Oh is the author of the famous (and fabulous) PH Farewell Email -- aka The Email That Launched A Thousand Blog Comments -- and a heroine in the eyes of many Biglaw associates around the country. Here are a few highlights from the interview:

[T]he former associate, Shinyung Oh (University of Chicago ’93, Georgetown Law ’98), a commercial litigation lawyer.... says she sent the now-infamous email because she didn’t want other associates who may be laid off because of downsizing by the firm – but told it is because of their performance – to doubt their own abilities.

“I want them to feel like they’re not completely alone and not to worry about their own performance when it’s the firm doing something for economic reasons” and because of a “desire to increase partner profits,” she said.

Inducing crippling self-doubt among associates is one of the most pernicious things about "stealth layoffs," in which economically-driven dismissals are cast by firms as purely performance-based. We know this from having spoken to stealth-layoff victims, who have described how their self-confidence was shattered when their firms dismissed them, purportedly for poor performance.

While there may be a "six of one, half-dozen of another" quality to this debate -- as Dan Weiner of Hughes Hubbard & Reed just told the WSJ Law Blog, "is it economic or is it performance-related is a false dichotomy," since if you have to make cuts, "you’re not going to pick people randomly" -- we still think it's the better part of valor for firms to take the reputational hit, rather than stick it to their associates. At any rate, it's certainly fair for law students and lateral candidates to shun firms that get called out for being less-than-candid about their personnel decisions.

Back to the interview. Here's the $64,000 -- or three-months-severance -- question: What was Shinyung Oh thinking when she sent out that email?

[Oh said] she knew that the email, which was sent to associates firm-wide, litigation partners in her office and the top management of Paul Hastings, could ruin her chances of landing another big-firm job. She said she isn’t considering suing the firm, and said she doesn’t feel she was discriminated against because of her pregnancy.

Oh Shinyung, are you sure? After Aaron Charney settled with Sullivan & Cromwell, he got himself a nice new apartment. Then again, if you were planning to sue, you probably shouldn't have told the Wall Street Journal that you didn't feel discriminated against on account of your pregnancy.

As for what’s next, Oh, who immigrated from South Korea when she was eight and grew up in New York and Houston, said she’s not sure. But she said that since the email was posted online, she’s received an outpouring of support from lawyers in the Bay Area and across the country. Several are trying to help her find a new job.

Shinyung, if you're looking for headhunter recommendations, drop us a line -- we can hook you up. And if you ever get the urge to send out another barn-burning, firmwide email, definitely give us a heads up. Based on the way that your email resonated with readers, it's clear that you have writerly talent that deserves a wider audience.

In all seriousness, we wish Shinyung Oh the best of luck. We commend her for the courage it took to write that farewell email. We have every confidence that she will land on her feet -- recall our prior post, quoting a colleague who praised her as someone who "ran a huge class action and got excellent results" -- and we look forward to following her career in the years ahead.

Update: Jane Genova shares our optimism about Oh's future. She writes: Oh "has almost an infinite number of fresh career options, within and outside law.... [enumerates options].... Being the good solider, girl scout or boy scout has no payoff in the current career marketplace. Bold risks do.... Wild risk is the only secure path."

P.S. Congrats to Amir Efrati on the interview. Read the full post over here. Check out a copy of Shinyung Oh's 2006 performance review, also obtained by the WSJ, over here (PDF).

A screencap of her firm bio is saved for posterity, after the jump.

Fired Paul Hastings Associate Talks to Law Blog [WSJ Law Blog]
The New Risky Business - Shinyung Oh's E-Mail Strategy [Law and More]

Earlier: Breaking: A Dramatic Farewell Email (And proof of Paul Hastings layoffs.)
Miscarriage of Justice at Paul Hastings? The Blogosphere Reacts
Nationwide Layoff Watch: Paul Hastings

Why do the gay lawyers land all the fabulous real estate? Just a few days after this installment of Lawyerly Lairs, profiling the palatial pads of two same-sex couples, we learn of a third such couple living large in New York.

A reader sums it up nicely: "This seems right up our alley for Lawyerly Lairs: Manhattan / East Hampton real estate, Yale Law alum (then Paul Weiss before going in-house), Ivy League pedigree on both sides of the same-sex partnership, and shout-outs by the New York Times."

