Internship Programs Benefit Legal Departments
Both students and legal departments can benefit from engaging internship programs.
October 31, 2010 at 08:00 PM
4 minute read
During the Great Recession and its lingering aftermath, many in-house legal departments have been faced with shrinking budgets, hiring freezes and–the worst case scenario–the termination of members of the legal staff. Yet the demands of doing more with less continue.
The establishment of a legal intern program in affiliation with a local law school–during the course of a year, starting with the summer months–can provide some relief as well as additional benefits for both the students and the legal department. Engaging interns can be justified on a budgetary basis since the cost is relatively minimal compared to hiring temporary attorneys, and there is no additional increase to headcount.
How can the legal department derive the most benefit when engaging interns?
Include the interns as part of the legal team. Involve them in your meetings. Seek their views on the legal and factual issues confronting the legal team. They have the ability to offer fresh insights.
Involve them in “client” meetings.
Seek out their views on employing technological solutions to some of the routine work that your department provides or the information that your department needs to stay ahead of the competition. For many of today's law students, computers and the Internet have always been part of their educational life. That knowledge can be a valuable resource.
Assign each intern to a specific attorney as his or her primary contact. This will give the department a sense of continuity of the intern's performance.
Assign substantive work to the intern. When properly supervised, an intern in the last year of law school can be performing the same type of work as an attorney in the first year following law school. By the third year of law school, a student is gaining cumulative knowledge. The main difference between a third-year law student and an attorney in the first year of practice is that one has taken (and hopefully passed) the bar exam.
Assign projects that require more research and time than an average in-house counsel can provide. Often, a brief check-in on progress is enough to ascertain that the intern has remained on track.
Capitalize on their enthusiasm for the practice of law, which can have a positive impact on the remainder of the department.
View an intern's time with your department as one big job interview. You can observe the intern's work ethic as well as work product. The newly graduated attorney who has been an intern with your department starts her career as if she already had one or two years of experience with the added benefit of knowing how your company operates. The success rate for this attorney will be much higher than someone who has been hired on the basis of interviews only. Hiring from among the intern pool demonstrates a commitment to the intern program that will attract the best potential candidates.
How do the interns benefit?
They gain much needed “hands-on” experience. In an economy where jobs are difficult to find, they have an advantage over other potential candidates.
They gain a legal mentor–someone with whom to discuss their assignments and law school experiences. Face to face meetings are essential for the law
student's development.
In the right legal department, they develop a passion for the practice of law. The interns gain good practical skills and see how all the pieces of the puzzle that are taught in law school come together.
When exposed to the corporate clients, interns learn the dynamics of attorney-
client interaction.
In establishing an intern program, enlist the support of your human resources department. Other departments, such as marketing and finance, can easily replicate all of the benefits described above.
A legal intern program can be a “win-win” for everyone involved.
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 AllGC Conference Takeaways: Picking AI Vendors 'a Bit of a Crap Shoot,' Beware of Internal Investigation 'Scope Creep'
8 minute readWhy ACLU's New Legal Director Says It's a 'Good Time to Take the Reins'
'Utterly Bewildering': GCs Struggle to Grasp Scattershot Nature of Law Firm Rate Hikes
Trending Stories
- 1Tips For Creating Holiday Plans That Everyone Can Be Grateful For
- 2Red Tape, Talent Wars & Pricey Office Space Greet Firms Entering Saudi Arabia
- 3A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Becoming Clerk of the Forum
- 4Pa. Supreme Court Taps New Philadelphia Family Division Administrative Judge
- 55th Circuit Rules Open-Source Code Is Not Property in Tornado Cash Appeal
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