Imagine that your law firm issues the following Request for Proposals:
Busy solo practitioner seeking large firm to partner on pro bono matters for small, walk in clients with no funds to retain an attorney at full rates. Firm must turn these clients down in the absence of pro bono support. Matters include messy family law and custody battles, eviction proceedings, Fair Debt Collection Act matters, bankruptcy and lawsuits against small business without insurance coverage. Benefits include court time before sometimes unqualified, nasty judges, (as opposed to civilized federal practice) and learning to prioritize issues, cut corners due to cost constraints and practice law at less than your full ability due to lack of resources.
Now honestly, do you think you’d receive even a single response? Yet when large corporation Intel posted an RFP for lawyers to partner on pro bono firms, biglaw came running, according to this article, Intel Recruits Firms for Pro Bono Partnering. But don’t think for even a second that the firms had thoughts of winning a plum client through working side by side with Intel lawyers on pro bono matters:
Nixon Peabody pro bono partner Stacey Slater said her firm was
motivated by the opportunity to do a good deed, not the chance of
winning a new client. "That’s not at all why we’re doing this," she
said. "This partnership will help increase pro bono on both ends."
Do these people even believe what they are saying?