Lawyer

Dear Sir:

Early in life, I knew that I would become a successful lawyer.

When I was a child, I had a picture of myself reading “The Little Book of Lawyers”. The book is a simple introduction to law that was written to make it easy for a young reader to understand. At an early age, I always wanted to know how to defend myself and my family from injustice.

My passion for the study of law grew when the landlord of the home where I lived with my parents, served us an eviction order. As a result of our problem, I started studying Lease Law when I was in high school to determine if our lawyer was pursuing our case correctly.

Fortunately, we won the case and this inspired me to begin my law study at the Università Statale di Milano. After completing my law studies, I commenced my training experience in the law firm of the lawyer who assisted my family in the eviction procedure. I have regarded him as a meticulous mentor who has provided me with vast knowledge, exposure and experience and trained me to work in an orderly, precise and professional manner.

After almost two years of law practice, I have confirmed a strong desire to specialize in International Law.  My love for International Law started when I was at the University where I studied under the tutelage of great professors such as Fausto Pocar and Tullio Treves. To have a better grasp of International Law, I decided to work at Clifford Chance LLP, a firm known to have a very strong international network.

It has been almost four years now since I began my law practice at Clifford Chance (CC).  Since Clifford Chance had offices in various countries, I gained a lot of experience while working with colleagues in other CC international offices. I am usually assigned to work with colleagues from the London headquarters and the New York offices but I am often given the opportunity to work with other offices, e.g. Germany and Spain.

As I deal with various cases, I learn to understand the importance of International Law.  I was astonished by the incredible ways various jurisdictions intertwined together and how the rules of every country combined in a unique entity in order to allow parties to have business relationships all around the world.

Nowadays, the world is a very small place due to globalization and the advancement of technology. Even the smallest business has to deal with customers from different countries in order to be competitive. In my practice, I have encountered questions, e.g. what happens when an agreement is ruled by a law different from the country where the party in default lives?

How can I enforce a judgment issued in Italy if the debtor is in Portugal? What happens when a company in Russia has to deal with a debtor who was declared bankrupt in Italy? The above are few of the problems that a good international lawyer has to deal with.  These are not easy issues and a lawyer has to study and work a lot and have good teachers in order to know how to handle them correctly.

At Clifford Chance, I had the opportunity to work on very big and important issues. We dealt with the bankruptcy of one of the main companies in our country. This company has subsidiaries all over the world, has business relationship with different countries, and has issued bonds on the market. Although the international issues were complicated, dealing with the problem was extremely interesting as I worked together with highly qualified professionals who helped me understand the complexities of every issue.

My passion to specialize in International Law has strengthened my desire to further my studies and pursue LLM in International Business and Trade Law.  I have always been focused in the pursuit of my career and my studies and work performance will attest that I have been a meticulous scholar, and a result driven lawyer.  As I always believe that we should always strive for excellence, I tend to work in a precise manner so I can achieve the best result.

This is something that I have learned in my work experience. I believe in the saying that if you want to be a good professional, you have to think that you must become the best professional. It is only in aiming high that you can reach the higher points of knowledge, professionalism and skills.

I hope that you will grant my application to pursue my studies in (write the name of the university). I strongly believe that pursuing the LLM International Business and Trade Law program will allow me to grain a solid knowledge and exposure on issues related to international law that will lead me to become a skilled professional in this field of study.

Thank you very much.

Very truly yours,

Aaron Ghirardelli

If you work as a paralegal or law clerk after your first or second year of law school, you will most likely spend some of your time researching and writing objective memoranda, or interoffice memos. Typically, an attorney asks you to provide a realistic analysis of the law as it applies to the facts of a client’s case. The purpose is to inform – not persuade. Although you should remember which conclusion favors your client, also keep in mind that you will represent the client most effectively by being objective and realistic.

The memo might be read many times – possibly, over a period of months or years by several different attorneys, including the writer, who may use it as a resource long after it is drafted. The attorney will use the information contained in the memo to advise the client and may use it to prepare a document that will ultimately be filed in court. For example, a partner may be asking you whether a particular client has a valid legal claim. If you conclude that the answer is “yes,” then this will probably turn into a lawsuit. At that point, some parts of the memo may be incorporated when the complaint is drafted.

The memo might me consulted a third time when the attorney responds to a motion to dismiss; a fourth time while drafting interrogatories; a fifth time before making a motion for summary judgment; a sixth time before trial; and a seventh during an appeal; and so on.

A memorandum heading . The Issue (sometimes called Question Presented) states the question(s) that the memorandum resolves. The Issue also itemizes the few facts that you predict to be crucial to the answer. (Such as travel expenses to out-of-state, keeping child out of danger, and commission of crime).

