{"id":7498,"date":"2007-04-17T17:30:54","date_gmt":"2007-04-17T22:30:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2007\/04\/17\/lawyer-survey-when-do-you-plan-to-"},"modified":"2011-08-05T14:53:50","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T18:53:50","slug":"lawyer-survey-when-do-you-plan-to-retire","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2007\/04\/17\/lawyer-survey-when-do-you-plan-to-retire\/","title":{"rendered":"lawyer survey: when do you plan to retire?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u00a0\"exitSignArrow\"\u00a0 You may recall that I speculated last month, in the giant essay on the Graying Bar<\/a>, about large numbers of lawyers working well past “normal” retirement age.\u00a0 Many experts are predicting delayed retirement by lawyers, and a study last year in Ontario<\/a>, Canada, showed the trend has already begun.\u00a0 With leaders of the organized bar, including the New York Bar Association (see our April 2 post<\/a>), 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.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 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.\u00a0\u00a0The findings are more than interesting.\u00a0 For example, “Speaking of Retirement<\/a>” (OAAP In Sight<\/em> Magazine, Sept. 2006) notes that:<\/p>\n

“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.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

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.”\u00a0 Here are some of the findings from\u00a0the Envisioning Retirement section of the survey:<\/p>\n

ENVISIONING RETIREMENT\u00a0 \"hammockS\"<\/p>\n

\u2022 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.<\/p>\n

\u2022 30% plan to continue practicing law part-time after age 65 mainly for the stimulation, sense of purpose, and satisfaction it provides.<\/p>\n

\u2022 11% plan to continue practicing law part-time after age 65 primarily for the income it will provide.<\/p>\n

\u2022 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.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

These numbers make the questions about the continued competence of superannuated lawyers raised in the Graying Bar essay<\/em> seem even more urgent. \u00a0If 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.\u00a0 [update <\/em>(7 PM).\u00a0 As we lawyers like to say: but see<\/em> 100-year-old attorney beats law of averages<\/a>,” Deseret [UT] Morning News<\/em> (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<\/em><\/a>\u00a0and MyShingle<\/a><\/em>)]<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

retirement options
\n\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 first ice
\nrims the campus pond<\/p>\n

……… by George Swede<\/a> – The Heron’s Nest<\/em><\/a> Vol. 5:5<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0………………………….\u00a0 q.s. quickies\u00a0\"QkeyNs\"<\/em>\u00a0\"sKeyNs\"\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"DrMTempest\"\u00a0\u00a0Are you aware of the Body Hair Correlation?<\/a> At The Psychiatrist Blog<\/em>, Dr. Michell Tempest\u00a0notes (via Barrister Blog Weekly Review<\/a>)<\/em>:<\/p>\n

[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.<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

\"hairyChestG\"\u00a0 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.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Hairless Arizona Appraisers?<\/strong>\u00a0 The above blurb makes me wonder just how hirsute the members of the Arizona Board of Appraisers<\/a> might be. (via Overlawyered<\/em>.com<\/a>)\u00a0\u00a0You see: “Arizona regulators have ordered a Seattle-based online home price estimator to stop doing business in the state.”\u00a0 According to the AP\/Tucson Citizen<\/em>, “Arizona bars online home price estimator<\/a>” (April 15, 2007):<\/p>\n

\"hairyChestN\"\u00a0“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.\u00a0 ‘It is the board’s feeling that (Zillow) is providing an appraisal,’ Deborah Pearson, the board’s executive director, said Friday.”\u00a0<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

As you may know, Zillow.com<\/a> provides free\u00a0information 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<\/a>) \u00a0Zillow makes clear that its zestimates are not appraisals, giving much cautionary advice about how to use the numbers and get better information.\u00a0\u00a0On a page called \u00a0
\nWhat’s a Zestimate\u2122 value?<\/a>, their explanation begins: “The Zestimate\u2122 (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.”\u00a0 Almost makes me nostalgic for lawyer Unauthorized Practice committees.
\n\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"NHTaxDeadlineMagnaS\"\u00a0orig.<\/em><\/a>\u00a0Have you enjoyed the MagnaPoets Japanese Form<\/em> weblog<\/a> yet?\u00a0 Why not?\u00a0 The image above is my recent MJF<\/em> nod to Tax Day; it’s a haiga posted April 15, 2007. Click to see the larger image.\u00a0 Here’s the accompanying poem:<\/p>\n

\u00a0tax deadline
\n\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 we count dependents
\n\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 and contributions<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\u00a0poem: DAVID GIACALONE
\n\u00a0photo: MAMA G.<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u00a0\u00a0 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.\u00a0 Many experts are predicting delayed retirement by lawyers, and a study last year in Ontario, Canada, showed the trend has already begun.\u00a0 With leaders of the organized […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":94,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[3513,1414],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7498","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-lawyer-news-or-ethics","category-qs-quickies"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p6kP1R-1WW","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7498","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/94"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7498"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7498\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12560,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7498\/revisions\/12560"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7498"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7498"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7498"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}