Last week’s federal court ruling that a law school graduate working as a graphics designer for a litigation support company was neither a learned nor a creative professional (NYLJ, Oct. 10), while touted as a victory for JDs who work non-traditional jobs, directly undercuts the premise that law graduates are highly specialized professionals.
According to the decision by Southern District Judge Shira Scheindlin, the requirements for the job held by the graphics designer plaintiff in Kadden v. Visualex, LLC, 11 Civ. 4892 (SAS), are strikingly similar to those found in job listings for attorneys in any classified section: “(1) “[e]xcellent critical thinking, project management and problem solving skills; (2) [s]trong communication/interpersonal skills; (3) [w]ell-organized, self-starter, able to meet tight deadlines; (4) [a]ttention to detail, strong editing and proofing abilities; (5) [g]raduate degree preferred (e.g. social science, law, etc.); (6) [w]illingness to work frequent overtime/occasional travel. Weekend work during peak periods.”
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
