David Giacalone reminded me that it's cherry blossom time here in DC. Unfortunately, I have been so busy with a very important brief that I don't think I will have a chance to see them this year. But here are some photos from 2005:
Just got word of two new blogs contemplating a leap to solo practice - Basquette and Talk About Solo, as well as one new solo, Not Guilty, who has just launched. Who knows - maybe you'll be next!
Update: And there's yet another one, Oklahoma Solo.
This article on the death of New York attorney, Joel Scelsi, will make you proud to be called a "small town lawyer." Where else can you handle such a wide array of cases and be known around town as the person to go to for help if someone finds themselves in trouble.
After reading articles like this one, I sometimes wonder why anyone winds up spending their life churning papers in a big corporate law practice.
Tom Kane of Legal Marketing Blog posts on the importance of a human answering a phone. Tom is certainly right that you shouldn't regularly let phone calls go to voice mail, particularly when you're in the office. At the same time, I'm not so certain about the importance of having a receptionist pick up. As a personal matter, I'd much rather hit someone's voice mail directly, then have to speak with a receptionist or secretary, let alone leave a message with them. Also, many new solos don't have the resources to hire a receptionist to answer calls. Consequently, they're likely to use a virtual receptionist, which can sometimes be more of a disaster if the receptionist is rude or simply sends messages to voice mail without any elaboration.
Continue Reading...Greatest American Lawyer posts on the mostly good of independent practice and links to this post by Russ Krajec on a similar theme.
Lawyers aren't the only ones starting to focus on the importance of client relations (as evidenced by the proliferation of blogs like What About Clients and In Search of Perfect Client Service). Peter Salgo, a professor of medicine at Columbia University, has this op-ed piece The Doctor Will See You Now for Seven Minutes in today's New York Times (3/22/06) where he ponders whether pressure on health care costs has commoditized the medical profession and eroded the "doctor patient" relationship.
Salgo's article points to little, imperceptible shifts within the profession, such as a young med student referring to a patient as a "55 year old male" rather than a man, reference to patients as "customers" or duration of hospital stays as "through put." To Salvo, this jargon reduces patients to a business school financial concept or items on an assembly line, rather than humans. Salgo admits that restoring the doctor-patient relationship won't save money, but that it doesn't have to, because it can restore compassion and dignity to the medical profession.
As a lawyer, I know that serving clients is important and that clients complain that they don't get the service they deserve. But maybe the solution isn't client surveys or enhancing efficiencies or squeezing out every cent we can from clients, but little things like not charging clients every time we talk to them or taking the time to engage them in conversation or showing compassion or empathy for a client in a tough spot. There's something inherently human about the lawyer-client relationship, and for most of us, it's that human element that makes the practice of law frustrating at times, but ultimately richly rewarding.
There's been some discussion on some of the listserves that I frequent about the Brodsky Law Firm which competes, proudly and flagrantly, on price alone. Predictably, Brodsky's strategy has generated a slew of remarks like "you get what you pay for" or comments critical of this "race to the bottom," but I see things a little differently. Continue Reading...
What I love most about solo practice is that, to quote Forrest Gump, it's like a box of chocolates - you never know what you're going to get. And as this article, Big Case for Fledgling Lawyer, Don Thompson, AP (3/19/06) bears out, you just might get the case of your life eighteen months out of law school. That's what's happened to Wazhma Mojaddidi, a young Muslim lawyer of Aghan descent, who's now representing Hamid Hayat, on trial in U.S. District on charges that he attended a terrorist training camp and lied about it to investigators.
From all accounts, Mojaddiddi is holding her own, though the judge "is impatient with her for her evident inexperience in cross-examinations and rules of evidence, frequently schooling her on how she should phrase questions to a government witness." But that kind of on the job experience is the best way to learn, far better, than Mojaddiddi's peers at large firms buried under stacks of documents. And Mojaddiddi isn't entirely on her own - her client's father is also standing trial for similar counts and represented by a more seasoned attorney who shares his substantive experience while Mojaddiddi brings her familiarity with cultural and Muslim issues to the table.