The reader should understand the question without having to refer to the facts.

Brief Answer (sometimes called Conclusion) states the writer’s prediction and summarizes concisely why it is likely to happen. Some writers begin with a direct response such as “yes” or “probably not. ” Our book says that they do not prefer this. Sometimes this is client or partner driven. Also, some questions lend themselves to answers such as “yes” or “no. ” Allusion to determinative facts and rules. Do not omit key facts. Begin by just re-stating your issue as a declarative sentence. Do not omit the reasoning.

Do not include citation to authority or application of relevant law. Many attorneys only read this part.

Facts set out the facts on which the prediction is based.

Discussion is the largest and most complex part of memo. It proves the conclusion set out in brief answer. If the discussion is highly detailed or analyzes several issues, it should be broken down into subheadings. Here is what the memo will look like and more information on each section.

A Few Ideas About Writing — Memoranda

Many students, approaching memo writing for the first time, are often unsure of how to proceed. We have put together a few tips for first (and second and third) time memo writers that we hope will be helpful.

Note: No single set of guidelines could possibly address all the matters related to memo writing. If you have questions about a particular assignment, be sure to check with your professor.

Find the test(s). In assigning a memorandum, professors are generally evaluating you on parsing a particular statute or test. In other words, they want you to use other cases to explain how your case either does or does not satisfy a test laid out in a case or a statute. For example, let’s say your case involves a niece (Mary) who witnessed her uncle (Jack) being injured in an automobile accident.

Mary wants to bring suit for negligent infliction of emotional distress as a result of witnessing that accident. In Burger v. McDonald, the Supreme Court of Iowa laid out a three part test to determine whether a bystander’s injury was reasonably foreseeable and, thus, legally actionable:

• Whether the bystander was located near the accident.
• Whether the injury resulted from sensory and contemporaneous observance of the accident, as opposed to hearing about it from others after its occurrence.
• Whether the bystander and the victim were closely related.

NOTE: If the memo involves more than one issue, your memorandum may involve more than one test. 2. Use the test as your outline. Tests come in two parts, or three (as above), often with subsections. Ideal for an outline. Use the major parts of the test as your major points, the subparts as sub-sections. Paragraph Structure

Begin paragraphs with affirmative propositions that parallel the test. In the above example, your first sentence should say something like: “Mary was located near the scene of her uncle’s accident, satisfying the first part of the Burger test. ”

Support your affirmative propositions. All propositions of a legal nature must have legal support. Where is your authority for your proposition? Cite it. For example: “See Burger, 606 N. W. 2d at 321 (bystander must be located near accident to recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress). ”

Discuss the facts of your support. What happened in the case you just cited? Explain in a concise and relevant way. For example: “In Burger, the court held that a mother who witnessed an accident on the street from the front door of her house was located near the scene of an accident.

Discuss the relevant facts of your case. Point to the facts that are similar to the facts of the authority you’ve just discussed. For example, you could continue from above as follows: “Mary was standing a block from the accident, heard the crash, and saw her uncle being pulled, bleeding, from the car. ”

Analogize/Conclude. What conclusions do you think the court will draw from the similarity between your facts and the facts of your authority? For example: “Although Mary did not see the accident, she was close enough to hear it and witness her uncle being pulled from the car.

Thus, a court will likely conclude that she was located near the accident. ” Alternative Paragraph Structure

Discuss other relevant authority. Once you’ve opened the previous paragraph with your affirmative proposition, your subsequent paragraphs can discuss the facts of other relevant cases without repeating the proposition as your opening sentence. For example, you could begin the next paragraph: “In Cameron v. Jones, the Court of Appeals held that a mother who was twenty-five feet away from her child when she heard a metal sculpture fall on him was located near the scene of the accident.

Discuss contrary authority. Are there cases that go against your position (or the position the partner/judge/etc. would like you to hold)? Another subsequent paragraph could open with: “But, in Alfred v. Stern, the court held that a father did not have a valid cause of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress. ” Then follow steps 5, 6, and 7, above, except this time, when concluding, tell the reader why the court won’t follow or give much weight to this contrary authority (e. g. , the facts are different).

Move on to the next part of the test. Follow steps 3-9 above for the next section of your test. Remember, a memorandum also includes issues presented, a brief answer (which usually follows the issues presented), and a statement of facts. These are often best written after you’ve written the body of the memorandum, since you’ll have a better idea of the issues once you’ve tackled the problem (though a tentative draft might help to get you started).

In her written statement last November 9 2005, Barbara E. Bergman, the President of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, aptly stated in behalf of the NACDL that the fundamental issue of every criminal trial is not to entertain, nor to educate, but to administer justice[1].