Indeed it is. Read about the charmed life of architect Michael Haverland and lawyer-turned novelist Philip Galanes, follow their successful adventures in NYC real estate (and furniture collecting), and ogle photos of their luxurious Upper East Side and East Hampton homes, in this NYT article.

Starting Over, and Over, and Over [New York Times]
Philip Galanes biography [galaneshaverland.com]

Earlier: Lawyerly Lairs: Gay Gotham Edition

In last week's ATL / Lateral Link survey, we asked you to submit your nominations for Lawyer of the Year. Today, you get to vote!

The nominees, and select comments explaining why, are below:

Aaron Charney

For both the attention focused, success of action, and for the visibility [he] brought to the secondary issue of partner/associate relations (but not those kinds of relations).

Alberto Gonzales

Exemplifies why lawyers are so mistrusted in this country.

Barack Obama

The man had the credentials to do Biglaw. He chose public service instead. Although he is obviously politically ambitious, he at least appears to be in it for the people. He's almost as hot as Judicial Hottie Jeffrey Sutton. I mean, did you see the Obama Girl videos? We've all got a crush on Obama. And he just might be president next year.

Hillary Clinton

She's fabulous.

Loyola 2L

He's generated the most thoughtful discussion of law school. That, and perhaps the publicity will help him get a job.

Ray Beckerman

For his tireless defense and continuous commentary in countless RIAA cases.

Whoever helps Chipmunk lady.

Because.

We know that last one should really be a 2008 Lawyer of the Year, not a 2007 Lawyer of the Year, but we just don't care. You demanded the nomination right now.

So who should win? Cast your vote below.

In Chicago, gay lawyers get to attend exclusive parties. In New York, they enjoy a finer prize: luxury real estate.

The law schools of Columbia and NYU have been battling over faculty superstars for several years. And now NYU is bringing out the heavy artillery: multimillion-dollar condo purchases. From the New York Times:

Columbia University, in a never-ending search for a larger campus, has long had an outpost for faculty housing at 455 Central Park West — 53 apartments in an 26-story tower attached to the French Renaissance chateau at West 106th Street.

So it was something of a surprise when a foundation associated with New York University bought a large condominium in the complex. The unit, which cost $5.2 million, is built into one of the huge turrets of the chateau.... The duplex apartment has a round living and dining room with 37-foot high ceilings and Central Park views, along with three more conventional bedrooms.

Sounds fabulous! Who gets to inhabit this fabulous pad?

Find out, after the jump.

Why was Cinderella stuck in the office doing document review, while her wicked stepsisters nibbled on caviar and danced the night away?

Maybe Cinderella worked at Kirkland & Ellis, and her sisters were of the Sapphic persuasion. From a K&E tipster:

The Chicago office of Kirkland & Ellis hosted a "GLBT only" party last night. The email invitation is below.

It's illegal under Illinois law to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation in the workplace. But they shouldn't be expected to know that as attorneys, should they?

Here's the invite:

The GLBT Subcommittee of the Firmwide Diversity Committee cordially invites All Chicago Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender (GLBT) Attorneys and Staff to a Winter Cocktail and Hors d’Ouevres Reception Today, Thursday, January 17, 2008 Sidebar Grille.

221 N. LaSalle
Chicago
5:00 P.M. — 7:00 P.M.

Truth be told, we aren't deeply troubled. Regardless of their technical status under the law, events for lawyers who share common interests happen all the time.

So lighten up, Mr. Tipster! You probably wouldn't have liked the music anyway -- or, for that matter, being ogled by those twinks from IT. And you definitely wouldn't have appreciated being hit upon by that bear from Duplicating.

As a certain ATL commenter might say, "Guys in my high school used to throw special gay parties all the time. They called it Drama Club. It was no big deal."

P.S. A more serious issue is presented by K&E's summer associate diversity fellowship, previously discussed by Professor David Bernstein over at the Volokh Conspiracy.

Diversity Fellowship Program [Kirkland & Ellis]
Illegal Fellowship at Kirkland & Ellis? [Volokh Conspiracy]

We're tired of the national lovefest for Barack Obama that is currently underway. It seems that Senator Obama, barely halfway through his first term in the U.S. Senate, can do no wrong -- and the divalicious Hillary Clinton, the fabulous former first lady who also has a complete (and highly successful) Senate term under the belt of her pantsuit, can do no right.

