文 | 张卫涛
By Weitao Zhang
写下本文的2026年6月24日，距离我开始实习，恰好整整七年。这七年里，我的变化不少：工作地点从重庆到深圳再到北京，工作平台也从天同到了汇仲。但很多事情又没怎么变：我还在做争议解决，身边的小团队、大团队也基本还是那些人。借这次约稿，让我也有机会回头看看：这七年里，究竟是什么在让我一直走下去。我想，大概就是这些人和事。
This piece is written on June 24, 2026, exactly seven years to the day since I started my internship. A great deal has changed over these seven years: my work location shifted from Chongqing to Shenzhen and then Beijing, and my professional platform moved from Tiantong to Hui Zhong. Yet much has stayed the same—I still practice dispute resolution, and my small and broader teams remain largely unchanged. Invited to contribute this column, I take the chance to look back and reflect on what has kept me moving forward all these years. I believe the answer lies in all these people and moments along the way.
『同行人的善意』
一直很感激，律所给了我足够的时间成长。
记得刚入职不久，团队接到一个案件。评估后，大家一致认为法律不可行。但出于维护客户关系的考虑，仍需形成一份书面分析意见。这项工作没有那么紧急，我的指导合伙人曹玉龙律师便把它交到了我手上，给了我三天时间起草初稿。当时我很紧张，对照材料做了案件大事记，也进行了案例检索，再模仿高年级律师文书的逻辑和风格，写出了一份看起来还算成型的意见。当然，交给曹律师之前，我也很清楚，这份文件肯定达不到团队出品要求，心里已经做好了被批评的准备。
第一稿交上去后，曹律师只是提了一些大方向的修改意见，让我先自己再想一想。我沿着他设定的逻辑调整了一版，以为这样就差不多了。没想到第二稿交上去后，他又提出了进一步意见。这样来来回回，改了四稿。当时，我觉得自己好幸运，竟然会有合伙人愿意花这么长的时间，为了一个没有任何收入的案件，如此认真地教一个刚入职的实习生改文书。
更让我意外的是，在第四稿交上去后，曹律师打开这份文件，让我站在电脑屏幕旁边，和我逐字逐句地改。每改一处，他都会告诉我原因：哪里存在逻辑断层，哪里表达过于绝对，哪里没有正确提示风险，哪里没有给出解决方案。有些修改，他还会专门说这是他的写作风格，即便改了也不用太在意。
现在回想，这个文件的修改过程对我很重要。它让我第一次真正理解到，法律分析意见不是把观点、法条、案例堆上去，而是要用一种清楚、克制、可信的方式，带着读者走完你的思考过程。脑中所有的权衡、取舍，最后都要借助这份文件呈现出来。也正是从这个文件开始，我对文书写作有了最初的感受。
律所对新人律师的帮助，并不只体现在某一次具体工作里，它会想尽办法帮我们把“什么都不会”的恐惧感一点点拆掉。
比如，当时为了提高大家的案件汇报能力，所里有专门的“青苗计划”。我们这些刚入职的实习生，每天早上上班前要轮流汇报一个典型案例。合伙人、高年级律师会自发地早到办公室，参与点评、指导。那时候每天早上都很紧张，生怕自己把观点讲偏、讲漏了。但也就是这种略带紧张感的培训，让我们那批实习生很快掌握了案件汇报的方法。
当然，对新人来说，比“被指出哪里不对”同样重要的，是有人及时告诉你“你真的还不错”。
实习时，只要有文件写得好、事情做得好，都会被发到群里表扬。合伙人、高年级律师也会在你完成一项工作之后，及时给反馈。我记得那时候得到一点点表扬，都会截图收藏，甚至发给家人，像小学生拿到奖状一样。对当时的我来说，这些正反馈很重要。它让我知道，自己能够把事情做好。
正是这些来自同行人的善意、耐心和期待，一点一点坚定了我做律师的信心。
Kindness From Fellow Travelers
I am endlessly grateful that the firm afforded me ample time to grow.
Shortly after I joined, our team took on a case that the whole group deemed legally unviable. Nevertheless, a formal written legal analysis was required to maintain client relations. The task was not urgent, so my supervising Partner, Cao Yulong, assigned the first draft to me with a three-day deadline. I was extremely nervous back then. I compiled a full chronological timeline based on case materials, conducted case law research, and emulated the logic and style of senior lawyers’ memoranda to produce a seemingly complete analysis. Before submitting it to Lawyer Cao, I knew full well the document fell short of the team’s standards and braced myself for criticism.