According to this article, the Arizona State Bar now includes records of formal disciplinary action against lawyers at its website to help consumers "weed out lawyers with spotty records while searching for representation." You might think that someone like me, who constantly complains that bars unfairly target solo and small firm lawyers (as I did here) would oppose Arizona's new development, but in fact, I don't. Consumers should be able to learn whether an attorney has been formally disciplined. Doesn't mean that the consumer should not hire the lawyer, but at a minimum, the consumer is entitled to an explanation about the charge and can then make a decision about whether to give the lawyer a second chance.
More importantly, public information about formal discipline helps lawyer too. For example, I've heard of several instances where my colleagues have referred cases to lawyers whom they believed to be reputable only to discover that they'd been disbarred. Making information publicly available helps avoid this kind of situation and allows us to make better referrals. Second, when litigating a case, it always helps to know your opponent - and learning that opposing counsel has a long record of disciplinary charges can potentially inform your strategy in the case.
I realize that there's always the possibility that the bar may wrongfully discipline an attorney and forced disclosure of the sanction can harm the attorney's business. But on balance, I think the benefits of access to disciplinary records far outweigh the possible harms.
This past weekend's New York Times article Why Do So Few Women Reach the Top of Big Law Firms? (Timothy O'Brien, 3/19/06) makes me ask the question "Why Should We Care?" The article describes the oft-cited problem of why women aren't making it to the top at large firms or why they prematurely leave, blaming the usual suspects such as lack of mentoring, ingrained gender discrimination and even billable hours.
For starters, I'm not sure that I understand the problem here. Large firms are profit making entities, where billables and rainmaking count more than anything, for anyone. Large firms apply billable requirements across the board. Sure, large firms aren't willing to accomodate women who want to work part time - but they don't accomodate male attorneys who seek a more balanced lifestyle either. In fact, if male attorneys asked for the same types of schedule reductions that their female counterparts demand, they'd probably be bounced out of the firm even more quickly. If women attorneys are willing, as some of those cited in the article, to come back to work full time after 6 weeks of maternity leave, to hire full time nannies and skip dinners with their kids, the gap would shrink. Most women lawyers aren't willing to do that - and more power to them for that. Indeed, many of my solo male colleagues weren't willing to make those sacrifices either - which is why they're working for themselves as solos instead of tethered to a desk in a big fancy New York or DC or Chicago office.
The other problem I have with this genre of articles is that they make it seem as if biglaw is the "be all and end all" of a legal career. In truth, only a small percentage of lawyers practice at large firms and real law is made day by day by solo and small firm practitioners and the clients we serve. But for some reason, when a woman heads her own firm, it's still regarded as an inferior position to serving as one of dozens of partners at a large firm. In fact, these articles almost never make mention of the hundreds of women making it on their own as heads or partners of solo and small law firms. (I highlighted this problem here).
I know it's not PC to say so, but ultimately, the problem with large firms is that everyone, male and female, is held to an equal standard: generate more billables, bring in more revenue. It's an inhumane standard, sure, but it's gender neutral. The real success stories aren't the women who continue to whine for accomodations at large firms that aren't available to men, but rather, the women who go out and create their own firms so that they can have the best of both worlds, on their own terms.
Jim Calloway hosts this week's Blawg Review, over here, with an OK (Oklahoma) theme. His round up is more than OK, though, so you should mosey on over and see what's been happening this week in the blogworld, including the unfortunate "Gunfight at Blawger Corral," between several A-list bloggers.
Ben Cowgill has a two part expose (here and here) on a new era of stock content (and stock links) in blogging. David Giacalone reminds us that he addressed the issue of ghostblogging (wondering whether it will ruin the authenticity and personality of blogging); David also notes Joel Schoenmeyer's post here (arguing that bloggers who don't reveal their alter-ego ghostbloggers are liars).
Questions like whether ghostblogging unethically deceives readers (though not sure how it's any worse than the senior partner who takes lead billing for an associate-written article) or destroys the authenticity of blogging are interesting, but they don't really get me all that riled. Here at MyShingle, I blog for love and to spread the gospel of solo practice; if a bar association ever decided to start a blog with canned material on starting a firm, I know that it would never duplicate my passion. And even though I do blog for love, I'm also thrilled that this tool that gives me personal pleasure can be used by other solos to make money.
Continue Reading...There's soon to be another new solo on the block, Steve Wells of the Alaska Blawg, who's leaving the Public Defender's office to start a new firm (hat tip to Kevin at Lex Blog for mentioning this). Steve writes that:
This is one of the saddest and yet most exciting posts I have written. For the past several months, I have been doing a lot of soul searching regarding my future. I knew when I took this position that it would be for roughly three years, give or take a few months, maybe a year, on either side.