Everybody loves Barack. The 2008 election has turned into a run for class president, Barack is the "Cool Kid," and Hillary is the nerd -- the Tracy Flick character from Election.

Lawyers seems to love Obama, especially young, starry-eyed law firm associates. But general counsels have a weakness for him too, as reported today in Corporate Counsel:

The nation's best-paid general counsel have a clear favorite in the presidential race: Barack Obama. In the run-up to the primary season, the Illinois senator received more money from the in-house legal elite than any other candidate....

A total of 29 GCs in the top 100 have contributed to a presidential candidate so far (five gave to more than one campaign). Eight legal chiefs gave Obama a total of $20,600; Hillary Clinton raised $14,500 from six; and Christopher Dodd netted $13,000 from eight.

And publishers like to throw money at Obama too. From a post over the weekend at Boston Now:

[P]residential candidate Barack "No Experience" Obama apparently has no program for reducing foreign corporate control of the U.S. book publishing industry and other U.S. media industries.

One reason Obama might not want to propose that U.S. anti-trust laws be enforced against German media conglomerates like Bertelsmann AG is that between Election Day 2004 and his swearing in as a Senator, Obama was given a $1.7 million two-book contract by the Random House/Crown Publishers/Alfred Knopf subsidiary division of Bertelsmann AG. By signing his lucrative book contract with the German media conglomerate's U.S. subsidiary before taking office, Obama did not fall under various requirements for disclosure and reporting that applies to members of Congress who accept money from U.S. media conglomerates.

We could offer some snarky quip, but will refrain. Senator Obama complied with all applicable legal and ethical rules. His deal was brokered by Robert Barnett of Williams & Connolly, the D.C. superlawyer who brokered a similar book deal for Hillary Clinton, also hammered out right before she took office.

And Hillary is our girl. If loving her is wrong, we don't want to be right.

Update: This video, in which HRC gets a bit choked up, is awesome. She's the most effective politically when she's the most personal. Remember how her political career was launched, after she was humanized as the wronged woman in L'Affaire Lewinsky?

Further Update: In the comments, some of you suggest that this post would be more appropriate for our personal blog. Thanks for the unsolicited advice, which we have taken.

We offer additional thoughts about Hillary, Obama, and the amazing video clip, in this post on our personal blog. The post's title: "Could this be Hillary's anti-Scream, her anti-Macaca moment? Could this video clip save her faltering campaign?"

The GCs' Choice: Obama [Corporate Counsel]
Obama's $1.7 Million Book Contract [Boston Now]

If you're in Iowa, we're guessing you have plans tonight. But if you're in New York City, and looking for something to do from 8:30 p.m. onward, consider attending the Law Blogger Happy Hour:

Thursday, Jan. 3, 2008, 8:30-10:30PM

Fireplace Room within Library Bar at the Sheraton New York Hotel & Towers

811 7th Avenue (at 53rd Street)

It's bitterly cold in the Big Apple right now: 19 degrees (and it feels like 10). So come in from the cold, plant yourself in front of that roaring fire -- they don't call it the "Fireplace Room" for nothing -- and cozy up to some of your favorite law professor/bloggers.

The holiday season isn't that far behind us, so who knows... Maybe there will be egg nog!

Concurring Opinions--PrawfsBlawg Happy Hour at AALS [Concurring Opinions]
Happy New Year! [PrawfsBlawg]

We previously opined that it would be tough to top last year's holiday party at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft. The Carnivale-themed festivities featured drag queens, dancers covered in silver make-up, and albino boa onstrictors.

But if the firm fails to equal that extravaganza, it won't be for lack of trying. Check out the "Schedule of Events" -- how lawyerly to have festivities on a schedule -- for this year's CWT holiday party, taking place tonight at the firm's offices in lower Manhattan. Be in the Empire Room by 7:45 PM sharp, or you'll miss the "Holiday Greeting by Bob Link"!

See also quesadillas. Mmmm, quesadillas...

P.S. We've been hearing all sorts of rumors about CWT lately. If you have some gossip to contribute, please drop us a line. Thanks.

Boogie, Counselor! Which Law Firm Gives Best Party? [New York Observer]

Former DLA Piper associate Charlene Morisseau isn't just our Lawyer of the Day. This high-powered litigatrix -- a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, and a former editor of the Harvard Law Review -- should be hailed as a heroine by Biglaw associates everywhere.

