Newly Appointed Co-Chairs Betsy Miller And Victoria Nugent On Collaboration, Leadership, And Diversity In The Law

Two leading litigators share career advice and insights on the legal profession.

Betsy Miller

Betsy Miller

“And when I meet Thomas Jefferson / I’m ‘a compel him to include women in the sequel!” Lin-Manuel Miranda, “The Schuyler Sisters,” Hamilton

Earlier this year, leading plaintiffs’ firm Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll announced that Washington, D.C.-based partners Betsy Miller and Victoria Nugent would lead its public client practice, which focuses on representing state attorneys general and other government entities in litigation and investigations.

This month, Miller and Nugent were generous enough to spend some time with Above the Law and share their valuable expertise and leadership advice for ATL’s younger audience.

They not only represent a new generation of firm leaders, but have a very progressive and pragmatic attitude for the legal profession in this new era. We hope you come away with a great idea or two on collaboration, leadership, and diversity from our chat with Betsy Miller and Victoria Nugent.

Without further ado, here is a (lightly edited and condensed) write-up of our conversation:

Renwei Chung (RC): What inspired you to go into law and how did you choose your respective law schools?

Sponsored

Betsy Miller (BM): The intersection of justice (what is fair?) and morality (what is right?) has always captured my attention. Law school provides a unique framework for exploring when individual freedoms can safely give way to the rules needed to govern society.

I have always wanted to help vulnerable voices be heard, and law school was the most logical way to pursue that passion. I paid for law school myself, so there was pressure to be accepted into schools that would either provide a scholarship or post-graduate loan forgiveness if I pursued a public-interest career.

I chose Harvard Law School because I believed it would give me the best résumé credibility if I pursued a non-traditional career path (which I did), and also because Harvard – at that time – had the most generous loan forgiveness program. Both factors have served me well.

Victoria Nugent

Victoria Nugent

Victoria Nugent (VN): When I finished college, I planned on a career in public policy. I worked in Washington, D.C. for several years at a large, consumer advocacy organization before I decided to go to law school.

Sponsored

I decided to go because so many of the people I worked with had J.D.s – but they were all doing different things. They were researchers, field organizers, lobbyists, and litigators.

This suggested three things to me: first, that the degree was flexible; second, that the real product of a legal education wouldn’t be a particular job but rather would be critical thinking and persuasive writing skills; third, that I might be better suited to the role of an advocate than a researcher or social scientist.

I went to Georgetown because doing so allowed me to keep my interesting job – at least on a part-time basis – while going to school.

RC: Knowing what you know now, what do you wish you knew when you began your legal careers?

BM: I was lucky because I learned several important lessons very early in my career. I clerked for a wonderful federal judge, the late Thomas Penfield Jackson. He taught me four things.

First, treat everyone with respect. Second, in every job, conduct yourself such that your boss and others with whom you interact want to hire you again – even if you don’t love that job. This means behaving with integrity, working hard, taking ownership, and being smart but never arrogant.

I think of this as the “Good Egg” recipe. Third, initiate and foster relationships with people who can serve as mentors. Don’t wait for a mentor to find you. And fourth, beautiful handwriting is a lost art. Thank-you notes should not be written in block letters.

I would be a different, and less successful, lawyer today without the benefit of Judge Jackson’s wisdom.

VN: I wish that I had made more of an effort to network as a young lawyer. For a number of reasons – temperament, a decided lack of entitlement, and a lack of time – I didn’t make as much of an effort to make and maintain professional connections as I do today and I was very reluctant to approach potential mentors.

Doing so would have given me a greater sense of agency earlier in my career. But in spite of my own reluctance, I was lucky to be mentored by really wonderful bosses and colleagues early in my career – women who were immensely talented, successful, and generous.

RC: How would you describe your leadership styles, and what advice do you have for young attorneys hoping to obtain leadership positions early in their careers?

BM: I’ve had great mentors, but none of them looked like me or had a personality quite like mine. I am a 5-foot-tall, assertive woman, confident in her ideas but also committed to listening and incorporating insights offered by others.

My background teaching and consulting in the field of negotiations has given me greater awareness of power dynamics and a skill set to manage them. It takes a long time to find the right mix of confidence and grace necessary to embrace that you can bring something different – and highly valuable – to the table.

I try to be a good mentor to more junior lawyers by helping them find their own style. Leadership is an evolving thing. With greater experience comes greater wisdom, and there is always something new to learn. My best advice for young lawyers is to find their passion, identify their best talents, and design a career that will highlight both. Success will follow.

VN: I would describe my leadership style as understated and steady, but effective. I am accessible, supportive, and collaborative, and calm in a crisis, and rarely at a loss.

I would advise young attorneys hoping to attain leadership positions to watch and learn from their leaders, to be curious about leadership and what makes a good leader a good leader. They should be looking for three markers of successful leadership: results, loyalty, and happiness.

Leaders who achieve and engender those things are the ones to emulate. Those who don’t are still worth observing carefully; if nothing else, one can learn from negative examples.

RC: Why is it important for there to be more diversity amongst public officials, such as state attorneys general?

BM/VN: Diversity in public offices is more important than in the private sector because it ensures that the relatively small number of citizens in government reflects the governed population. The products of government office are policy and services – to be meaningful and effective, these must be based on knowledge, theory, and experience.

Diversity among office-holders is the trickiest challenge, because it depends, in large part, upon those who step forward to run. While women and persons of color have steadily increased their numbers in legislative bodies – in some states, women now comprise 30-40% of the legislature – the attorneys general, as a group, are still overwhelmingly white and mostly men.

RC: It was great chatting with you. Is there anything else you would like to share with our audience?

BM: Studying, and later teaching, negotiation theory has been the single most important influence on how I practice law. When I was a student at Harvard, I was lucky enough to be a student of Roger Fisher, author of Getting to Yes and architect of principled negotiation. I worked in the field of negotiation skills consulting and mediation early in my career, and I have been teaching these topics as an adjunct professor at Georgetown Law since 2001.

The “aha” moment for me was when I realized that the power of persuasion is fueled mostly by the ability to stay curious and ask effective questions. Whenever I am in a negotiation, I stay focused on gathering information so that I can create a proposal that will address the real interests of the parties.

I find the concept of leadership development equally fascinating and also related. In that spirit, I am enrolled in Georgetown’s year-long Executive Leadership Coaching certificate program. The curriculum draws heavily from negotiation theory, the neuroscience behind strong leadership, and the aptitude for inspiring and developing leadership skills in others.

VN: Litigating is challenging work; it has to be adversarial, but it’s often contentious and unpleasant. Therefore, I have found it useful over the course of my career to return to a few touchstones on a daily basis.

First, the civil justice system is the product of revolutionary and enlightened political theory, and as a lawyer I am privileged to play a part in it. It is remarkable that under the laws of this country, the least powerful individuals can challenge the most powerful institutions and vindicate their rights in a court of law.

Second, lawyers are custodians of a public trust.

Third, one’s work should be an expression of, or a perhaps a continuation of, one’s personal and political values. I am the same person at work that I am at home and that I am when I am with my family and friends. Admittedly, I am less whimsical and better dressed at work than I am at home and with my friends and family, but I am truly the same person.

On behalf of everyone here at Above the Law, I would like to thank Betsy Miller and Victoria Nugent for sharing their stories with our audience. We wish them continued success in their careers.


Renwei Chung is the Diversity Columnist at Above the Law. You can contact Renwei by email at renwei@footnote4.com, follow him on Twitter (@renweichung), or connect with him on LinkedIn.