Next Gen

None of the lawyers we spoke with for this 20th anniversary Upstate New York Super Lawyers feature have been practicing law for very long—certainly not 20 years. Even so, these four Rising Stars listees had plenty to say about why they chose the law, how AI has affected—and will affect—their careers, what they see when they look ahead, and what they’ve learned along the way.

Twenty Years Ago …

Jacob Honan, Rupp Pfalzgraf; Business Litigation; Buffalo: I was 12. I’ve got a bunch of younger siblings, and I was homeschooled. I’ve always been good at reading and writing and, as a kid, I read constantly. 

Alicia Loomis, MCV Law; Personal Injury – General: Plaintiff; Syracuse: Twenty years ago, the thought had not even crossed my mind that I would ever be an attorney. I was teaching hundreds of students every day in a public-school setting—seventh through 12th grade choir, and directing musicals.

Kadeem Wolliaston, Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker; Commercial Litigation, Insurance Coverage; Albany: I was 14. I attended high school in New York City in Hell’s Kitchen on 50th Street. I was still trying to understand what my future would look like. I knew I wanted to do something meaningful and challenging, but I did not necessarily have a clear roadmap on how to get there. I didn’t have the mentors early on in life to show me the pathway to get to these professions. Now that I’m in a profession where I get to solve problems and advise clients, it’s still surreal to me that I’m in the mentorship role. 

Morgan Napierski, Woods Oviatt Gilman; Estate Planning & Probate; Rochester: Twenty years ago, I was 12. I was a competitive dancer growing up, and that translates so well to being a lawyer. As a dancer, you learn discipline, motivation, loyalty, being comfortable in the spotlight, and thinking on your feet. You also learn how to work with a team. All of those I do as a lawyer all the time, while working with clients and in the courtroom. So I absolutely would not be who I am today without dance laying that foundation for me.

On the Path

Loomis: My path to becoming an attorney was atypical. I have a degree in opera performance and music education, and I taught for 10 years. I tell people that I woke up one day, very Elle Woods-style, and said, “I think I’ll go to law school.” I was moving away from teaching and wanted a new challenge. I wanted to stay in Syracuse [after law school] and I took a job on the other side, in insurance defense. I learned a lot about the New York state practice and litigation, but something didn’t feel quite right for me. I really empathize more with injured people.

Napierski: My mother planted the seed from a very young age that I was destined to be a lawyer. I always wanted to see things through, and maybe I enjoyed being right. I tried to fight it and go in a different direction for a long time but always found myself coming back to the idea. Right out of law school, I worked at a boutique law firm that only did litigation—and I knew that it wasn’t my path. In the trusts and estates world, I find it incredibly rewarding on the planning side, before death, but also guiding people after their loved ones have passed away. 

Wolliaston: I’m a first-generation American. My family’s from Jamaica and, growing up, I understood very early that professional opportunities were not something to take for granted. I was drawn to the law because it is one of those professions where your mind is constantly being challenged. What appealed to me in particular was that the law is not static: You’re constantly solving problems, advocating, analyzing risks, communicating with different audiences, and wearing different hats. You’re also counseling about real-life problems that affect people every day.

Honan: A third of the way through college, I was thinking, “Maybe I’ll get my English degree and teach.” But I realized I couldn’t live where I wanted to live if I did that, because the job market is so competitive. So I quickly pivoted. I was like, “Well, maybe I could go to law school.” When I started my career, I worked for a really awesome firm doing insurance defense work. I loved litigation, but I’m not into medicine; biology, and reading medical records all day, was not my strong suit. So I thought, “What could I do in litigation that’s not that?” I do about 50-50 plaintiff side and defendant side.

Early Obstacles

Wolliaston: In this profession, especially when you’re still building confidence, it’s easy to question whether you belong in certain rooms or whether your voice carries the same weight. Another challenge was learning how to put myself out there—whether that means speaking up, building relationships, taking on difficult assignments, networking, or being visible professionally. For me, the first step has always been to just show up. The results will follow. 

Napierski: I started during COVID, which was definitely different. I didn’t get a formal graduation. I got sworn in virtually. I try to take it as more of a positive thing, and a learning experience.

Loomis: I am a mom of five, so I can’t just say that I need work-life balance. I have to live that. I had to find an environment that was supportive enough to let me run out when the nurse calls and I need to pick up my child, or the fun things like go to preschool and read a book. Being able to establish myself as a trustworthy, responsible person where I was working so that they, in turn, would respect my need to put my family at the top—it takes time.

