August 19th, 2009

10 Tips for Laid Off Lawyers

It may be a long time before the legal field recovers from the massive layoffs from this past year. Some folks could be out of work longer than imagined, and it appears that some may need a bit of help on what to do. As you can see from this utterly miserable description of life as a cast-off lawyer coding documents in the basement of BigLaw firms for $28/hr. (via ATL), there are some people with big time degrees that are trapped into thinking that BigLaw is all the law that exists.

‘Taint so.

So, without further ado, here are 10 tips for lawyers without a job, from a guy who started from scratch:

1. Make business cards. You are not unemployed. You are self-employed. Big difference.

2. Don’t tell people you don’t have an office. You do. It’s your home office. All you need is an address and a computer to do research and writing.

3. You never know where business might come from, except you know it won’t come from sitting at home watching Oprah. So get out of the house and talk to people. The waitress, the cabbie, the dog-walkers, the people in the supermarket. The doorman of your friend’s building. Maybe you’ll meet someone who needs legal assistance, or knows someone who needs legal assistance. Or you’ll get a date. Who knows? You might find that extricating someone from a bad marriage, representing an abused child, saving someone from an overly aggressive district attorney, or helping an immigrant get a green card, to be one of the most satisfying things you’ve ever done with your law degree. But you won’t know if you don’t try.

4. Tell people you’re an attorney. That doesn’t mean you scream it from the top of your lungs, but it comes naturally when meeting new people (see #3) when they say, “So what do you do?” You’ll have your card in your pocket. Because they might know someone, who knows someone, who needs you. In a big, bad way.

5. Start a blog. Or offer to guest blog for an existing one. Or write an article for a legal publication. Or an op-ed for the local paper. Most lawyers love to write. A few even do it well. Now is your chance to write like a human. You must have an interest in something legal or you wouldn’t have picked law for a career. You can write about anything. Except how wonderful you are an as attorney. That would suck. Because that’s an advertisement. And people hate self-promotional clap-trap. Everything else is fair game. Get your name out there. And claim your Google reputation while you’re at it.

6. Dress nicely when going to the grocery store. That doesn’t mean a suit and tie, it just means looking neat and clean. Because you don’t know who you will meet. You can’t open doors if you push them closed by looking like a slob. And you will, of course, have your card in your pocket. Just in case.

7. Join listservs. These are not only great places to swap ideas on the law, but other lawyers often run into temporary overflows. They need someone to handle a court conference. Or draft a memo of law. Or help with an appeal. And when that happens they will turn to their listmates for help. And you will be there. Of course, your new friends will also be there when you start to wrestle with questions of where to file something and other picayune procedural stuff that BigLaw never taught you.

8. Don’t be proud. My first job out of school was high end medical malpractice cases at a prominent personal injury firm in New York (Fuchsberg & Fuchsberg). Then I went out on my own. My first stationery was a business card taped to a piece of white paper and xeroxed onto good paper. I had a Mailboxes, Etc. address for my office. My first regular client argued parking tickets for commercial businesses. I started making appearances and doing depositions for $75-$100 a pop. With overhead near zero I turned a profit. I got by till the better stuff came in.

9. Keep your ears open for other business opportunities. These opportunities might be outside the law, or closely related to it. After all, if there are too many lawyers, well, I’m sure you understand that old supply and demand thing.

10. Don’t stop looking at the traditional avenues of employment. The above tips were not designed for you to start a new practice. It just might lead that way. Or not. No one has a crystal ball. All you are doing is creating opportunities. And with that comes the potential that some firm, some where, gets some big business and needs to staff up. Your resume is ready. And when they Google you they will find a few things you’ve written while you were self-employed. And you might have a really interesting story of how you changed someone’s life.

Links to this post:

true solos have true grit, but law school rewards the ephemeral
got grit? you do if you’re making a go of it as a solo. as much as many of the law practice gurus tell you that earning gobs of money as a solo is easy as pie (particularly if you’re using their thousand dollar “recipes”),
posted by [email protected] (Carolyn Elefant) @ August 21, 2009 8:45 AM

 

July 27th, 2009

Client Privacy and the Courthouse File

One day the scandal will happen, and I want to make sure my clients don’t get caught up in it. The problem is simple: Our court files are open to the public and all manner of private information gets place into those files. Attached to motions in personal injury cases, for example, may be pleadings, discovery responses and deposition transcripts containing a spectacular wealth of information.

Those records may contain social security numbers, birth dates and places, maiden names, kids names, schools attended, and the answer to almost any other type of “security” question that people ask in order to verify identities.