From a most engaging article by Anthony Lin, in the New York Law Journal:

A Manhattan federal judge has thrown out a race discrimination suit brought against DLA Piper by a former associate who claimed the firm's New York office was a hostile work environment.

Charlene Morisseau, a 2001 graduate of Harvard Law School, where she was a law review editor, joined DLA Piper as a litigation associate in April 2003 but was asked to leave less than a year later. In a lawsuit filed last year, Ms. Morisseau, who is black, claimed her firing was retaliation for complaints she had made about discriminatory treatment.

She requested almost $250 million in damages from the firm and the 11 partners she individually named in the suit.

Now, we're all in favor of giving associates more money. But $250 million may be a bit much, even for a Harvard Law grad. It's about 90 percent of DLA Piper's total firm profits for 2006 ($280 million).

But it looks like Morisseau won't be seeing a dime:

Southern District Judge Lewis Kaplan granted summary judgment to the firm Monday, finding that DLA Piper had put forth a "legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for plaintiff's termination."

"Here, the uncontradicted evidence demonstrates that plaintiff did not perform in a manner satisfactory to Piper notwithstanding her academic credentials," the judge wrote. "She was a confrontational, stubborn, and insubordinate employee in an environment in which professional personal relations, flexibility and a willingness to accept supervision were essential."

Now we've reached the good part. Here's why Charlene Morisseau should be every associate's idol:

[I]n court filings, DLA Piper denied treating Ms. Morisseau differently and said the firm had taken action because the ex-associate had exhibited a pattern of unacceptable behavior, including yelling at partners and throwing one out of her office.

The firm said Ms. Morisseau ordered former partner Marilla Ochis to "back up" out of her office after Ms. Ochis had come to discuss an e-mail exchange Ms. Morisseau had apparently taken offense to.

Have you ever fantasized about telling off your partner oppressors? Well, Charlene Morisseau has lived your dream -- and then some.

Read the rest, after the jump.

That's the conclusion suggested by this Houston Chronicle article, about the most fabulous law firm holiday parties thrown in that city.

In New York, the biggest and best law firm parties tend to be thrown by the biggest and best law firms. But they do things differently down in Texas, Land of the Plaintiffs' Lawyers. From Mary Flood's quite interesting article:

A random survey of about 100 Houston lawyers showed these to be the six hottest legal party tickets this holiday season:

• litigation firm Susman Godfrey's art-studded office reception;
• plaintiffs lawyer Richard Mithoff's traditional classy soiree;
• plaintiffs lawyer Mark Lanier's family-friendly extravaganza;
• plaintiffs lawyer John O'Quinn's sparkling gala;
• Abraham, Watkins, Nichols, Sorrels & Friend's crowded office open house;
• defense lawyer David Beck's high-quality in-home affair.

More excerpts and discussion, after the jump.

From a law student tipster:

I was wondering if you've ever posted about the "care packages" big firms send their summers around finals time. I searched around your site and didn't find anything. [FN1]

The things my friends are receiving from large New York and Boston firms are nuts. Tons of firm gear, Godiva chocolates, leather portfolios, popcorn, Red Bull, Starbucks cards... You name it. It would be interesting to see what firms send out to summers. Just a thought.

Love ATL - keep up the good work!

So have you received a Biglaw "care package" to get you through the next few weeks? Or is your firm just not into the holiday spirit (i.e., cheap)?

Please discuss, in the comments -- and identify firms by name if possible. Thanks.

[FN1] This is a good tipster. Many times people suggest topics to us without running a site search or looking through our archives first, and it turns out that we've already covered the subject.

Our latest column for the New York Observer addresses a seasonal subject: law firm holiday parties. Here's the opening:

Law firm holiday parties aren’t what they used to be. In bygone days, the booze-fueled blasts yielded up tales of M&A lawyers making out with each other in darkened corners, partners dancing drunkenly with paralegals young enough to be their daughters and similarly dubious behavior.

In recent years, however, stories of scandal have become less common. Perhaps guests are more afraid of public embarrassment, now that cellphone photos of carousing legal eagles can be uploaded to the Internet in minutes....

But even if they’re not as wild and crazy as they used to be, law firm holiday parties still reflect, in ways large and small, the cultures and personalities of the firms throwing them. Let’s have a look, shall we?