After I handed in the first draft, Lawyer Cao only shared high-level revision guidance and told me to rethink the arguments independently. I revised it following his framework and thought the draft was ready, yet he raised further points for improvement after the second submission. This back-and-forth editing went on for four rounds. At that time, I felt incredibly fortunate that a partner would devote so much time to meticulously tutor a brand-new intern on drafting a memorandum for a matter that generated no revenue at all.
What surprised me even more was that, upon receiving the fourth draft, Lawyer Cao sat me beside his screen and revised the text word by word together with me. For every adjustment, he explained the rationale: where logical gaps existed, where wording was overly absolute, where risk disclosures were insufficient, and where viable solutions were missing. For certain stylistic tweaks, he specifically noted that these reflected his personal writing style and I need not rigidly mimic them.
Looking back, this drafting iteration process proved transformative for me. For the first time, I truly understood that a legal analysis memorandum is not merely a patchwork of arguments, statutes and precedents. Instead, it must guide readers through your entire line of reasoning in a clear, restrained and credible manner. Every weighing of options and trade-offs you make must be conveyed through this written work. This memorandum marked the starting point of my understanding of legal drafting.
The firm’s support for junior lawyers extends far beyond isolated assignments. It systematically helps us gradually overcome the overwhelming fear of feeling incompetent.
For instance, the firm launched a dedicated Young Talent Development Program to sharpen everyone’s case presentation skills. New interns like me took turns delivering presentations on landmark cases every morning before work. Partners and senior lawyers voluntarily arrived early to offer commentary and guidance. Each morning filled me with nerves, terrified I would misstate or omit key arguments. Still, this slightly high-pressure training cohort quickly equipped our batch of interns with solid case briefing capabilities.
Equally vital for new practitioners as corrective feedback is timely recognition of work done well.
During my internship, any well-crafted document or completed task would be shared in the team group chat for praise. Partners and senior lawyers delivered prompt feedback upon finishing each assignment. I remember screenshotting every bit of positive feedback and even sending them to my family, as proud as a primary school student holding a certificate of merit. These affirmations meant the world to me back then—they convinced me I was capable of delivering quality work.
It is this kindness, patience and faith from colleagues that steadily built my confidence to pursue a career in law.
『抓住成长的机会』
新人律师的成长，肯定不是一蹴而就的。它需要时间，也需要机会。
记得刚拿到录用offer时，我们几个实习生聚在一起，讨论最多的问题就是：什么时候能够主导案件。心里期待的，是有一天可以直接和客户沟通，也可以站到法庭上发言。
我记得年终总结会议时，夏伟律师还专门跟我们讨论过这个问题。具体的表达现在有些模糊了，大意是：你们从法学院毕业，像是带着宝剑准备上战场，但现在这把剑还不够锋利，还需要继续打磨。当时听起来，我还不是特别理解。现在回想，才更能明白其中的含义。
所谓成长，是在一次次具体工作里，慢慢向下扎根。那些初期所做的工作，其实都是基本功：案件大事记，是在帮助我们按照时间逻辑梳理事实；检索案例，是在帮助我们通过类案找到裁判思路；制作图表，是在帮助我们更好地理解法律关系和数据关系。只有这些基础工作做得足够扎实，真正承办案件时，才可能更快进入状态。我们需要等待的，只是一个证明自己的机会。
时间来到2021年。那是一起建设工程施工合同纠纷，我有机会直接配合陈耀权律师和曹律师。陈律师是曹律师的“师父”，算起来是我的“师爷”。当时参与这个案件我精神高度紧张，担心自己掉链子。尤其那时，我也很希望自己能尽快成长起来，能为团队多分担一些工作。所以，虽然有陈律师、曹律师兜底，我还是很想尽可能把案件的全部工作承担下来。
当时，法院已经决定启动鉴定程序，本次开庭也是对鉴定材料进行质证。为了准备这次庭审，我对照法院委托的鉴定事项，把我方和对方已经提交过的证据重新梳理了一遍。在这个过程中，我发现我方此前提交的证据还不足以满足鉴定机构的要求。为了集中补充、整理鉴定材料，我那段时间在工程所在地贵阳驻场将近一个月。客户也给了我很大的支持，他们经常会站在工程角度帮我理解事实，耐心地听取我的意见、回答我的问题，并按照我的要求查找资料。证据收集完毕后，经陈律师、曹律师确认，我对此前的证据册进行了重编，形成了一套专门用于鉴定的证据册，方便鉴定机构翻阅。为避免重复质证，我还在鉴定证据册中通过高亮标注区分新证据和已提交证据。
在这个过程中，我好像第一次找到了做律师的感觉。
这种感觉，开始于责任真正落到自己肩上的那一刻。当我知道某一份材料能不能补上、某一个事实能不能说清、某一组证据能不能被法院和鉴定机构理解，都会直接关系到主张能否成立时，我会开始主动思考：现有材料够不够？还缺什么？如果法院、鉴定机构存在疑问，应当如何回应？这些材料按照什么顺序呈现，才更容易支撑我们的主张？也正是在这个时候，我很清楚地意识到，自己不再只是被动接受安排，而是真的进入了案件。也许，这就是我们当时一直期待的“成长”。
Seizing Opportunities for Growth
Junior lawyers do not mature overnight; growth demands both time and opportunity.