In the pre-Internet days this wasn’t as much of an issue. While the records rooms of the courthouses were open, the problem of identity theft hadn’t exploded. But the Internet has made the acquisition of information vastly easier. In some places with electronic filing, a trip to the courthouse to look at the physical file may not even be needed anymore.

Back in those pre-Internet days I used to send reports of my significant verdicts and settlements into the New York Jury Verdict Reporter, which in turn would send its publication of verdicts and settlements out to subscribers. Potential clients would then have published synopses of my cases so that they could see what types of actions I had handled. This was particularly important since I was a solo practitioner, and I could understand how a new client would like to see a track record for such an attorney.

Those jury verdict reporters were (and continue to be) valuable tools in trying to determine the value of a case in settlement negotiations. Just as house hunters like to look at “comparables,” so do lawyers. These verdict reporters also sometimes had information on experts, unless you were like me and refused to provide those little tidbits.

When the Internet came along, I put up those settlements and verdicts on my website, again so potential clients could see what I had done in the past. I stripped out the names of my clients though, as I began to appreciate the power of too much available information.

And I also elected to remove the names of doctor-defendants. About a year after one particular case had settled, I saw my prior adversary on the street and he mentioned to me that his doctor-client had Googled himself and found his name on my site. (There was no confidentiality agreement.) He wasn’t happy. So I deleted his name, and the names of all other individual defendants. Why? Because I didn’t want some future defendant to fear settlement because their name would come up on my site in a Google search. That would be a disservice to my own client.

All of this brings me back to the too-much-information issue in the courthouse files. Several years ago I stopped putting social security numbers into any document likely to be filed, as well as dates of birth. This information can be given privately to defense counsel if they need it to track down records. But the court file doesn’t need it.

So far I’ve yet to have a defense lawyer complain, and for good reason. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Neither side finds it beneficial to have more personal information than is absolutely required in an open file.

One day the scandal will come. Some big case some place will settle and a wealth of details will be stolen from the court files to steal an identity.

And the only question is, which lawyer will have allowed it to happen?

Links to this post:

Had A Client Stolen Yet?
In a brilliant article by Eric Turkewitz, Esq. he describes the information now becoming available in public records of lawsuits; settled and active and the potential for lawsuits arising from this type of easily accessible private data

posted by Lina Maini @ August 03, 2009 2:00 AM

had a client stolen yet?
as our readers know, bni is in the business of information gathering. specifically, as virtually all lawsuits have a monetary value attached, our stock in trade is locating positive and negative financial information (assets, debt,

posted by Lina Maini @ August 02, 2009 6:00 PM

litigation vs. privacy, part lxxvii
related posts. vaccine lawyer subpoenas kathleen seidel (22); suing anonymous bloggers (1); strippers, privacy and class actions (again) (0); september 29 roundup (9); scooping up police crash reports, cont’d (6)
posted by Walter Olson @ August 02, 2009 4:34 PM

 

May 19th, 2009

The Million Dollar Advocates Forum (What the Heck is That?)

I’ve received the letter a few times, beseeching me to join the “Million Dollar Advocates Forum.” Oh boy! That looks mighty impressive. So I investigated to find out what, exactly, it is.

And now I’m here to report: It’s a great way to make money for the guy that thought it up. And little more. You pay him $1,200 and he gives you a certificate (gold embossed and suitable for framing!) and the right to use one of those groovy logos that you see to the right on your website. It is to me, short and simple, a marketing program.

The Forum is a “prestigious” group that is “limited” to those that have “won” million dollar settlements or verdicts. If you Google Million Dollar Advocates Forum you will find no shortage of lawyers boasting of this faux honor. But if a lawyer already lists such results on a website, why pay this guy $1,200 in cold, hard cash for this piece of marketing? You don’t need his logo or piece of paper to prove you’ve handled a big case.

I found this bit of hype from the website interesting:

There are over 3000 members throughout the country. Fewer than 1% of U.S. lawyers are members.

Read carefully, for that bit doesn’t mean that only those 3,000+ lawyers have handled million dollar cases. No, it means that of those that have handled million dollar cases that is the number that forked over their money for the logo and certificate.

And I think it’s also worth noting that having “won” a million dollar case doesn’t mean a lawyer is good. What if, in better hands, the case could have been resolved for three million? All of a sudden that million-dollar-lawyer moniker isn’t much to brag about.

But wait, there’s more! And you don’t even have to order by midnight tonight. You see there is also a “Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum,” and lucky for you that certificate (gold embossed seal and suitable for framing!) can be had for only an extra $1,000. Or $1,700 if you apply for both at once.

