To love the law is to love the past. Even for those who were inclined to fall asleep in history class, the preparation of a thorough brief requires detailed understanding of disputes long forgotten and authorities otherwise obscure. In a courtroom, the past isn’t dead. As William Faulkner said in a different context, “it’s not even past.”

On September 16, Insight Labs partnered with Generation Generosity, Akina, and a roomful of estimable esquires to re-imagine the legal profession. In advance of the Lab, Content Director Andrew Benedict-Nelson asked each participant – whether trained in the law or not – to identify a person that he or she considered to be the paragon of all that is good about lawyers and lawyering. Here’s what Mike Moynihan of Freeborn Peters had to say. Click here to see the other interviews.

Andrew Benedict-Nelson: I’d like you to think of a lawyer who, for you, embodies the best qualities of the profession. This can be any type of lawyer, any type of law. It can be someone from the past or present, real or fictional, someone you’ve worked with or someone you’ve  never met.

Mike Moynihan: I’ve got it. His name is Thomas J. Kelly. He is an extremely intelligent, very hard-working, very honest lawyer and an excellent advocate for his clients. He practiced many types of law, but he was primarily a real estate lawyer.

ABN: What is something that he did or said that demonstrates those qualities?

MM: He was my mentor, so I would probably point to the fact that he was willing to mentor someone younger than him, especially because that is so important to our profession and is so often lacking.

ABN: What qualities made him a good mentor?

MM: Well, his principal method of mentoring people was throwing them in the deep end of the pool. But he had a way of doing that while still watching carefully to make sure that you didn’t drown.

ABN: What qualities might you point to from this person to show someone that the law is a good profession?

MM: That’s something that you see over a long period of time, looking at how someone conducts themselves. But that wouldn’t change my original answer too much because it was over that long period of time, I saw that he was smart and committed and honest and hard-working, which are the same things that reflect well on the profession.

ABN: So now I would like you to think of the system we have today in this country for producing lawyers – everything from the kids going into law school to the arenas in which law is practiced to the way lawyers are compensated. Do you think there is a place in that system for someone like your mentor who is coming up in the profession?

MM: I certainly think there is a place, but you might have to get to that place against all odds. I think the current state of compensation in law, and what it is that we reward people for now, make it more difficult to become like Tom Kelly. You are rather forced to be more selfish than is in the best interest of the profession.

ABN: You say “what we reward people for.” What do you think we reward people for?

MM: You have to define your terms, because if you’re talking about a large law firm, that might be different from practicing in the state’s attorney’s office. But if you’re talking about large firms, you’re rewarded for being an economic engine and working lots of hours. You are incented to do so because you are well-compensated. That is not necessarily in alignment with doing the right thing for the right reason.

ABN: Okay, now let’s look at the flip side. What are the factors we have in the system that do help us to keep producing people like your mentor?

MM: You still have the sense that the law is not a career but a profession that is rooted in  societal common good. But that has to kind of weather the storm of time. What is probably still in our favor is that the law still draws intelligent people. Those are two positive realities.