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.”
