You may recall that I speculated last month, in the giant essay on the Graying Bar, about large numbers of lawyers working well past “normal” retirement age. Many experts are predicting delayed retirement by lawyers, and a study last year in Ontario, Canada, showed the trend has already begun. With leaders of the organized bar, including the New York Bar Association (see our April 2 post), pressing for an end to mandatory lawyer retirement, and the EEOC litigating law firm age discrimination in the Sidley & Austin case, more and more lawyers will surely be working into their 70’s.
Recently, I ran across an article that details the results of a survey on retirement and disability planning done last summer by the Oregon Attorney Assistance Program. The findings are more than interesting. For example, “Speaking of Retirement” (OAAP In Sight Magazine, Sept. 2006) notes that:
“About 80% of sole practitioners report that they have not made any arrangements with another attorney to cover their practice if they are temporarily unable to practice due to disability or extended absence or to close their practice due to permanent disability or death.”
In addition, “over 40% of the Oregon lawyers surveyed plan to continue to practice law or work after age 70” and “11% to 12% of the Oregon lawyers surveyed do not plan to ever retire.” Here are some of the findings from the Envisioning Retirement section of the survey:
ENVISIONING RETIREMENT
• 11% to 12% of the Oregon lawyers surveyed do not plan to ever retire. They plan to continue to practice fulltime or part-time until they die or are no longer capable of practicing.
• 30% plan to continue practicing law part-time after age 65 mainly for the stimulation, sense of purpose, and satisfaction it provides.
• 11% plan to continue practicing law part-time after age 65 primarily for the income it will provide.
• 18% plan to retire completely and no longer work for pay by age 65; almost 60% plan to do so by age 70; over 40% of the Oregon lawyers surveyed plan to continue to practice law or work after age 70.
These numbers make the questions about the continued competence of superannuated lawyers raised in the Graying Bar essay seem even more urgent. If you know of other surveys on this topic, please let me know in a Comment or by email. If you’d like to tell us your retirement plans (or lack thereof), you’re invited to leave a Comment. [update (7 PM). As we lawyers like to say: but see 100-year-old attorney beats law of averages,” Deseret [UT] Morning News (April 13, 2007) Solo practitioner “Richard Bird has not only turned 100, but he still has his driver’s license (it expires in 2010), his downtown law practice, his wood-paneled law office and a mind that remains, if my recent conversation with him is any indication, as sharp as the day he graduated from Harvard Law School in 1933.(via LegalBlogWatch and MyShingle)]
retirement options
first ice
rims the campus pond……… by George Swede – The Heron’s Nest Vol. 5:5
…………………………. q.s. quickies 
Are you aware of the Body Hair Correlation? At The Psychiatrist Blog, Dr. Michell Tempest notes (via Barrister Blog Weekly Review):
[I]n a study published by psychiatrist Dr Aikarakudy Alias, it was found that men with excessive body hair may be associated with higher intelligence.
Alias’s research focused on mecial students in the USA, which showed that 45% of male student doctors were ‘very hairy’, compared with less than 10% in the general population. Further investigations showed that hairer men got better grades when student academic rankings were compared.
Alias went onto study 117 Mensa members (who have an IQ of at least 140) and found that this group tended to have thick body hair. In fact, men with hair on their backs as well as their chests seemed to have the highest IQ’s within the Mensa members.
Hairless Arizona Appraisers? The above blurb makes me wonder just how hirsute the members of the Arizona Board of Appraisers might be. (via Overlawyered.com) You see: “Arizona regulators have ordered a Seattle-based online home price estimator to stop doing business in the state.” According to the AP/Tucson Citizen, “Arizona bars online home price estimator” (April 15, 2007):
“The Arizona Board of Appraisal issued two cease-and-desist letters to the company that operates the popular real estate Web site Zillow, saying it needs an appraiser license to offer its ‘zestimates’ in Arizona. ‘It is the board’s feeling that (Zillow) is providing an appraisal,’ Deborah Pearson, the board’s executive director, said Friday.”
As you may know, Zillow.com provides free information on over 70 million homes in the USA, giving its zestimates of the value of more than half of the residences. (It even as a weblog) Zillow makes clear that its zestimates are not appraisals, giving much cautionary advice about how to use the numbers and get better information. On a page called
What’s a Zestimate™ value?, their explanation begins: “The Zestimate™ (pronounced ZEST-ti-met, rhymes with estimate) home valuation is Zillow’s estimated market value, computed using a proprietary formula. It is not an appraisal. It is a starting point in determining a home’s value.” Almost makes me nostalgic for lawyer Unauthorized Practice committees.
orig. Have you enjoyed the MagnaPoets Japanese Form weblog yet? Why not? The image above is my recent MJF nod to Tax Day; it’s a haiga posted April 15, 2007. Click to see the larger image. Here’s the accompanying poem:
tax deadline
we count dependents
and contributions
poem: DAVID GIACALONE
photo: MAMA G.