The reason is that this particular position will ultimately burn out whoever has it....
I'm heading into private practice, hanging out a shingle. I'm going to be renting space from a friend of mine who has his own office, which should minimize expenses and give me a good head start.
What's so amazing about blogs is that just a couple of years ago, sitting here as an energy regulatory solo in the D.C. area, I'd have never known about an Alaskan colleague who's joining the big happy family of shinglers.
Here's an article, Lawyers' ads seek to grow ag business, Silicon Valley (March 10, 2006) about a firm with an agriculture-based practice that's embarking on a new marketing campaign that brands the firm as Lettuce Lawyers - Together We Grow. It's a neat name, with lots of potential for other taglines, such as Lettuce Help You Get Ahead or Our Firm Can Help You "Leaf" Your Legal Problems Behind. Seriously, I am always amazed by the number of potential lawyer niche opportunities that you never heard of in law school.
Just a warning, postings will be a bit on the light side for this next week or so. Nothing to do with my new gig at Legal Blogwatch; just a combination of what's seemed like a slow news week, coupled with a huge summary judgment motion response that is consuming me. I will be back up to speed soon, I hope.
David Swanner posts this excerpt from a rehearing petition that's likely to lose. Read it and see if you can figure out why:
Statement of Issue Presented for Review: The Court of Appeals committed a major error in affirming the dismissal. The Court did not address the facts of the case. The Court has a warped perspective of the Rule of Law.
Conclusion: The Court Administration should have the case reviewed by competent individuals.
I had to read the post carefully to make sure it wasn't some kind of premature April Fool's joke, but it appears that the petition was actually filed.
Dennis Kennedy has been writing about law firm websites for ten years now, a veritable eternity in Internet time - and he has these tips for law firms who still can't seem to get it right. Dennis' peeves include hard to find email addresses and concealed or non-existent attorney bios. (As for me, a law firm website isn't complete without photos of the attorney).
Dan Hull of What About the Clients speads some good cheer for us solo and small firm lawyers with this post referencing a recent study that only 30 percent of clients would recommend their law firm and that poor client service is driving clients away. As Dan recaps:
it's what I've been telling you for 6 months. Good news for smaller firms and boutiques willing and able to capture, serve and keep BigLaw clients.
Sounds like good news, indeed.
In response to posts criticizing the Nevada Bar's heavy handed approach to an attorney who advertises himself as "The Heavy Hitter," (see here, here and here), Jon Stein of The Practice blog endorses increased regulation. Jon, who is a personal injury attorney himself believes that undignified advertising gives the professsion a black eye and hurts all attorneys in the long run. He also believes that there are other, more dignified ways to advertise, citing Ben Glass or Bob Kraft.
I don't practice personal injury law, so I'm immune to any direct, adverse impacts that undignified advertising has on other attorneys. Still, I have to believe that to the extent that undignified advertising has negative consequences, then lawyers like the Heavy Hitter would stop doing it. Obviously, ads like Heavy Hitter hit home with clients - and if that's the case, lawyers who dislike those ads should find a more effective approach, or try to inform prospective clients that they shouldn't necessarily pick a lawyer because he or she has the flashiest TV ad.
Continue Reading...Via Ben Cowgill, I learned about Jim Calloway's announcement about the Oklahoma Bar's website for Starting A Law Firm. Even if you're not starting a practice in Oklahoma, there's quite a bit that you can learn from the resources at the site.
Continue Reading...As if it weren't enough that multiple bloggers continue to go solo, the number of blogs on solo practice are also proliferating. Welcome three newcomers, Ray Dowd of Small Firm Life, Victor Medina's Solo Law Practice Blog, and Take the Fifth (launched in December 2005) about an Estate Planning attorney building a practice. Is solo practice the most blogged about topic these days or what?!
As more law firm bloggers turn solo (including this one), Supreme small firm lawyer Tom Goldstein, bucks the trend with his recent announcement that he's moving on to join a large firm. I've got mixed feelings about this one. On the one hand, Tom's move is testament to my belief that solo practice can take you anywhere and create opportunities you'd have never had. Prior to founding his firm in 1999, Tom worked at a large, then midsized firm where chances are, he'd have been lucky to argue one case before the Supreme Court. On his own, as of May 2005, Tom has argued forteen, which has bought him unparalled experience that he's used to write his own ticket at a large firm. No reason why Tom's model can't work for any other lawyer toiling at biglaw - you can leave, develop a niche practice area and return on your own terms.