When our internship cohort received our formal offers, the topic we discussed endlessly was when we would get to lead a case independently. We dreamed of the day we could communicate directly with clients and stand up to make oral submissions in court.
I recall Lawyer Xia Wei addressed this exact question during our annual review meeting. The exact wording fades from memory, yet the core message lingers: fresh law graduates step into practice carrying swords ready for battle, but those blades remain unrefined and require continuous sharpening. I failed to grasp the full meaning at the time, yet it resonates deeply with me now.
Genuine growth takes root amid repetitive hands-on tasks. Entry-level assignments all build foundational competence: drafting chronological timelines trains us to sort facts by sequential logic; case law research teaches us to identify judicial reasoning from comparable rulings; visual chart creation sharpens our grasp of legal and data relationships. Only with rock-solid foundational work can we swiftly gain traction when handling full cases. We simply need to wait for a chance to prove ourselves.
The pivotal moment arrived in 2021, on a construction project construction contract dispute. I got to work closely with Partners Chen Yaoquan and Cao Yulong. Lawyer Chen was Lawyer Cao’s mentor, making him my grand-mentor in practice. I operated under immense stress throughout the matter, terrified of letting the team down. Eager to accelerate my own development and lighten the team’s workload, I volunteered to take ownership of nearly all case tasks despite having two senior partners overseeing the matter.
The court had ordered a judicial appraisal, and the upcoming hearing focused solely on cross-examining appraisal materials. To prepare thoroughly, I reorganized all evidence submitted by both sides against the court’s appraisal scope. In the process, I discovered our previously filed exhibits failed to satisfy the appraisal institute’s requirements. To compile and supplement complete appraisal materials, I stayed on-site in Guiyang, the project location, for nearly a month. Our client provided tremendous support: their project team walked me through technical factual context, patiently answered all my inquiries, and sourced documents per my requests. After Partners Chen and Cao reviewed the full evidence collection, I restructured our exhibit binders into a dedicated set formatted exclusively for the appraisal panel, optimized for easy reference. I also highlighted newly added exhibits separately from previously submitted materials to avoid redundant cross-examination.
It was during this process that I first truly felt like a practicing lawyer.
That feeling arrived the moment full accountability rested on my shoulders. I realized that whether supplementary documents could be sourced, factual narratives clarified, or exhibits accepted by the court and appraisal institute would directly determine whether our claims would prevail. This pushed me to think proactively: Is our existing documentation sufficient? What gaps remain? How should we respond to potential questions raised by the tribunal or appraisers? What order of exhibits best reinforces our legal arguments? At this stage, I was no longer merely executing assigned tasks passively—I was fully immersed in steering the case forward. This, I believe, was the long-awaited growth we once hoped for.
