Last night I judged a competition at the law school, which was pretty fun. It was the client counseling competition, which essentially means that the two-person teams get a fake client and have to role-play through an initial interview. The goal is to judge the contestants on how much they connected with clients, were able to get relevant information, and advise the client.
I found it to be somewhat frustrating in law school because the judging is very subjective, perhaps moreso than any other competition. I remember getting one piece of advice on Monday, then changing something, only to get feedback to the effect that I should have done it my original way.
On reflection (and a dash of time in practice), I think that's something that needs to happen in law school. How frustrating is it to be in front of a judge who makes (you believe) a completely wrong evidentiary decision? Very frustrating. There are other things, too, so I think lawyers need to get used to it.
This isn't to say that you should not assert your position, make your case, or take an appeal. I just mean that it's important to not let it get to you emotionally. As hard as it is, keeping it separate is a useful sanity-preservation strategy. So, for that if nothing else, I'm glad for the competitions.
Leave a comment