This is just the sort of thing that would be lauded in a typical self-congratulatory Bar Journal. In fact, I'm suprised I haven't read about it yet. Big firm lawyers overcharge corporate clients, overpay associates, get publicity for every let-them-eat-cake "charity" work they do, and then have the gall to bemoan society's antipathy towards lawyers. In the meantime, the lawyers who are out there providing good and necessary services to the public (government lawyers who keep things running behind the scenes, family lawyers who try to straighten out your messy personal problems, the lawyer who sues the contractor who screwed you, the lawyer who defends you against your insurance company, etc.) are largely ignored by the press and the population in general. And BTW, most of the lawyers I just described would consider $15 daily lunches a luxury!

The services offered by the lawyers you portray as being "good and necessary to the public" are also very lucrative and they are also offered by associates and partners at many large law firms. I used to write internet marketing copy for lawyers and I never met one who didn't salivate thinking about how to market to clients with "messy personal problems," or a legitimate case against contractors and insurance companies. For most personal injury lawyers, $15 a day for lunch would not be a great stretch. I'm not trying to belittle them - far from it. It's just that I think the services offered by corporate lawyers etc are in many ways just as essential as the ones you praise - if not on a personal level, then at least to the overall function of our economy.

Gross himself points out that this Chow for Charity thing is really meant for summer interns and not for the firm's actual associates and partners. These interns are students who don't have much money (law school is expensive) but who are nonetheless still interested in donating something somehow - in this instance, it's the tab for their lunch. What's actually bad about this? Gross never mentions how much (or even whether) the partners making $2.5 mil / year donate out of their own pockets. He also never explores any other charitable giving / pro bono services these firms offer - why would he, when this program taken out of context looks so deliciously damning, when it makes himself and his readers feel so morally superior to those rich lawyers everybody loves to hate?

Brilliant Reply Austin Annie. As a public interest lawyer living with extremely high student loan debt right now, I couldn't have said it better myself.

Here, here, Annie. I have a neighborhood practice and after 25 years in the profession I have developed a healthy contempt for most corporate lawyers. They are masters of the bullying letter and of paper "litigation" - to say nothing of the billable hour. Most would wet their pants if called upon to try a case before a jury.

I have come to see them as specialized tools; useful to large business but of little value to the rest of the world. If "donating" a lunch can assuage their consciences, it also suggests how cheaply they were bought in the first place.