『信任下的重担』
2023年秋天，我们的一个老客户跟曹律师说，西北有个工程项目，希望我去一趟现场看一看。
这个案件表面上是建设工程施工合同纠纷，但它的核心问题并不是工程价款数额本身，而是在转包人资信不佳的情况下，如何让真正投入成本的实际施工人最终实现工程款债权。彼时争议尚未真正爆发，客户希望我们提前介入，在风险发生前设计解决方案，尽量把后续的不确定性降下来。
到现场了解案件情况后，我带着案件材料回到了深圳，团队开始一起讨论解决方案。
让我印象很深的是，当曹律师向客户说明方案后，客户只是询问了一些问题，没有太多犹豫，很快按照我们的意见和转包人进行沟通，并根据我们的建议推进协议签署、公证送达等工作。后来，客户还对项目人员提出要求，凡是与业主、转包人有任何交流，或者项目部需要出具任何文件，都要先经过曹律师和我的确认。
这种信任对律师来说，是一种很强的正反馈。客户愿意把一个重要问题交给你，也愿意依据你的判断推动决策。那一刻，我更清楚地意识到，自己说出的每一句话、提出的每一个方案，都可能影响客户的切身利益。这种压力不轻松，但它是向上的。它会让人更想把事实查清楚，把证据找扎实，把方案做细，也会让人提前预判每一个可能出现的风险点。
所谓青年律师的成长，不只是自己能力变强，也包括被客户需要、被客户信任，并开始理解这种信任背后的重量。这种重量会让人紧张，但也会让人更加坚定地走在律师这条路上。
Heavy Responsibilities Built on Trust
In autumn 2023, a long-term client told Lawyer Cao they had a construction project in northwest China and hoped I would travel to the site for an on-site assessment.
Superficially, the matter centered on a construction contract dispute, yet its core issue lay elsewhere: given the subcontractor’s poor credit standing, how to secure full payment rights for the actual constructor who had borne all project costs. At that stage, formal litigation had not yet erupted, and the client sought our early intervention to design risk mitigation solutions and minimize future uncertainty.
After investigating the project on location, I returned to Shenzhen with all case materials for joint strategy discussions with the team.
What stuck with me most was the client’s reaction after Lawyer Cao walked them through our proposed resolution framework. They asked only a handful of clarifying questions, hesitated very little, and promptly engaged with the subcontractor following our guidance—moving forward with agreement execution, notarized service and other formalities per our recommendations. Later, the client issued an internal requirement to their project staff: all communications with the project owner and subcontractor, and every document issued by the project department, must first be reviewed by Lawyer Cao and myself.
This level of client trust delivers powerful positive reinforcement for legal practitioners. When clients entrust critical matters to you and base key business decisions on your professional judgment, you fully grasp that every statement you make and every strategy you propose carries tangible consequences for their interests. This pressure is weighty yet motivating. It drives you to dig deeper into factual backgrounds, fortify evidentiary chains, refine every detail of legal proposals, and pre-empt all foreseeable risks.
Young lawyers grow not only through technical advancement, but also by earning client reliance and comprehending the gravity behind such trust. While this sense of responsibility brings nerves, it also strengthens resolve to persist in the legal profession.
『纯粹且可传承的文化』
去年和曹律师、胡律师一起在云南开庭，有一个场景让我印象很深。
庭审时，双方对于已付款项究竟应当冲抵利息、违约金，还是冲抵运费，产生了很大争议。对方主张，我方付款应当优先冲抵利息及违约金；我们则认为，根据开票及双方对账情况，我方付款数额与本金一致，应当优先冲抵运费。
就在这个焦点反复拉扯时，我突然想到，对方证据里有一份其向我方主张尚欠款项的函件。在那份函件中，对方的计算逻辑便是将已付款均冲抵运费。这说明，对方明知并认可我方付款性质为运费。我立刻翻到那份证据，递给正在发言的胡律师，什么都没有说。胡律师接过证据后，很快向法官作了清晰指引。法官看到后，没有再继续追问这个焦点，最终判决也是支持我方主张。
这个瞬间，并不是什么可以拿来宣传的“大场面”，但我一直记得。因为那一刻，我能很清楚地感受到同频。这种同频，并不是某一次庭审里偶然形成的默契，它来自日常工作中一次次讨论、争执和配合，更来自一种相对纯粹的工作环境。
幸运的是，无论是在老东家还是汇仲，我周围一直是这种纯粹。
工作七年，大多数时候只是因为熬夜而感到身体疲惫，但从没感到心累。大家都是一门心思扑在办案上。合伙人对我们要求的，也只是保证办案质量，对案件负责。在一个相对纯粹的环境里，很多事情会变得简单：观点能不能成立，证据能不能支撑，表达能不能说服，方案能不能解决问题，最终还是回到案件本身。
正是因为这种纯粹，这里也鼓励年轻律师发表自己的观点，鼓励年轻律师接触客户、主导案件。合伙人会给机会，也会对案件最终把关。年轻律师不是只能坐在角落里做记录，也不是只能完成被拆分好的零碎工作，而是会被推到案件里，慢慢学会判断、表达和承担。
更重要的是，这种工作方式、带教方式也会慢慢传递到后来的人身上。
以前曹律师、胡律师和其他前辈怎么带我，后来我遇到更年轻的律师时，也会下意识地用类似的方式对待他们：逐字逐句地帮助他们修改文件；在他们向合伙人汇报前，先帮助他们厘清思路；案件讨论时先听他们怎么想，再一起考虑哪里还不够。总之，能保证托底的，就尽量让他们尝试。这也是我理解的“可传承”，它很具体地发生在一次改稿、一次汇报、一次庭审、一次客户沟通里。一个年轻律师被认真带过，后来也会更愿意认真带别人。
A Pure, Inheritable Firm Culture
Last year, I attended a hearing in Yunnan alongside Partners Cao and Hu, and one scene remains etched in my memory.
