3 answers
3 answers
Jenna Zebrowski, JD, MBA
Bilingual JD/MBA with compliance and regulatory experience and real estate (leasing and franchise) expertise
135
Answers
Updated
Jenna’s Answer
I'll give you a lawyer answer: it depends! Different types of law attract different types of people to be lawyers. I am a real estate attorney. I like it because I don't go to court and I get to read and write a lot and use my negotiation skills to help my client get the best documents. I enjoy helping my clients and knowing that I am protecting them and their business, and I like being able to control the hours I work and the clients I accept. Other people may enjoy going to court or solving different types of problems. I think there is overall a desire to get things done and to help and protect the client, and to use our brains to make a difference!
Updated
Pablo’s Answer
For me, see the smile and the shine into the eyes of any of my clients when they feel that them problems have a solution...
This is not hace a price in my heart and soul
This is not hace a price in my heart and soul
Updated
Kim’s Answer
Van,
Jenna is exactly correct! The various specialties in law are very different from each other!
I worked for an attorney who did Civil Rights Law. Watching him, it was like he was playing a chess game against the other side. It was all about strategy, out-maneuvering, and things like that, filing different motions, wording of his written arguments, etc. And then there was the eternal search for that one piece of evidence that would catch the opponent by surprise. He seemed to get an adrenalin rush when he discovered something that would be highly beneficial to the case - be it evidence or perhaps a certain decision in another case that supported our position. He really liked the intellectual challenge.
Jenna is exactly correct! The various specialties in law are very different from each other!
I worked for an attorney who did Civil Rights Law. Watching him, it was like he was playing a chess game against the other side. It was all about strategy, out-maneuvering, and things like that, filing different motions, wording of his written arguments, etc. And then there was the eternal search for that one piece of evidence that would catch the opponent by surprise. He seemed to get an adrenalin rush when he discovered something that would be highly beneficial to the case - be it evidence or perhaps a certain decision in another case that supported our position. He really liked the intellectual challenge.