Honan: The biggest obstacle early on was COVID. I was admitted to the Bar in January 2020, and mid-March is when New York state basically shut down. So I had two months of getting in a good groove of going to court for the first time by myself and being in the office every day, doing depositions in person. COVID just added another layer to the learning curve. 

The Unexpected

Loomis: It has surprised me that every day is truly different, and I’m never bored. No two days ever look the same, and that’s very refreshing. It keeps me excited to be here and excited to meet new people and take on more clients.

Honan: In law school, you’re graded on everything. You’re expected to put out A-plus work. At the start of my career, doing something like a report to an insurance company could take five to eight hours. I was like, “I’m going to do such an A-plus job on these reports.” What I didn’t realize is the insurance adjuster just needed a couple of quick paragraphs to figure out what’s going on. Not everything you write needs to be a novel. You just have to get the message across.

Napierski: It’s not always a win, and that’s OK. Sometimes things in the courtroom, or a client’s situation, don’t go your way. You learn as you go and you try to stay positive.

Wolliaston: You come out of law school and you know the law by book and paper, but you don’t understand that the book and paper only teach you the tools. Also, you see someone in the robe slamming a gavel on TV and you don’t realize that they’re real people until you get to a networking event, you’re shaking hands and talking about the sports game last night with the judge. You realize, “Oh, these are my colleagues.” 

Looking Ahead

Loomis: I started right before COVID, so right off the bat we saw a very sudden shift in using technology. Before the world shut down, I remember driving three hours one way to attend a 15-minute pretrial conference, then hop back in the car and drive three hours back. Very quickly, everyone decided, “We can do this on Microsoft Teams. We don’t have to spend all that time in the car.” Now, the big conversation is AI and how we should use it.

Honan: At the firm I work for, they’re not afraid of AI. They’re embracing it. We’re not laying people off because of AI; we’re actually hiring. We’re using it ethically, safely and cautiously, but we’re using it. When I’m doing a huge document-review project, I can turn to AI, and it just makes me much more efficient. But I think it can be tough for lawyers even younger than myself to figure out how to do things organically, rather than just relying on AI.

Wolliaston: The biggest thing is always going to be focused around technology. I think the lawyers who have practice areas which are focused less on personal connection are going to be impacted the most, because you can’t replace human connection. How does the technology impact the support staff? How does it impact paralegals? How are courts going to adapt to it?

The elephant in the room is artificial intelligence. How is that going to fit into everything? I see its benefits, but I also see its drawbacks. AI is going to have a major impact on the future of law, but I do not view it as replacing lawyers. The lawyers who adapt will be the ones who understand how to use AI as a tool without outsourcing their judgment.

Honan: The thing I hear all the time from clients is just how long the litigation process takes if you’re filing it in a traditional court. I’ve seen a little more emphasis on mediation, arbitration, alternative dispute resolution. So I think the future might have more focus on [that]. In the Western District in New York, here in Buffalo, they have a mandatory mediation program, and I think that’s a really good idea. 

Napierski: I hope to continue handling my clients’ legacies. They work so hard their whole lives, and then they trust me to guide them in the right direction. So I hope to still be doing that, and I hope to be a partner someday.

Waving the Magic Wand

Wolliaston: I would change how unnecessarily adversarial the practice can become. Litigation is naturally adversarial, and that’s part of the job, but there is a difference between advocacy and making the process harder than it should be. At times, the practice can be delayed with posturing instead of focusing on the actual dispute and a path towards resolution.

Napierski: I want to show that women really can have it all in the end—even if you can’t have it all at once in the beginning. I hope the legal field continues to evolve in a modern and flexible way, wherein women—or parents and caregivers in general—can be both parents and partners at law firms, and succeed at both. 

Loomis: I would love to see more diversity and equality. We’re always looking around the courtroom or the table. How many women are at the table? How many people of color, or from different countries or even affinity groups? I’m actually the president of the Central New York Women’s Bar Association, and an active member in the LGBTQ+ community. And for me, it’s really important that it’s more of an inclusive picture of the people that we represent.

Honan: A lot of people—myself included—say something in a two-paragraph email that could’ve been said in a one- or two-sentence email. I think some people fall victim to, “Hey, this has got to be perfect. I’ve got to make all my points really strong.” A lot of the time, it’s more effective to make short, punchy points. If I could wave a magic wand and get everybody to write a little bit less, or say a little bit less—myself included—that would save everybody some time.