The controversy regarding whether media coverage of criminal trials is detrimental to a fair trial or not is hotly debated and difficult to balance. Even high caliber lawyers have not reached a general consensus about the issue. The tension between the pros and cons of the said subject is still being balanced every time process of litigation is on going. Questions arising from this issue involved: How much of the media be allowed? Will it be helpful to let the media cover every trial of a particular case from start to finish?

What about the parties involved? Does decision to permit the media or not be the sole right of the judge, or is it the right of all the parties involved, including the defendant? These are but “some” of the important components that embody the whole subject. The apprehension is that, too much publicity might affect the trial’s fairness. The unrestrained freedom given might be used or manipulated to influence fair and just decisions on the parts of the jury and the judge.

This paper covers the different views pertaining to media coverage/publicity of a trial. What are the advantages and disadvantages when media coverage is allowed? What are the effects – negative or positive – of the media to a fair trial?

The Pros of Publicity

Arguments for media coverage inside the courtroom are solid and convincing. As cited by Bergman in her written testimony, it promotes “civic awareness” raises “government accountability,” and enhances “legal professionalism”[2]. Bergman was right when she pointed these three positive results of opening the court to the public via media reporting. A prying press, in this case, has become and is indeed a friend and complimentary to the justice system. It exposes everything. When there is malpractice on the side of the police, the prosecutors, and the judges, the media is supportive and contributory in the exacting of fairness to the opposite side[3].

It is also appeasing to the public, especially when a particular case is controversial – involving celebrities or notorious personalities. The public whose curiosity have made them a part of the trial must be given the chance to participate, or else, mistrust to jurisprudence will take place among people in general, as a result. Media coverage is of great assistance in this area.

It prevents closed door proceedings and subjects people of authority to the scrutiny of the public and thus avoid further corruptions which could otherwise happen when media is banned from the deliberations. Another plus of the coverage of criminal trials is that it promotes respect to the justice system. It alleviates the mystery of secrecy in closed insulated proceedings. When there is no care on the part of those involved in executing justice inside hearings and open trial is rather encouraged, public trust heightens, and thus deference to whatever outcomes – may it be comporting to the general sentiment of the public or not.

Because there is also that “damning stigma” to the so-called pretrial publicity (an irony inherent to media coverage), open trial dispels this. The consequent result that oftentimes reverses the guilty verdict of the public restores the already smeared reputation of the criminal defendant. When charges are dismissed, and the premature guilty judgment is eventually proven wrong, the supposed criminal is vindicated before the watching community.

Last point in favor of media involvement, is the benefit that the government, the people, and jurisprudence itself, obtain in this process. Insights to the already wisely crafted laws are contemplated and possible or potential modification of existing laws is considered. As Barbara E. Bergman has stated in her testimony, “Court TV must be credited for its considerable contributions in all of these areas”[4].

The Cons of Media Coverage

The arguments against media involvement in judicial processes are equally convincing. There are also disadvantages to unrestrained media meddling. One primary concern is its negative effects to the parties involved in a particular litigation. The conspicuous presence of cameras inside the courtroom will affect the behaviors of the “main players” of a specific case.

It will thus weaken the procedure or the “fair administration of justice”[5]. Because lawyers, defendants, jurors, and judges, and witnesses are aware that they are being watched, in this kind of scenario, their tendency is to act unnaturally; in other words, they may act hypocritically, and this will be to the detriment of fair judicial process. In the O.J. Simpson case, there were instances when crucial witnesses withheld their testimonies because of fear that they are being watched by the public[6].

If the jurors had been made aware beforehand that the case they were handling would be televised and publicized, the overall verdict would definitely be affected. Concern for the public’s opinion of whatever the eventual decisions they will ever come up regarding the future of the defendant, will or may get into the deliberations process.

Conclusion

The important thing in the whole scenario of judicial procedures everywhere is striking a balance between the pros and the cons of media involvement. First, of course is the fairness that begins in whose authority it is to say “yes” or “no” to the media. As the NACDL has forged and is now binding in the courts of America, all parties involved in the case – Judge, Prosecutors, Defendants, etc. – have to be asked. Everyone must be given the freedom to exercise his/her right. Is it true that, because the eyes of the general public are watching a particular case, it thus precludes a fair trial?

Does presence of cameras in the court demean and disrupt the proceedings? Are the participants in the hearing process – judges, attorneys, jurors, and witnesses – get affected negatively, and therefore adjust their behavior because they are conscious that they are being watched? No one knows for sure whether these are true or not. They may be in many cases, and again, maybe not. The important thing is to strike a balance in both sides and apply what is necessary to secure due process of law. Remember, the fundamental issue in every criminal trial is the administration of justice, not entertainment nor to educate.

