Among many other comments on the exchange between professors Levine and Rounds, this one, by federal judge John L. Kane, is particularly sharp:
Excellent response. One thing Professor Levine alluded to I agree with is that many third-year boutique courses seem to be toys for the professor that may or may not help his research, but do little to educate a lawyer.
I am fortunate to have law student-interns from a number of different schools, and I am able to work one-on-one with them in drafting opinions and orders on summary judgment motions. They tell me the experience here in chambers is well worth the time and effort. Just the other day, I had to issue an opinion invoking the cy-pres rule to the remainder of funds following distribution in a class-action settlement. Neither of the two students (from different law schools) had ever heard of cy-pres. I took them to lunch and had one of the most enjoyable sessions I can recall.
As close as either student had come to the study of equity were oblique references to the Restatement. I told them they had to develop, apparently without much help from the law schools, a passion for history and culture or else be condemned to join the other barbarians at the gates. (I was referring primarily to the lawyers in the case, who were equally ignorant of the rule. The difference, of course, is that the student-interns were learning whereas the lawyers in the case were obtaining fees for inadequate services.)
During the academic year, most of my interns come from the nearby law schools, Univ. of Colo. and Denver U. This summer, however, I will have interns from Michigan, Texas, Columbia, and DePaul. My experience with interns over the years has taught me that you are entirely correct in your criticism. As for legal writing courses, per se, I am reminded of Truman Capote’s statement about Jacquiline Susanne’s novels: “That’s not writing, that’s typing.”