You can read the rest of the column -- which describes the December festivities of Wachtell, Cravath, Sullivan & Cromwell, Skadden, Cadwalader, and Fried Frank -- by clicking here.

Boogie, Counselor! Which Law Firm Gives the Best Party? [New York Observer]

Despite her attractiveness, Judge Cheryl Aleman is not our favorite Floridian judge. That honor would have to go to Judge Mary Barzee Flores (with Judge Ursula Ungaro a close second).

But Judge Aleman still sounds pretty delish. Tomorrow she goes on trial before the state’s judicial ethics commission. From the Daily Business Review:

In February, the JQC [Judicial Qualifications Commission] filed formal charges against Judge Aleman for incidents when she:

• Threatened to hold two assistant public defenders in contempt in a first-degree murder case for not filing a motion quickly enough.

• Held a contempt hearing for a defense attorney when she knew he was out of town, and then sentenced him to 60 days in jail for missing two hearings.

• Refused to release a man allegedly dying of AIDS from jail and then issued an order releasing him once a negative article was published about the incident.

• Served on cases involving a defense attorney with whom she had conflicts.

A little bit more, after the jump.

Some of our prior coverage of Heller Ehrman has been a bit gloomy. We take it all back. Now that the firm's Los Angeles office is under a magnificent new leader -- Nancy Sher Cohen, whom we have previously praised in these pages -- we see nothing but good things ahead.

Legal Pad conducts a very interesting interview with Nancy Cohen. Here's an excerpt:

Legal Pad: How do you feel about “Above the Law” blog calling you “divalicious”?

Cohen: I found out about it from several associate who came to show it to me. Isn’t that funny? I just looked at it and howled. There is a lesson there. You just never know who is going to be writing about you, thinking about you, making comments about you. It’s a reminder that you should always do your best and always be sensitive and nice, civil.

We're confused. Does Ms. Cohen think that we were speaking negatively of her? To the contrary, we had only good things to say. From our prior post:

When we were in private practice, our experiences with Heller Ehrman were quite positive. We attended several depositions defended by the diva-licious Nancy Sher Cohen, who protected her witnesses like a lioness protecting her cubs. We were most impressed by this badass litigatrix (who is also a community activist and cancer survivor; see this profile).

As for the "diva-licious" quip, let the record reflect that the term "diva" is ATL's highest form of praise. Longtime readers are well aware of our obsession with strong-willed women -- especially women who have managed to achieve tremendous success in a traditionally male-dominated field like law.

This is why we are such fans of Senatrix Hillary Clinton, who is a tough, smart, fearless leader. We have no clue why some of you seem to think we don't like her. We think Senator Clinton is fabulous.

Why do you think we've snapped up so many domain names related to her? Visit HillaryClintonIsMyGirl.com, HillaryIsMyGirl.com, Hillarylicious.com, HillaryIsSexy.com, HillarySexy.com, or HillarySex.com. Where do you get redirected to?

'Badass Diva' Ready to Run Heller in L.A. [Legal Pad /CalLaw]

Earlier: Going to Heller in a Handbasket? (Part 2)

This Friday, at the Ninth Circuit courthouse in San Francisco, a ceremonial "passing of the gavel" will be held. The court's outgoing chief judge, Mary M. Schroeder, will hand over the gavel to her successor, Alex Kozinski. Details about the ceremony appear in this press release (PDF).

From How Appealing (additional links collected below):

Judge Kozinski was able to sneak some humor into the news release:

"The chief judge of the circuit assumes the position based on seniority. The chief judge is the judge in regular active service who is senior in commission of those judges who are (1) 64 years of age or under; (2) have served for one year or more as a circuit judge; and (3) have not served previously as chief judge. Judge Kozinski also believes that looks count, though he can provide no support for that proposition.

That last sentence, we're guessing, is a nod to Judge Kozinski's victory in our Superhotties of the Federal Judiciary contest. With such a robust sense of humor, is it any surprise that Judge Kozinski has his own Facebook fan club?

The Ninth Circuit's press release states that "still and video cameras will be permitted" at the gavel passing ceremony, which is taking place on Friday, November 30, at 4 p.m., in Courtroom One of the James R. Browning U.S. Courthouse. If an ATL reader (or readers) would be willing to take pictures or videos and send them our way, we'd be most grateful. Thanks!

