The expansive lawyer: The advantage to being a generalist - Interview with Mark Jansen

I recently had the opportunity to talk with Mark T. Jansen , an amazing business, employment, trade secret and intellectual property litigator at Kirsch & Jansen LLP, about developing up-and coming attorneys, the creative process and building successful partnerships.?

One of the reasons I, as a then-junior litigation attorney, and others wanted to work for you, is that you created a true partnership. You gave us feedback that was not only intended to produce ?good work product for the client, but also gave us opportunities to take the lead and shine where appropriate. What advice do you have for other senior legal leaders when managing attorneys??

While many of my law school classmates were super excited to go to big law prestige firms, I was fortunate to be hired as the eighth attorney in a small, but super talented antitrust and business litigation boutique in San Francisco. I was immediately put to work on challenging projects, for example writing the entirety of a Ninth Circuit appellate brief, a motion to dismiss an antitrust suit against the City of San Jose, and being given full responsibility for getting discovery in a class action we had against the title insurance industry. I was also assigned a pro bono case for a foreclosure victim.

Every first year associate has the smarts, potential and desire to have that kind of responsibility, although they need guidance in how to approach and best put together their work product, and support when they make the inevitable mistake. That is the kind of mentorship I got when I was new to the legal profession. “Passing it on” was not just my responsibility but it is also in the best interest of the law firm, to optimize a good firm culture of inclusivity and teamwork, and to maximize the use of the talent (and hopefully improve attorney retention.)??

Persuasive writing, in particular briefs, takes place under what can be extraordinary time pressures and taking input from multiple sources (the client, other legal professionals, etc). How do you structure your creative process to make sure you allow for that feedback to happen and yet deliver on time???

Like many recent college (and law school) graduates, I was used to waiting until the day or even the night? before a paper was due to get to work. That obviously can’t work when there is a team involved, including a supervising partner, the client, secretaries, paralegals who are expected to gather together evidence and shepardize, cite check, etc.?

The approach I learned to apply, and which has worked very well through my entire career, is to first outline the arguments you think need to be made (with input as appropriate from the client and managing partner). Then, even while waiting for input on the outline, fully research and draft the first issue; then research and draft the second issue; then go back and revise the first issue draft; move to the third issue, etc.?

That way others on the team can start gathering the evidence and cite checking for the first sections of the brief (or other work product), while you are doing research and drafting of the later sections.?You want the first 3-4 pages of the brief super tight before you let your supervising attorney see it.?And wait until there is a final full draft that you recommend for filing before sending your work product to the client.?You also have to get rid of all typos and formatting problems before you let your managing partner or the client see it!

Managing large litigations, in particular in the IP space, means collaborating with non-litigation folks, including subject matter experts in the science/technology, both attorneys and non-attorneys. What advice do you have for successful partnership between these groups??

There is no one answer to this question as it very much depends on the “personality” of the particular case: its subject matter and your familiarity with it, the client and the client-side engineer or scientist you have to work with.

It is important to have an open and trusting relationship; if the client has chosen you, then you obviously can be?confident on that front. While I do have a bachelor’s degree in chemistry, as an IP generalist I have to be willing to learn whatever the business or technology is, and also remember that being a generalist is an advantage.?

Judges and juries will probably have less technical knowledge than me and it is critical to simplify the subject of the litigation during court or other presentations, which is much harder for a specialist to do.?You need to be candid with the engineer client rep about the education they will need to provide. Most people welcome this educational role, and you have to realize that they typically are, on their side, feeling quite insecure about the legal process. But they want to learn from you.?Having an attorney (or tech advisor) on the team with expertise in the subject-matter at the heart of the litigation is also important.

Thank you, Mark, for sharing this today! You can reach Mark at [email protected]