It’s also interesting to note that if you defended a million dollar case, you don’t qualify, because you have not “won” a million dollars or more. I’m not sure why defense counsel wouldn’t be on the same footing as the plaintiffs’ folks, for while funding of the case is certainly vastly different, the courtroom skill set is pretty similar once you step into the well. (My father likes to tell the story of the first lawyer to lose a million dollar malpractice case in New York. Rather than hurting his reputation, he became the million dollar go-to lawyer for the big cases.)

So if you see that little logo on someone’s website, or the certificate on the wall, don’t be too impressed. If the lawyer handled million dollar cases, and handled them well, and wants you to know, s/he will likely list them on their website or tell you in person.

The logo should mean little to the potential client seeking counsel. The certificate seems to be worth the price of the paper it’s printed on. Unless you were the guy who came up with the idea and raked in the dough for creating that certificate. In which case it means $1,200 being transferred from your bank to his.

Do you detect sour grapes on my part? You bet! I’m bummed that I didn’t think of this first. Who needs to work when you can get, according the web site, over 3,000 people to pony up that kind of cash for a piece of paper? Who knew there were thousands of lawyers out there so willing to part with their cash for this token? According to this 2002 article, the old fee was $450. It has almost tripled since that time. Now that is a great business model for a company that provides a website, logo and piece of paper.

The “Forum” is the brainchild of Donald F. Costello. Costello is himself a personal injury lawyer out in California (though he says he is no longer accepting cases), and his website features the logos that he created three times as well as three additional mentions of the “Forums” in the text. Visitors, however, are unlikely to know that he is the one that created this little business out of whole cloth.

Curious as to whether his company had the backing of any bar association anywhere in the United States, I shot him an email. And the response from Costello?

“The Million Dollar Advocates Forum has no relationship of any type with any bar association or any other group.

Update: See comment #5 by fellow New York attorney Gerry Oginski. He wrote in a March 2009 post about some company called Elite Lawyers of America is trying to suck $500 out of attorneys for a lucite obelisk proclaiming their greatness.

Updated x2: The Wall Street Journal Law Blog picked up where I left off, quoting this piece, in The Million Dollar Advocates Forum: A Valuable Service or Something Else?

Links to this post:

the million dollar advocates forum: a valuable service or
let’s say you or a family member is badly injured in a car accident and you need to sue the person you think is at fault. in order to find a lawyer, we figure you’ve got a few options. you could go with a recommendation from a friend;

posted by WSJ_law_blog @ May 22, 2009 5:00 PM

The Million Dollar Advocates Forum: A Valuable Service or
Let’s say you or a family member is badly injured in a car accident and you need to sue the person you think is at fault. In order to find a lawyer, we figure you’ve got a few options. You could go with a recommendation from a friend;

posted by Ashby Jones @ May 22, 2009 2:09 PM

“million dollar advocates forum”
prestigious honorific? marketing gimmick? eric turkewitz does some digging, and also passes along this tangential but memorable anecdote: my father likes to tell the story of the first lawyer to lose a million dollar malpractice case in
posted by Walter Olson @ May 19, 2009 8:24 AM

 

May 4th, 2009

Gloria Allred v. OctoMom (What’s a "Celebrity Lawyer?")

It is, perhaps, the most bizarre of legal specialties: Celebrity Lawyer. It must be a specialty, because the media insist on tagging California attorney Gloria Allred that way.

Allred managed to get her mug in the news by suing Octomom Nadya Suleman. Leaving aside the little issue of whether Allred has standing to sue — apparently on behalf of a child welfare advocate with no apparent connection to the case — at least I understand what an Octomom is. But a “celebrity lawyer?” This headline comes from New York’s Daily News: Octomom Nadya Suleman sued by celeb lawyer Gloria Allred for exploiting her babies.

Now I understand what a matrimonial lawyer is. And I know what an entertainment lawyer is. And certainly what a personal injury lawyer is.

But what the hell is a “Celebrity Lawyer?” Do all celebrities have the same issues? Think about it. Criminal defense. Real estate. Securities. Immigration. Corporate work for those that have their own productions companies. Child welfare if you’re Britney Spears. Adoption if you’re Madonna.

The list of potential legal needs is limited only by the many ways people need to protect themselves from troubles.

So someone who pitches her services as being a “celebrity lawyer” is, in fact, saying that she is a Jane-of-all-trades (and, therefore, master of none). But should a major media outlet buy this self-promotional aggrandizement?

Allred’s website starts with this bit of vomit-inducing narcissism:

Gloria Allred is the most famous woman attorney practicing law in the nation today, a tireless and successful advocate whose high-profile legal battles …

I don’t know the lady but I hate her already. Anyone who writes about themselves that way seems to have an ego so large it would ultimately get in the way of any legal issue presented. If I’m a client, I don’t want the case to be about the lawyer. I want it to be about me. My issue. Not the lawyer’s desire for fame.

