My Shingle

By now, you’ve probably read about Stacy Ehrisman, the Georgia attorney who filed a judicial complaint against immigration judge J. Daniel Pelletier after he denied her unopposed continuance request due to maternity leave and then berated her when she showed up with her four-week old infant in tow.  Lots of female commenters – Staci Zaretsky,  Above the Law, Alaina Sullivan, freelance attorney, Modvive and Caitlin White, MTV – took  the judge to task for sexism – both for refusing to accommodate Ehrisman’s schedule and humiliating her in the courtroom.

But was the judge a sexist?  I’m not so sure.  Law is an uncertain business and there are never guarantees that a request for a continuance will be granted, even when it’s unopposed.  All lawyers – and solos in particular, who often struggle to find back up – deal with this kind of uncertainty every day. But until we start using technology to cut down on the number of onerous and useless in-person scheduling conferences that run up client bills (geez, why not just use Doodle?), juggling court dates is always just a little like Russian Roulette.  My guess is that most lawyers, male or female, requesting family based leave from Judge Pelletier could expect the same result as Ehrisman received.

Likewise, there’s no question that Judge Pelletier’s remarks to Ehrisman were way out of line.  But seems that Judge Pelletier is also a big bully – and nasty as his remarks were to Ehrisman, they pale in comparison to his reported treatment of detainees.   [click to continue…]

{ 0 comments }

A recent decision by a New York court, rejecting a law firm’s breach of contract claim to recover $2.3 million in legal fees from a client highlights both the importance of a detailed written representation agreement and yet another reason to consider adopting flat fees.

According to the New York Law Journal, Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman were retained in July 2011 by a hedge fund manager and his company to file a discrimination suit against a New York coop for rejecting an application to purchase a new unit. A little more than a year and $3.2 million in legal fees later, the firm withdrew from representation, citing an unpaid balance of $2.3 million in fees.

Subsequently – and in a move that’s often the kiss of death for law firms – Kasowitz sued to recover the unpaid balance from its former client. Notwithstanding that a court referee found that the firm was entitled to the $2.3 million balance, Judge Anil Singh denied Kasowitz’s summary judgment motion to recover the full amount due, citing triable issues, in particular the firm’s compliance with New York’s rules on client engagement agreements. [click to continue…]

{ 13 comments }

Slowly but surely, these times they are a changing. In Ethics Opinion 1025, the New York State Bar Association (NYSBA) clarified that its advertising rules – which require lawyers to list a physical address on letterhead and business cards – does not “independent mandate for attorneys who advertise to maintain a physical office address.” What’s noteworthy about the opinion, however, is that it recognizes that a physical office is not necessarily presumptively more safe, secure or accountable from the perspective of the client. From the opinion:

First, a prospective client’s intelligent selection of a lawyer can be facilitated not merely by physical presence but also by the potential value (due to lower overhead) of having a lawyer who works solely through a virtual law office (where that can be done competently, as we address below). Second, some clients who work only virtually might also prefer, for some kinds of work, the lawyer who operates virtually as well.  Third, the robustness of electronic communications, and the appointment of a virtual law office service as an agent for accepting service of process, effectively combine to eliminate any concern that a physical office is necessary in all cases for the receipt of service and other communications.  Indeed, as N.Y. City 2014-2 points out, the more electronically-connected lawyer may be “at least as accessible as a lawyer who rents a dedicated physical office space.” We note that physical offices almost always are open only on a limited schedule. Finally, there is nothing inherently misleading about advertising a virtual law office.  All such advertising must be truthful and not misleading, and the inquirer here intends to disclose that all services are conducted virtually and not via a physical office.

[click to continue…]

{ 3 comments }

Biglaw Manages, Solo Manages to Do

by Carolyn Elefant on October 10, 2014 · 2 comments

in MyShingle Solo

In any universe other than the one inside the Beltway, attorney Paul Zukerberg would be the overwhelmingly favorite to serve as the first elected Attorney General of the District of Columbia. Zukerberg has the legal chops for the job; he’s practiced law in Washington D.C. for twenty-eight years, focusing on complex traumatic brain injury cases on the civil side to and marijuana and drug possession on the criminal sides.

But Zukerberg doesn’t just practice law, he changes it too. He’s been instrumental in galvanizing the movement to decriminalize pot in DC – which took effect in July 2014. And in fact, there wouldn’t even be a direct DC Attorney General election this fall at all but for Zukerberg’s successful lawsuit  to overturn a DC Council decision to postpone the elections until 2018.

