As I transition into the second semester of ISM, I set two goals for myself.  Firstly, I want to transition from the project and research base I used while focusing on the issue of wrongful convictions to a more wider and broader perspective in focusing on an actual discipline of law.  This way I can gain experience into the career and have a more career path focused approach to the class where I pair my work on a final product with my learning about the field.  I am looking to place an emphasis on gaining experience about the profession.  Secondly, I need to find a mentor.  Mentor meetings are a huge part of the class and so setting up meetings with professionals in an attempt to find a mentor is huge and is a goal I am going to try to accomplish relatively early in the process.  I am also looking to transition into a focus on appellate law but this can change and I am willing to pursue experience in a few different disciplines and areas before creating a final product.

 

Considering the information above, I scheduled an interview with Walker Steven Young.  Mr. Young is a lawyer who has been with the Scheef and Stone LLC law firm for the past 5 years.  He currently practices in a variety of different areas including federal and state appeals, shareholder disputes, and a variety of litigation focuses including real estate litigation, construction litigation, banking litigation, and security litigation.  Part of the reason I was interested in reaching out to him was because of his past experience before joining Scheef and Stone.  He has clerked for two different courts, one of which was an appeals court in the Eleventh District Court of Appeals, and he has also had the opportunity to intern in Washington D.C. under United States Representative John Culberson.  On top of this, Mr. Young majored in political science and history which are both areas I find extremely interesting.  I am planning to continue with political science in college.  

 

This meeting allowed me to focus in on the day to day life of a lawyer like Mr. Young and learn first hand about the profession.  I appreciate Mr. Young’s willingness to meet with me and his interest in teaching me and conversing with me throughout the interview.  Mr. Young explained how he began getting interested in appellate law which stemmed from his time working at the Eleventh District Court of Appeals.  He explained how part of the reason he enjoys appellate law is the slower pace it has compared to trial court lawyers.  With appeals, the entire case is in front of you, the record and events that have already happened are the material, and it is simply a methodical process of choosing routes to either defend your client from appeal or to create an argument for a case on behalf of the appellant.  He also highlighted the importance of managing what you are working on.  He said he currently has about 6 cases that he is working on with his personal clients ranging from simple contract breaches and dispute cases that will likely end in settlement to serious appellate cases where he feels he has a strong chance at winning big for his client.  Additionally, he is also a part of other cases by helping with research or even in presenting a case in front of his old “home court” on behalf of a client of the firm.  This case is currently being appealed to the Supreme Court of Texas.  This is quite the accomplishment for a relatively new member of the firm.  

 

We also briefly discussed the appellate process of the Texas Supreme Court who will likely only take a case up if they feel it is of major importance to the law and to other processes.  For example, with the case he is working on, his client is being sued for a breach of contract where the contract was not clearly lined out and in some ways was nothing more than a conversation.  This makes the case complex as both sides are trying to find solid evidence of a contractual breach, or for his client and wrongful termination.  Additionally, this makes the case important on a larger scale as he is arguing to the court that if this case is allowed to stand the way it is it sets precedent for extremely light regulations on what is considered enforceable as a contract.  However, the problem they are faced with is that the case may be slightly too important in a sense.  This would be because the other side is arguing this would completely nullify a large series of contracts that are already in place across the state and would cause major issues within companies that have contracts set based on current law.  Young personally feels that this is a poor argument that simply is false and over exaggerated but he also brings up the point that oftentimes case results and the decisions courts make are surprising and sometimes flat out wrong.  He said he has worked on multiple cases where the court simply made obvious errors and was objectively wrong in their ruling but will have their decision stand.  This highlights the percolation requirement that is often valued at the highest appellate level. 

​

Because it is often hard to judge whether a case will be won or lost, Young highlights that a major part of his job is dealing with clients and advising them diplomatically to make the right decision.  This is where settlement often comes into play.  When a case is possibly up in the air and it is simply impossible for him to state with full confidence that he will win a case, because of the surprises that often come up, a settlement is often a safe concession.  However, this is not always the desired option.  For example, in a case he is currently working on, a win in appellate court would be huge for his client but a loss would be a major sting.  While he feels confident that he has grounds and merit in his case and argument and that he has solid odds of winning the case, this is not something he can be fully certain of.  Additionally, the opposing side has offered a settlement which he is legally obligated to share with his client.  That call will happen today and he said with these calls he needs to establish two things with his client in order to decide whether to accept the settlement or see it through in the appeals process.  Firstly, he has to establish what a win looks like.  For different cases, losing a small amount of money as opposed to a large loss is a win if it can happen at no risk.  In this case the settlement is a perfect option.  For others, a win would be seen as winning the case in court and seeing a large sum of money.  The definition of a “win” for each case can help him determine how likely winning would be.  The second thing he needs to present is that likelihood of victory.  He said he likes to undershoot a little bit because if he gets a client to go to court and decline the settlement, a loss looks even worse on his part.  Part of what I hope to learn in a possible second meeting is how this call went, how he approached it, and what the result of the case now is. 

 

I want to thank Mr. Young for his willingness to meet with and help me in my learning.  He highlighted the importance of mentors in his career and so he is giving back by acting as one to me, whether or not he would be willing to be my actual mentor for ISM purposes.  I feel like he is someone I would like to have as a mentor but obviously this decision would come after at least another meeting and his acceptance.  I learned a lot today and feel compelled to continue with my work towards appellate law.