Ninth Circuit Attempts to Prepare Itself for Chief Judge Alex Kozinski [How Appealing]
‘Hottie’ Judge Kozinski Continues Joke in Press Release [ABA Journal]
Apochiefosis [Volokh Conspiracy]
Gavel Passing to Mark Changing of the Guard for Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (PDF) [U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit]

Ladies (and gentlemen -- manicures have gone manly, dontcha know):

Please see below. A picture is worth a thousand words -- and this picture explains, better than any recruiting brochure or Vault write-up, why you want to work at Latham & Watkins.

P.S. Why wasn't this quirky perk wasn't featured in the recent New York Times piece on the blessings of Biglaw?

A photo op with two of the nation's most distinguished jurists: Ninth Circuit Judges Stephen Reinhardt and Alex Kozinski!

(Judge Reinhardt seemed a bit skittish about the taking of this picture, but Judge Kozinski's enthuasism was infectious. Or maybe it was just hard for Judge Reinhardt to say no to the incoming Chief Judge of the court.)

At the Federalist Society festivities: Ryan Bounds, Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Policy; Deputy Associate Attorney General John O'Quinn; and Susanna Dokupil, Assistant Solicitor General for the Office of the Attorney General of Texas.

Last week, the Federalist Society celebrated its 25th anniversary, with a black-tie gala at Union Station. The official ATL report, by Laurie Lin, is available here; the account of the Washington Post appears here (via the WSJ Law Blog).

Since we were there also, we figured we might as well add our two cents. Some random tidbits about the evening, along with a few more photos, after the jump.

We now yield the floor to Laurie Lin. Who better to report on one of the year's biggest social events than the writer of Legal Eagle Wedding Watch? Over to you, Laurie.

****************
Ambition and Old Spice wafted sweetly through the air last night at the Federalist Society's 25th Anniversary Gala at Union Station -- a kind of right-wing Golden Globes. Nearly two thousand G-ed up conservative lawyers packed the main hall to hear President George W. Bush blast the Senate on judicial confirmations:

"Today, good men and women nominated to the federal bench are finding that inside the Beltway, too many interpret 'advise and consent' to mean 'search and destroy,'" Bush said.

Tickets to the black-tie affair were $250 -- actually $249, because there was a new $1 Madison coin at every place setting -- but that was a small price to pay to breathe the same oxygen as Ted Olson, Antonin Scalia, and Laura Ingraham.

More on the conservative legal fabulosity -- including pictures of the people who didn't hide when they saw us coming -- after the jump.

We previously commended the firm of McKee Nelson for the steps it's taking to accommodate its associates in the wake of the credit crunch. Credit market woes have significantly affected the firm's once booming capital markets practice, but the firm is bending over backwards not to do layoffs.

So far backwards, in fact, that we're going to go even farther: we wish we worked at MN. To paraphrase Crazy Eddie, the offers they're making to associates are INSANE.

On Friday, the firm offered these options to its associates:

(1) a full bonus, and four months' pay, to anyone willing to depart from the firm; or

(2) the option to take a year-long sabbatical, at 40 percent pay, AND with a full bonus for 2007.

Wow. How is option (2) -- or even option (1), for people who wanted to change jobs or career paths anyway -- not the sweetest deal ever? You get a year off from the Biglaw grind, at 40 percent of your pay (McKee is on the $160K scale), AND with a year-end bonus? (Their bonus table appears here -- the firm is paying standard year-end bonuses, although not "special" bonuses.)

There are some caveats, according to our tipsters. First, there's no guarantee of a job at the end of the sabbatical -- whether you can return to the firm will depend on what the business climate looks like in a year. Second, you're supposed to do something public-interest-oriented during that year -- or, as the managing partner put it, "something that makes the world better." So you can't just go to Ibiza and party for twelve months (although cynics claim that turning lawyers into layabouts "makes the world better").

On the other hand, there's no requirement that you work for a 501(c)(3) during your sabbatical; the concept has some flexibility. Could you perhaps use the year -- and the money -- to study painting, or to finish the novel you started writing back in law school?

So many lawyers talk about the dreams that died when they went to law school. How is the McKee Nelson sabbatical program not a great opportunity to resurrect those dreams, with the luxury of free time and financial security?

Earlier: Nationwide Personnel Reconfiguration Watch: McKee Nelson