Treat yourself to some free time
Ive discussed the importance of extracurricular activities such as conference networking, article writing and pro bono efforts.
August 09, 2012 at 05:30 AM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
I've discussed the importance of extracurricular activities such as conference networking, article writing and pro bono efforts. Those columns fall within a category some may view as eating your professional vegetables. Career-oriented extracurriculars should be enjoyable, but they can also feel like work.
So, as I pen this summer column by a swimming pool, I choose to indulge in the topic of fun. I believe that fun is critical to your success in the stress-filled role of inside counsel. You must shut the damn phone off on occasion. Give yourself the gift of truly free time.
I sent out an email to twenty of the attorneys we have placed as inside counsel since 2010, asking how they enjoy their free time. My conclusion is that many of you have a funny way of relaxing. A ridiculously high percentage of you seem to be building something: fixing up a second home, tinkering with crafts, creating art, etc. The most extreme example is an inside counsel in Wisconsin who is building a small private plane from a kit. Yes, from a kit.
My free time choices usually involve a beach chair. Your responses are far more interesting, and may even point to a need for a very specific kind of counter-balance among inside counsel. Your daily professional efforts don't always lead to immediate or concrete results, and outcomes are not necessarily within your control. Ironically, attorneys are usually detail-oriented control freaks.
Creating a work of art, or building a shed, can satisfy that desire for outcome control. Simply seeing a finished physical product can be very rewarding, and absolutely good for your health and spirits.
So, this will go down as one of the touchy-feely columns. No advice here that will help you land a promotion. But if I can encourage even a few of you to turn off the iPhone or Blackberry when you get home today, and carve out some real personal time for yourselves this August, then I think this will prove to be a very worthwhile read. I'll end with Nike's classic tag line, as is remains the best advice out there: Just Do It.
This content has been archived.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 AllBallooning Workloads, Dearth of Advancement Opportunities Prime In-House Attorneys to Pull Exit Hatch
The Reason a GC Abruptly Departs May Not Be What You Think
Trending Stories
- 1Can The Threat of a Bar Complaint Be a Settlement Tool?
- 2Sentencing Commission Addresses Inconsistent Definitions of “Loss”
- 3What Are Forbidden Sexual Relations With Clients?
- 4AEDI Takeaways: Demystifying Hype, Changing Caselaw & Harvey’s CEO Talks State of Industry
- 5New England Law | Boston Announces New Dean
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