OTLA Trial Lawyer Winter 2021

21 Trial Lawyer • Winter 2021 See Better Together p 22 way I saw it was joining a partnership just meant I would be responsible for the bottom line, for making sure the ship didn’t sink. And at Pickett Dummigan, there were a lot of important people in that ship, including our clients. Pickett and Dummigan kept it afloat really well. And I was in no hurry to worry about sinking ships. I felt heard and happy in my employment as an associate at Pickett Dummigan. I even advertised myself as the oxymoron I felt I was: a happy lawyer. I’d found a niche representing victims of neglect and elder abuse in nursing homes and other care facilities. I saw value — and I worked hard to create value — in those cases where I didn’t see very many other plaintiff ’s lawyers working. I knew the challenge and reward of achieving an unlikely resolution for the traumatic suffering of victims and their family members would drive me for the rest of my career. I felt no hesitation about the work itself, so what else mat- tered? As I gained confidence and control over my cases, the question for me was how to organize the work duties within our team. Did I want to take on the big- ger responsibility that comes with part- nership? The best fit Increasingly, Pickett and Dummigan considered me an expert in premises and nursing home negligence. I recognized I was creating a niche, and these kinds of cases lit my fire — I am incredibly pas- sionate about justice for abusers of older adults. I also recognized how much I loved the team building aspect of grow- ing our law firm, matching people to positions, lawyers with assistants, and creating teams that match the specific needs of particular clients and particular cases. I started talking with colleagues and friends about the pros and cons of part- nership. Was this a project I wanted to undertake? This is where Dummigan, a seasoned businessman, gave it to me straight, “Business is challenging,” he said, “and there are never any guaran- tees.” And law school had not taught me anything about how to run a business. For a moment, this deterred me. The risk and challenge seemed immense. I spent two years pondering the pros and cons of partnership, as a happy associate, be- fore I joined as partner in 2017, creating Pickett Dummigan McCall. The pros of partnership were easy for me to articulate. I saw them play out between Pickett and Dummigan almost every day, and they shared them with me often. The moral support and camarade- rie they shared excited and motivated me every single day. They made even my most challenging issues seem solvable and worthwhile. By their nature, Dum- migan and Pickett created a firm culture that amplified other people’s voices and each other’s. Each partner, in turn, made the other stronger, and doing it together felt easier and more fun. Their strengths complement each other so well — they each cover aspects of the firm’s work that the other would prefer not to, so they each end up being able to do more of what they love. As Dummigan would cover things like the medical expertise, client contact, lease negotiation and marketing plans, Pickett could spend more time crafting legal arguments, solv- ing engineering puzzles, bringing in new cases and making new law. This meant I could focus on my strengths and do more of what I love: using laws to benefit abuse victims, growing our team and educating the public on the rights of older adults. In the partnership I was contemplat- ing joining, I saw the ongoing balance shifting back and forth between the joy- ful sharing of resources and the juggling act of it all. A looming change Ultimately, it was hard for me to ar- ticulate the cons of partnership, to argue against joining as a partner. I’d heard plenty of stories of how partnerships breakup and fail. That sharing profit and loss can be too contentious and too stressful and ultimately unworkable. The stories scared me, but they didn’t reso- nate. I was a happy associate of a thriving and successful partnership. Still, I had to face the potential downsides in order to make an informed decision about whether or not to join the partnership. I worried. I asked a lot of hypothetical questions. I took advice from people, and especially women, who had gone before me. I pondered the possibilities. Perhaps I risked having the impact of my work diluted. Perhaps I could be more power- ful and make more money if I didn’t have to share as much. Perhaps I would be happier if I controlled all the decisions in a firm of my own. Perhaps it would be easier if I didn’t have to confer with partners all the time. Perhaps I would be seen as a stronger attorney if held myself out there, solo, as I knew I could, strong enough to go it alone. Ultimately though, from where I stood, I could only see the cons of