Works Cited

Bergman, Barbara. 2005. Cameras in the Courtroom. National Association of Defense Criminal Lawyers accessed on April 28, 2007 in. http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1672&wit_id=4801.

Goldfarb, Ronald. The Trial of the Century Accessed on April 28, 2007

I Reiner, “Cameras Keep Justice System in Focus,” The National Law Journal, October 23, 1995, p. A23. in Goldfarb, Ronald. The Trial of the Century Accessed on April 28, 2007

Cameras in the Courtroom. 2005 National Association of Defense Criminal Lawyers in  http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1672&wit_id=4801.

Ibid.
Goldfarb, Ronald. The Trial of the Century. Accessed in http://www.cosmos-club.org/web/journals/1998/goldfarb.html
http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1672&wit_id=4801.
Ibid.
I Reiner, “Cameras Keep Justice System in Focus,” The National Law Journal, October 23, 1995, p. A23. in Goldfarb, Ronald. The Trial of the Century Accessed on April 28, 2007 in http://www.cosmos-club.org/web/journals/1998/goldfarb.html

http://www.cosmos-club.org/web/journals/1998/goldfarb.html.

A lot comes to the mind of an upcoming high school graduate, especially what that person wants to do for a living. My future career is that of a lawyer. Granted becoming a lawyer takes a lot of work and effort. Once I have attended undergrad and finish law school I then can become a lawyer. Becoming a lawyer has many advantages, I can either argue for the applicant or defendant. My future career, a lawyer, is without a doubt a long-term goal that I’ve dreamed of becoming since I was in 3rd grade.

Benefits are really great and I help make society a better place to live in. It will be a chore, that’s why I’m trying to get the right mind set now before it’s too late. The growth potential for being a lawyer all depends on my education and how far I want to go. Many people get into general law and work with a firm for years without moving up, but if I work hard at building up a client base then living is easy. Continuing education is also a good move for this potential job opportunity, I can become qualified for a more wide-ranging field of practice.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics converse that now, to add in education, most states and jurisdictions “require future lawyers to complete a juris doctor (J. D. ) degree from a law school accredited by the American Bar Association. ” First, of course I must graduate high school then I have to get a bachelor’s degree, and I take the LSAT test. Afterwards I must go to 3-4 years of law school and finally, I must take the bar exam; it’s usually 7-8 years after high school. The costs all depends on the school that I pick.

For going to public schools, I’d have to expect costs to be around $100,000 for tuition, housing, food, books, test fees, etc. Because of my dad being a retired Marine, most of this stuff will come free, that will help be less of a detriment to this situation. The lowest-level law school costs about $30,000 a year and prices are raising quickly too, so it’ll only go up from there. This all is just stressful, and the work is 24/7. The pace all depends on how I feel about this work; in the end, it all feels good to have accomplished such a mission.

Legal careers guide Sally Kane states for becoming a lawyer “is an enormous undertaking in terms of time commitment and financial investment. ” Basically in the end, it’s all money well spent. It takes time though, therefore I should learn as much about the profession as possible to fill that time. I’ve never met a lawyer who wasn’t moral, honest, connected with their clients, or prepared for deadlines. One must be highly educated and have fast thinking skills. A persons mind must be set to be quick to analyze a situation and decide the best outcome to a situation in order to become a wonderful lawyer.

These type of work values, can be really great to have for a great cost and time well spent. In addition to spending things, I’ll be able to spend a lot more with the salary I’m able to get $113,310 every year. A source, ONET OnLine, indicates that lawyers median wages are $54. 48 an hour, project growth from 2010-2020 will be an average of 10%-19%. The projected job openings from 2010-2020 are 212,000 and the employment rate for lawyers updated in 2010 are 728,000. The work environment for lawyers is either in the law library, in the office or in court.

Court hours for most lawyers are typically regular business hours, with a one-hour lunch break. The study hall, law libraries etc. are all very helpful necessities. David R. Johnson, author of Serving Justice with Conversational Law simply states “The existence of libraries of legal materials required professionals to help lay clients read and understand increasingly complex rules and precedents. ” One is usually working up to 11 hours a day, most times weekends as well. A majority works full time, to raise the hourly and annual wages these are the prices it takes to make big bucks.

To conclude my reason to shoot for my dream career, the bonus is I have the opportunity to save people’s lives, and bring justice to people that deserve it. A lot comes in the mind of a high school graduate, especially what that person wants to do for a living. A lawyer is something I feel I am capable of doing. Whether it being extensive or lengthy working hours, I find it something I am capable of striving for. The long term reward isn’t just the rather large amount of pay, but the fact that I have accomplished what I always wanted to do and that I’m happy doing it.