Biglaw, Boutique Law Firms, Small Law Firms, Television

Beyond Biglaw: 3 Associate Lessons From 'Goliath'

As an associate, you are operating in an environment where information is a limited resource.

By  
on
(via Wikimedia)

(via Wikimedia)

One of my favorite classes in law school was “Law and Literature,” where the central conceit of the class was that literature (broadly defined as including both prose and cinema) had much to teach us about life as a lawyer. From reading Billy Budd, to watching Paul Newman’s unforgettable performance as a lawyer in The Verdict, we were tasked with analyzing how fictional portrayals of lawyers and the legal process could fine-tune our own approaches to legal practice. It was a fun class, and challenging in its own way. Perhaps informed by my experience in that class, I have always been drawn to studying fictional depictions of lawyers, with an eye to actually learning something along with my dose of escapist entertainment.

The undisputed heavyweight champion of the entertaining yet informative piece of fiction for lawyers is, of course, My Cousin Vinny. The movie is a paean to various aspects of trial practice, from cross-examination, to dealing with expert testimony, to avoiding contempt via proper courtroom attire and demeanor. But there are a host of worthwhile law-oriented pieces of fictional material, and over a recent vacation I found myself drawn into one of them — Amazon’s Goliath. The show, which netted star Billy Bob Thornton a Golden Globe, has been reviewed in these pages, and centers on a series of David v. Goliath (hence the title) battles — primarily between a dead former employee and the mega-corporation who was his employer, and between a washed-out Biglaw refugee and his former Biglaw firm. My favorite variation of the David v. Goliath theme, however, was the depiction of a Biglaw associate’s struggle to survive and thrive in the crucible of an important litigation for an indispensable firm client.

The successes and travails of the associate, known as Lucy Kittridge on the show, have been addressed elsewhere. In a October 2016 piece, Big Law Business notes that Lucy is the show’s “most realistic Biglaw character” while lamenting her struggle “working in a system where information is doled out selectively.” I submit, however, that Lucy’s challenges have less to do with the knowledge imbalance between partners and associates, and more to do with the power imbalance inherent in a hierarchical system. A system that works, mind you, for its primary purpose — to make as much money for the partners as possible through the provision of top-notch legal services. One look at the law firm offices in Goliath — especially when contrasted with the plaintiff lawyer’s “offices” in a motel room and storage locker — makes clear the contribution of associate labor to Biglaw profits.

Lucy’s successes and travails have a lot to teach associates, no matter what size firm they are employed by. As Bloomberg notes, understanding that as an associate you are operating in an environment where information is a limited resource dispensed from on high is an important first step. But what about the power imbalance inherent in the partner-associate dynamic? What about Lucy’s character arc can help associates successfully navigate across those perilous waters? I submit the following three lessons from Lucy’s story on Goliath.

First, it is critically important for associates to avoid deification of partners. Yes, they are more knowledgeable about the law, and may have already paid off their student loans. But partners are people, and are often people who have done a good job of masking their inherent flaws in arriving at their current position. Lucy’s interactions with the partners on Goliath, while perhaps exaggerated, are often defined by her ability to read and adapt to the flaws of each partner as she deals with them. Take her tryst with the managing partner of the firm, who doubles as the show’s “big bad” or villain. Yes, he is infinitely more powerful than her, but he also needs the validation of her affection to help calm the insecurity he feels as a result of his disfiguration. Again, this is an extreme example, and not a course of behavior I condone or suggest, but it is illustrative. Lucy’s success is directly tied to her ability to please the partners she works for, without trying to supplant them. The latter impulse is what can be destructive, for her and associates generally.

Recognizing that partners are flawed humans, as we all are, gives Lucy a fighting chance. Associates can and should understand what motivates the partners they work for, and attempt to help out by helping those partners cover their flaws. A more prosaic example: if the partner you work for is not the greatest writer, a smart approach for an associate who actually is a good writer would be to help the partner draft or polish written work product, while also allowing the partner to take the credit. Is it fair? No. But law firms are not designed for fairness.

Sponsored

Second, Lucy does her best work when she remembers that she is not the only associate at the firm. At one point in the show, she is seen trying to recruit other associates to help her. While she does not convince all of her colleagues to pitch in, her willingness to admit that she could use a helping hand inures to her benefit and is convincing enough for at least one other associate to help out. Remembering that you are part of team, as opposed to a one-person fortress, is an important characteristic for associates to have. There will be times when even the best associate could use some help, and there are also times when even the busiest associates must altruistically make some time to help out their colleagues. Building strong relationships with colleagues requires sacrifice. But those relationships can also be lifesavers, on many levels.

Third, Lucy operates with a level of self-awareness that associates should strive to achieve. In particular, Lucy understands that the law firm environment is often set up as one of disqualification, rather than elevation, for associates. Put another way, associates must always understand that their colleagues and superiors, by virtue of the competitive environment at law firms, are more likely looking for reasons to disqualify them, rather than advance them. In Lucy’s case, she is well aware that her stuttering problem is precisely the type of disqualifier that could make her tenure in Biglaw a short-lived one. Yes, you can argue about whether that should be the case, or whether it is fair, but that is not Lucy’s approach.

Lucy is at her most sympathetic and courageous when she is aware of her challenges, but plows ahead anyway. Everyone who has succeeded in a law firm has overcome various challenges. Knowing what challenges face you as an associate is the first step to overcoming them. I won’t spoil the show and let you know what Lucy’s fate is. Whether she makes partner or gets fired matters less to me than the lessons her characters offers us. Nearly every lawyer practicing today knows what is was like as an associate, and today’s associates know that they can take all the help they can get. Especially if they want to capture the crown like King David did.

Please feel free to send comments or questions to me at gkroub@kskiplaw.com or via Twitter: @gkroub. Any topic suggestions or thoughts are most welcome.

Earlier: Standard Of Review: Examining The Visual Look Of ‘Goliath’
‘Goliath’: An Interview With Lawyer And Writer Jonathan Shapiro

Sponsored

Gaston Kroub lives in Brooklyn and is a founding partner of Kroub, Silbersher & Kolmykov PLLC, an intellectual property litigation boutique. The firm’s practice focuses on intellectual property litigation and related counseling, with a strong focus on patent matters. You can reach him at gkroub@kskiplaw.com or follow him on Twitter: @gkroub.

Topics

, , , , , , ,