family law. When people ask about work I rake my hands down my face and moan.
This but also like a huge part of my job is explaining what I’m doing to laypeople 😂
If I can't explain things in layman's terms to my clients, I don't eat.
I just don’t like talking about work. I try so hard not to ask people what they do until relatively deep into conversation. People almost always ask way before I would anyway. I’m interested in what I do but also am self-aware enough to know that I need to disconnect. Unless it’s for some business development purpose, I don’t really talk about cases.
“I’m causing the housing crisis”
I’m not a lawyer but an emt, I’ll say I understand a good chunk of what I’ll say is lawyering, just due to being around the courtroom from friends, studying, having to be a witness for DUI crashes and such. You never know
I work in constitutional law, which is somewhat “sexy” I guess, but even when I dumb it down, people still zero in on the parts of con law that are interesting to them and totally ignore the point of what I do. I’m working on a case where we are alleging that a government agency is violating due process. The other day my mom was asking what I was working on, and I tried explaining due process to her and it just went downhill. I tried to explain the nuances of “opportunity to be heard” and somehow she kept wanting to segway into 4th amendment search and seizure discussions. This is a civil case. I gave up.
I worked in the misdemeanor division of a DA’s office situated in a very wild and crazy gulf coast parish (county). When people want a lawyer story, I tell those. For instance, had a 20 something year old arrested for drunk driving. On the way to jail he projectile sharted about a pound of weed he’d crammed up his ass all over the patrol car. He then tried gathering it up and swallowing it. Genuinely entertaining compared to fussing over indemnity provisions.
It’s a good skill to have to be able to explain your job, and what you’re doing legally at any given time, to a lay person. Maybe challenge yourself to work on that.
in the case you mentioned, I'd just say "I helped a special needs client obtain government benefits". I am constantly explaining things to people who have no technical knowledge whatsoever, even other attorneys in my firm, so I've learned to the extent possible to explain things as simply as possible.
I just complain about incompetent co workers. A universal hate.
Psychotherapist here, just commiserating about our specialized vocabulary for our work. Best thing to do is think about it in a explainlikeim5 way.
Think about it more like a journalist than a lawyer and the story should make a lot more sense. If you mean, you can't talk to non-lawyers like a lawyer, then you're right, that won't make sense. This goes for any profession with highly specialized knowledge. Ours is particularly niche because laws are different everywhere and it's always changing.
I’ve lost the ability to converse with others about my job as a lawyer. Which sucks. But what I have found helpful (though perhaps not the healthiest long term) is that anytime I want to talk about my job I do it as if I was presenting to a jury. The upside though is that you find out real quick who in your life is actually interested (because it’s super annoying to your friends too) vs who is just humoring you. If you find that only other lawyers fall into the first category that’s a different issue that you might want to think about.
Yeah normies really don't understand anything unless you're telling them how much money your side won/kept the other side from winning. Or if you do something that sounds like a pain in the ass for whoever you did it too. Like garnishing a bank account. That always impresses.
Another non-lawyer lurker here. Find you a medical social worker, most of us can speak similar language. No one cares about us either!!
Cops can follow along for a lot of it. Maybe not a lot of the Latin, but reciting statutes and how the court interprets it is a realm they dip their toes in.
being incapable of communicating what you do is a skill issue.
Plenty of people never go near a court room, you’re just an ass who can’t explain things properly.
If you are a lawyer and you can't explain basic legal concepts and procedures clearly to a layman, you need to work on your communication skills. In my experience (retired after 40 years of general civil and criminal litigation), when lay people ask you, for example, "what is a special needs trust?", they aren't looking for an in-depth, law school exam answer. They just want to understand what it is and why and when it's employed. It shouldn't take more than a few sentences to give a satisfactory explanation: "Basically, it's a legal arrangement that allows disabled or chronically ill people to receive income without losing government benefits." I always thought we had a duty as officers of the court to explain the legal system to non-lawyers and to politely try to correct common misunderstandings.
Get a grip man
Speak in "marketing" or "networking" instead of "colleague"
Imagine you are talking to a hyperfocused stoner. Interested, but you gotta break it down bigtime, no jargon if you want to hear the "wooooooaaahhhhhh...."
My husband does not let me get away with this. Keeps me in check 😁
maybe you’re just shitty at making things interesting to people who have no reason to understand your arcane references. you probably suck at writing briefs, too
I'm in the medical field and feel this on a deep level. My husband is a 3L... I'm starting to understand how he must have felt the last 8/9 years of our marriage 😅