During the trial, both sides clashed fiercely over whether received payments should first offset interest and liquidated damages or transportation fees. The opposing party contended all remittances ought to deduct interest and penalties first. We argued that payment amounts exactly matched principal sums per invoices and reconciliation records, and should prioritize repayment of transportation costs.
As the two sides circled this core dispute repeatedly, I suddenly recalled a demand letter submitted by the opposing party as evidence, in which their own calculation method allocated all received payments to transportation fees. This proved they had acknowledged and accepted the characterization of our payments as transportation-related costs. I quickly located the exhibit and handed it silently to Partner Hu mid-submission. He immediately referenced the document clearly for the judge, who ceased follow-up questioning on this point, and the final judgment upheld our position.
This moment was no grand media-worthy courtroom victory, yet it stays vivid in my mind. It embodied seamless professional synergy between team members. This rapport is no random coincidence forged in a single hearing; it stems from countless strategy discussions, debates and collaborations day in and day out, rooted in an unadulterated working environment.
I am fortunate to have worked within this kind of uncomplicated culture both at my previous firm and Hui Zhong.
Over seven years in practice, exhaustion has only ever stemmed from late-night work marathons—never mental burnout. Every team member devotes their full focus to case work. Partners hold us to one core standard: deliver quality representation and take full accountability for every matter. In this streamlined, purpose-driven environment, all debates circle back to the substance of the case: whether arguments hold legal weight, evidence sufficiently supports claims, written work persuades adjudicators, and proposed strategies resolve the client’s practical problems.
This pure atmosphere also empowers junior lawyers to voice independent viewpoints, engage directly with clients and lead case work. Partners extend opportunities while retaining final oversight of case outcomes. Young practitioners are not confined to note-taking in the background or fragmented low-level tasks; instead, we are placed front and center on matters to gradually cultivate judgment, advocacy and accountability.
Most importantly, this mentorship and working methodology passes naturally to the next generation of lawyers.
I learned under Partners Cao, Hu and other senior practitioners, and now I instinctively adopt their approach when guiding newer associates: revising their drafts word for word, refining their briefing logic ahead of partner presentations, soliciting their independent analysis first during case roundtables, and supporting them to take on independent work while standing ready to backstop their efforts. This is what I understand as an “inheritable” culture, realized concretely through every draft edit, case briefing, court appearance and client consultation. Lawyers who receive thoughtful mentorship grow eager to pass that same care to those who follow.
写在最后
如果说这七年有什么幸运，我想不是遇到了某个突然改变人生的机会，而是一直有一群人和我一起面对案件。刚开始，我只是跟在他们身后跑。后来，慢慢能和他们一起讨论、一起判断、一起承担。再后来，也开始有更年轻的律师在我们身后。这大概就是成长。
七年过去，我还在路上，也还愿意继续这样走下去。
Closing Remarks
If I am to name one stroke of luck from these seven years, it is not a single transformative career opportunity, but the steady companionship of a group of colleagues facing every case alongside me. At first, I merely followed closely behind them. Later, I joined them to debate facts, weigh strategies and share accountability. Now, newer lawyers walk in our footsteps. This is the true meaning of growth.
Seven years on, I remain on this path—and remain willing to keep walking forward.
作者介绍
