I wonder what the judicial system would look like if people were completely truthful and forthcoming. It seems like 90% of a lawyer's job revolves around dishonesty. That's got to be a frustrating career.
I practice a type of law where I hope I never have a hearing or go before a judge. No one ever told me in law school this was the type of practice I could be one day doing (although if I had taken the right class - Admin Law, it might have seemed a possibility). My practice is almost entirely by fax (and hopefully one day soon some technology from this century). I advocate best by putting pen to paper, well fingers to keyboard, and connecting the dots in a way that someone can read it and say "that makes all the sense in the world, looks like your client should win." Of course, I'm not so naive to be it operates 100% like that but it's how I get to operate my practice and it means I get to really enjoy my work and feel fulfilled.
Here's the shocker - I'm writing to the VA (Veteran's Administration).
EDIT - Caveat - I would still totally leave to start a software company to improve the legal profession. Been teaching myself code for the last couple years and love to just mess around in my spare time. I just wouldn't be leaving because I was disgruntled but because it's a better opportunity.
The issue is that it's economically advantageous to pay a lawyer anything up to $5000 in fees if the result will be a 50% chance that you can net $10,000. So the parties could collectively pay the lawyers $10,000 to argue over who should get $10,000, even assuming everyone is acting rationally and has substantially accurate information.
The waste of resources is inherent to the adversarial process. It's in the same nature as a war but fought with money and time rather than blood. It's the same calculus: The fight is very rarely worth the cost but if you have no soldiers you're a victim to someone who does.