Continue Reading...I like to think that I'm pretty good at multi-tasking but reading this post by Greatest American Lawyer tired me out. In a couple of three minute intervals that would have otherwise gone wasted, GAL added two items to the firm extranet, Practicing Law from the Kitchen Table and in the Car, dictated instructions to staff so that they'll stay busy while GAL's out all day at depositions and added a post to his blog. The next time you wonder how some people find the time to do so much, re-read GAL's post because it gives the answer: don't waste a minute.
Frequently, either in emails to this site or on my listserves, I see questions by lawyers asking about "of counsel" arrangements, from how to find these relationships to what kind of contract should be used to memorialize them. So I was happy to see that
Dennis Kennedy has done the work for us with this recent post on resources for an of counsel arrangement. Thanks Dennis - this will surely be indispensable to many lawyers.
A Nevada attorney, Glen Lerner, is challenging an ethics decision that prohibits him from calling himself "The Heavy Hitter," according to this article, Lawyer to Sue Over Heavy Hitter Name. What's even sillier than the title "Heavy Hitter" is the bar's reason for banning it: the bar believes that Lerner's use of the term is misleading because it gives the public the impression that he is the only Heavy Hitter. The article reports that reviously, Lerner had a run in with the bar over a television ad where a giant phone falls on a victim - and the bar believed that the ad could generate undue anxiety.
I don't know whether Lerner's the only heavy hitting lawyer in town. But one things for sure. With this kind of reasoning, the Nevada Bar shows that it's a lightweight.
This article, A small firm's approach to competition - go paperless (Biz Journal 2/27/06) reports on Baltimore area, solo attorney Adam Spence who's been able to limit his office to one large file cabinet as a result of his decision to go paperless. The cost - $1300 for a top of the line scanner. Clients' reactions and convenience? Priceless.
Proving that solo and small firm lawyers don't have a monopoly on good marketing ideas, this Press Release announces Thompson, Hine's weekly casual gatherings every Wednesday where "clients, friends of the firm and existing clients" are encouraged to stop in and chat "off the meter." It's a neat idea that a solo or small firm could readily adopt. I just wonder, though, whether Thompson, Hine screens its meetings - because otherwise what's to stop competitors from showing up to chat and introduce themselves to firm clients?
In a short while, my first batch of posts (unfortunately, slim, as it's a slow news day) will appear at law.com's Legal Blog Watch, which I'll be writing with Bob Ambrogi. This opportunity - as a writer - came serendipitously, not something that I actively sought. Just more testament to the power of the blogs and the magic of the universe when you keep yourself open to possibility.
My beat here, won't change one bit. I love being one of a growing chorus of voices on solo practice and one of its loudest cheerleaders and I love watching how the face of solo practice is changing with more and more people who'd have never considered solo practice before now choosing it as an option. At Legal Blog Watch, I expect that I'll cover somewhat broader issues, including more discussion of substantive legal topics. I'd love to hear your ideas for where I can take the Blog Watch column in the future.
On the surface, the two articles that I'm linking in this post have nothing in common or nothing to do with solo practice. But if you look deeper, you'll see the obvious connection: both offer ideas for niche practice. This article, Lawyer's specialty: Advice for gay, unmarried couples, Pittsburgh Post Gazette (2/27/06) describes a biglaw attorney who specializes in "non-traditional family law practice," while this article,
Senate discusses DS, legal services (2/27/2006), reports on a University of North Dakota student meeting that discussed the possibility of allocating $40,000 to retain an attorney to deal with student legal issues.
Serving students or non-traditional families are both niches. Would they work for you?
As we wrote here, first it was Dennis and Kevin, then the Appealing Howard. Today, Ernie the Attorney joins this distinguished group of A-list bloggers turned solo with this announcement of his decision to birth a new firm in his home city that's experiencing its own rebirth in the wake of Katrina. Way to go Ernie - you bring grace, class and visibility to Shingles everywhere.
Enter keywords:
| An Affiliate of the Law.com Network |
||||
| ||||
 | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
|
||||