Yet despite Zukerberg’s vast body of work, the Washington Post questions his qualifications and ultimately, endorsed his opponent, Karl Racine. The reason? Racine hails from venerable Venable, a prominent D.C. based big law firm, while Zukerberg’s solo. And in a stratified company town like DC, it doesn’t matter what solos do or how much they accomplish (including beating big law at the Supremes), at the end of the day, they’re still small potatoes in comparison to big law.  [click to continue…]

{ 2 comments }

Move over, vanity license plates emblazoned with slogans like NTGUILTY, or call lines like  1-800-SUE-THEM. Beginning today, lawyers everywhere will have yet another means to brazenly trumpet their presence as the gtld  (generic top level domain names) .lawyer and .attorney become generally available for registration. That’s right, by tonight, the web will be littered with declarative URLs like CallMy.Lawyer or WorldsBest.Attorney or more banal but descriptive ones like NewYorkCityPersonalInjury.Lawyer.

Still, while seemingly related to dozens of other poor taste forms of lawyer branding, the new lawyer and attorney dots aren’t just another type of digital beauty mark. As I’ll discuss below, only licensed lawyers in good standing qualify to register these new domains, and thus, the domains act as a quick proxy to distinguish real lawyers from the dozens of  #newlaw, lead-hen and pay per click sites that dominate Google searches for lawyers.  The only remaining kink: will the ethics regulators view registrar regulation of lawyers’ license status an encroachment on their turf and declare lawyer use of the new domains a prohibited deceptive practice?

Before reaching the larger policy questions, let’s take a look at how the new domains work and more importantly, whether solos and smalls should consider registration. By way of background, back in 2012, ICANN, the non-profit organization that oversees creation and management of domain names announced that it would expand the limited registry of gtld (such as .com, .org and .gov) to include law related terms such as .legal, .law, .lawyer and .attorney.  On October 8, 2014 following a sunrise phase, in which trademark holders could register domains matching their trademarks, .lawyer and .attorney will become generally available for any lawyer to register. [click to continue…]

{ 5 comments }

Women Lawyers Now Biglaw Managing Partners. And we care because…?

October 6, 2014 by Carolyn Elefant

Today’s Wall Street Journal reports that two major law firms, BryanCave and MorganLewis each named women as managing partners, a first for both firms. So now, in the words of Therese Pritchard, Bryan Cave’s new managing partner, “younger women think that they can do it too.” Yet is big law partnership what younger women want?  […]

Read more Work/Life Balance & Women 2 comments

Playing the Cards You’re Dealt

October 6, 2014 by Carolyn Elefant

Let’s just say that 2014 hasn’t been a banner year for me. The trade association I co-founded nine years ago and helped grow to 55 members at its peak imploded. I lost a motion that I’ve never had denied- nor ever even seen denied in 25 years of practice – and  managed to pull out […]

Read more Encouragement 14 comments

Try Before You Buy: Can Testing Potential Hires Work for Solo and Small Law Firms

September 15, 2014 by Carolyn Elefant

We’ve all been there. After months of sitting on the fence about bringing an assistant or paralegal or associate on board to help dig you out from under, you place an ad or ask around to colleagues for recommendations. You’re encouraged when you identify a job candidate who looks great on paper or comes highly […]

Read more Growing Your Practice 7 comments

Future Fridays: Hitch Your Niche To Another Law Firm

September 12, 2014 by Carolyn Elefant

The niche practice as the future of law is also yesterday’s news. Meaning that the benefits of niche practice have been well documented forever, nowhere more extensively than at Chuck Newton’s Third Wave Blog, which is jam packed with dozens of niche practice ideas. But I don’t like re-blogging old territory. So here’s a little […]

Read more Future Fridays 3 comments

Whose Client Is It Anyway?

September 9, 2014 by Carolyn Elefant

Rob Jordan’s recent Above the Law column, The (Alleged) Uber-fication of Legal Services  comprehensively compares the latest crop of  lawyer match-making services and platforms designed to connect consumers and small business clients to lawyers. One of the characteristics that Jordan examines in distinguishing between services like Upcounsel, Priori, Law Kick or Law Dingo is “data […]

Read more Marketing & Making Money 4 comments