It’s clear that Allred does a fine job of getting her mug in the news, and therefore she probably gets cases as a result. But why anyone would hire such a person for a specific problem is utterly beyond me.

I once knew a lawyer with a lot of high profile clients, and he asked me to try a medical malpractice case with him. The lawyer had decades of experience. We went to verdict. He was, in my 24 years of experience, the worst trial lawyer I ever saw. Lots of shtick, but no preparation. No concept as to how a medical malpractice case should be handled.

Rookies I’ve tried cases against were far better. But he had high profile clients, and that begot more high profile clients. What he lacked were actual courtroom skills. Every time I saw his face in the news I knew his clients would hang.

Hiring a “celebrity lawyer” is, perhaps, the dumbest thing a person can do if they need actual legal help.

See also:
Celebrities + Lawyers = One Train Wreck After Another (Legal Pad)

The (shudder) “Octomom” is gonna face Gloria Allred in court. Allred, consistently described in news articles as “feminist celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred,” is going after the mother of 14 for being unfit…

Links to this post:

celebrity lawyer gloria allred
related posts. we don’t feel competent to handle your hair (0); rob lowe nanny lawsuits (2); november 27 roundup (0); muscling into her clients’ wedding pictures (3); moe the chimpanzee escapes; st. james davis v. west covina update (9)
posted by Walter Olson @ May 05, 2009 7:07 PM

 

January 9th, 2009

Why is SimmonsCooper Spamming My Blog? (Updated)

Every blogger gets spam. I expect it from the various hustlers who permeate the web. But I didn’t really expect it from a law firm. From a big law firm.

SimmonsCooper* is a personal injury firm in Illinois. They focus on asbestos litigation and the disease it causes, mesothelioma. According to their web site, they have 17 partners and 39 associates and of counsel talent on hand, so this isn’t a small shop.
But apparently SimmonsCooper thinks it would be a mighty fine idea to send spam advertising to my blog in the comments area.
The first message came in January 2nd, and I deleted it and ignored their transgression. Then they did it again today. The post they were spamming was a September 17, 2007 piece on the Graves Amendment and immunity for car renting/leasing companies. Not a lot there about asbestos, I’ll tell you that. But that didn’t stop them from posting this drivel: If you or someone you know has been diagnosed with blah, blah, blah.
Note to SimmonsCooper: That’s pretty scummy stuff. It’s also a waste of your time and resources because:
1. The note is old and unlikely to be read by many;
2. Those that do read it aren’t looking for an asbestos attorney; and
3. You get zero Google juice out of it because my blog, like others, has a “do not follow” command for the comments area so that spammers don’t waste their time polluting our little publications.
If you want to advertise your services, go ahead. Knock yourself out. It’s legal because of that First Amendment thingie. I’ve got a web site too. Nothing wrong with that concept. I have to hope that any lawyer that does advertise will do so in a dignified manner.
But sending spam to my blog is not dignified.
Now I’m going to take a guess here and say that SimmonsCooper hired some idiotic SEO company to spread their name around. Perhaps they are ignorant of the fouls being committed in their name, or perhaps they are simply turning a blind eye to what their agents are doing in their name. Perhaps they are just shocked, shocked, I tell you, that their agents would behave in such a slimy manner.
I can only hope they pick their experts in a better fashion than the people who do their marketing.
———————————————————-
* Link is via a TinyUrl redirect so that the spammer doesn’t profit from any Google juice due to this posting.
———————————————————-

After posting this, I receive an apologetic call from Mark Motley at SimmonsCooper. He told me that they did not approve of what had been done in their name and were embarrassed by the spam.

I’ve previously written of the risks of lawyers outsourcing their web marketing to others, in the context of those horrid attorney search services (The Ethics of Attorney Search Services). There is a danger not just on the ethics front, but on the reputation front when SEO companies sing their own praises to get your business, and then do trashy things in your name.

Motley sent on to me this email, which he asked that I publish:

Thanks for your time today on the phone. It was a pleasure meeting you.
As you and I discussed, SimmonsCooper does not have anything to do with
the spam commenting you refer to in your blog. We do not approve of
spam commenting. We have a blog ourselves and frequently receive those
sorts of messages as well. I’m sorry to have met you under these
circumstances but am glad to have found your blog. Keep up the good
work!

Regards,
Mark Motley
SimmonsCooper LLC

Links to this post:

Sixteen Rules for Lawyers Who (Think They) Want to Market Online
1. If you’re looking for The Promised Land, you’re in the wrong place. This is the Wild West, Pilgrim. 2. There are clients online—sophisticated, moneyed clients—but they don’t find lawyers the way you think they do.
posted by Mark Bennett @ November 16, 2009 10:15 PM