Posted by Orin Kerr:
Do Law Professors Need Practical Experience?:
Lawprof Amy Cohen spent a semester-long sabbatical from Western New
England College School of Law working at a law firm practicing IP law,
an area of law she has taught for many years. On her return she wrote
an interesting article: The Dangers of the Ivory Tower: The Obligation
of Law Professors to Engage in the Practice of Law, 50 Loy. L. Rev.
623 (2004) (not available online). Cohen writes that the experience of
working at a firm was quite useful both to her and her students:
What I learned from this experience was more valuable than I had
expected. First, I learned quite a bit about the practical aspects
of copyright law and trademark law that I had not and probably
never would have encountered in the ivory towers of academia. For
example, I learned how actual trademark searches are done and what
issues are frequently raised by trademark examiners who evaluate
trademark applications. I also learned how to search for a design
mark and where to look for descriptions of goods and services that
are acceptable to the trademark office. These may seem like simple
and perhaps even trivial matters, but in reality these are the type
of matters about which students often ask and with which I
previously had no direct experience.
Furthermore, I was able to do research on a number of cutting
edge, substantive issues that I might never have realized were of
practical significance had I not been there to see how such issues
arise in practice. As an illustration, I did some research on the
copyrightability of a magazine layout and learned that the
Copyright Office has been quite strict in its interpretations of
the standards of originality, despite a contrary Supreme Court
decision, which had led me to assume otherwise. . . . The fact that
th[is] issue came up in the context of a real client's problem, as
opposed to purely academic meanderings, made it much more exciting
and interesting for me to try and understand the underlying issues.
These experiences will also undoubtedly enrich my teaching. For
one thing, I have a new appreciation for what kinds of issues arise
in practice and how practicing lawyers resolve them. I am hoping to
modify my syllabi to emphasize those issues and to illuminate for
my students why such issues are important on more than a purely
"academic" level. Additionally, I can develop a whole set of
"hypotheticals," problem sets, exam questions, and paper topics
from the actual case files that I reviewed and discussed while at
the firm. To be able to use materials that are based on real client
problems and to be able to talk about the arguments made by the
lawyers, clients, and the decision-makers in the actual cases will
add a level to my teaching and to the understanding of my students
that I could not have provided without this experience.
This experience observing the world of practice will also make me
a better scholar. Although legal scholarship has moved in a more
theoretical direction in the years I have been teaching, I continue
to believe that much good can be accomplished by traditional
scholarship. Lawyers and judges can still benefit from thoughtful
analysis of case law and statutes. My experience at the firm made
me aware of a number of questions in copyright and trademark law
that scholars should address, and it has provided me with the
inspiration to write about such questions, knowing that in the
world of practice there is still a need for the analysis and
insights that a traditional scholar can provide.
Just a few quick (and probably unoriginal) observations on my part
--
As a general matter, I think there is a lot to this. Although I
don't think law professors have an obligation to practice law, an
awareness and understanding of the issues that arise in legal practice
can be tremendously valuable for professors both in terms of teaching
students and writing scholarship. In most cases, understanding the
real world can make academics much better at what they do. Even those
who bring a more theoretical bent to their work can benefit, as it
always helps to understand the real world details that you're
theorizing about.
At the same time, it's important to note that the usefulness of
practice expeience depends on the subject. With a few exceptions, a
couple of years at a firm won't help you teach or write in the area of
constitutional theory or jurisprudence. Law schools host a wide range
of subjects and approaches, and some are less related to legal
practice than others.
Thanks to [1]Out-of-the-Box Lawyering for the lead.
References
1. http://www.outoftheboxlawyering.com/archives/000083.html
_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
Volokh@lists.powerblogs.com
http://highsorcery.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
