Law is the opposite of every other professional degree. In law, you receive your J.D. (Juris Doctorate) before receiving (if someone chooses to get it) and LLM (Master of Laws). So, law school is backward, you get your doctorate and then your masters.
Its debatable whether the the Juris Doctor degree is a doctorate in the sense of how people usually think of the term. Its the highest professional degree in law, but the S.J.D. or J.S.D. is the actually degree equivalent to a Ph.D because that is the the highest academic/research degree in law. The JD is much more similar to a MD than a Ph.D in the sense that they are considered professional degrees (they mean you are qualified to practice a certain profession).
Not even debatable. In the same way that an M.D. makes one a "Medical Doctor/Doctor of Medicine", a JD makes one a "Juris Doctor/Doctor of Jurisprudence", i.e., one who doctors or operates within
the profession, NOT one who is a "qualified EXPERT" in a particular discipline or field. As difficult as it may be to accept, lawyers, judges and profs (without Ph.D's are not considered experts, regardless of how good they are. And, IMHO, they should not be. We must have some unique way of denoting the amount of intensive study one has devoted to a discipline. Ph.D. means "expert". That's the way it should be.
And, though some might craftily argue that the most experienced lawyers and judges become experts in their own rights, they do not experience a wide enough breadth of social or scientific problems over the lives of their careers to justify that argument.