The Unknown Sacrifice of the Military Spouse Lawyer and the Network Trying to Help
The Military Spouse JD Network was formed to help military spousal lawyers have an easier time balancing their careers as lawyers with the military lifestyle.
November 14, 2017 at 11:03 AM
2 minute read
By Carley Meiners Beckum
Last week, the U.S. celebrated Veterans Day as a way to honor those who serve and have served in the armed forces. But often the challenges of those who also serve and stand by a veteran's side on a day-to-day basis go unnoticed: The spouses.
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate for military spouses is 74 percent—a high number but understandable as many career fields are not meant for the military lifestyle, such as a lawyer.
An attorney traditionally has to take the bar exam and process many applications for each new state of residency. Active duty military families move every 2-4 years, many times across the country (sometimes out of the country).
That's where Military Spouse JD Network comes in.
The foundation was formed “to serve as a bar association and networking body for military spouse attorneys, with the goal of improving the lives of military families,” according to its website. Today, it has helped 23 states and the U.S Virgin Islands create military spouse attorney licensing accommodations in states such as Connecticut, New York and Texas.
Job hunting can be a daunting task then add constant moves as an extra obstacle to overcome. According to The Hill, “90 percent of military spousal lawyers in the U.S. say that the military lifestyle has impacted their careers.” According to MSJDN, military spousal lawyers report having taken 3 to 4 bar exams.
Connecticut, the most recent state to pass a rule, will allow attorneys who are military spouses stationed in Connecticut to be admitted to practice law without taking another bar exam (as long as they have been admitted in another state, of course).
MSJDN continues to encourage reducing the challenges military spousal lawyers face with every military move.
If you're a veteran, thank you for your service.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllOvercoming Hurricane Helene: How the Western North Carolina Legal Community Managed Court Closures, Sanitation Concerns
Hurricane Helene's Impact On Asheville, North Carolina: How Public and Private Attorneys Dealt With Closures, Safety and Sanitation
More Young Lawyers Are Entering Big Law With Mental Health Issues. Are Firms Ready to Accommodate Them?
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250