When Susan Cartier Liebel first told me about Solo Practice UniversityTM --a " revolutionary new web-based educational community that picks up where your legal education left off" -- I admit I wondered whether anybody could turn an idea that grand into reality. But it's real now, and over the last few weeks, Susan has been announcing the faculty, one person at a time. Today, she's announcing me; I'll be teaching a voir dire course.
I'm not just doing this because the idea is so intriguing, or because Susan has become a friend I respect in the blogosphere, or because she may be the single most persuasive person I've ever talked to -- although all those things are true. More than those factors, Solo Practice University interests me because it offers a way to be concretely helpful that few other formats offer.
Lawyers struggle with jury selection. In their education and in their daily lives at work, it often comes as an afterthought. They watch other lawyers do it poorly, and aren't sure what better looks like. Lawyers make mistakes; sometimes they kick themselves later, and sometimes they never know they could have done it differently.
When I write about these issues, the most difficult question I get is also one of the most common: How do we fix it? What do we do? I work with lawyers individually on these questions, of course. But for a larger audience, it's challenging to shape workable answers -- challenging, or plain dumb. I'm hopeful that a class will be a chance to work together with a group to find concretely helpful solutions to the challenges of jury selection.
I'm looking forward to it. Susan, thanks for the opportunity.
