My Shingle

MyShingle Is Proud to Be Part of the 18 Percent

Carolyn Elefant — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 16:51:42 +0000

Solos comprise at least 60 percent of practicing lawyers, yet that’s not always apparent from mainstream legal publications which focus largely on the accomplishments of and matters relevant to large firm practice. Slowly, however, blogs are chipping away at the legal caste system that by giving solos a powerful megaphone to influence the law and our profession. This year’s ABA Blawg 100 is proof. Solo bloggers comprise 18 percent of the top 100; twenty percent if you eliminate the dozen blogs in the News and Opinions categories which are occupied by professional journalists and academics.

What’s more – if you look at the solo blogs included in the top 100 (the majority are in the criminal defense category with the remainder spread between LPM, Tech and Niche), you’ll find that most of them don’t just focus narrowly on legal issues or dutifully report on recent cases with nothing more. Instead, most solo bloggers are addressing big picture issues – from the ethics of lawyer marketing and conduct (six of the ABA Top 100 Blawgs, albeit not just solos, are defendants in Rakofsky Sues the Internet), the relevance of legal education the policy implications of Supreme Court decisions and most of all, what it’s like to practice as solo lawyer in today’s world. I am honored to be included in the 18 percent – and awed at MyShingle’s inclusion in the ABA Blawg 100 for the fifth year running.

CDLs Putting Us Other Solos to Shame

Carolyn Elefant — Wed, 29 Dec 2010 14:52:52 +0000

For the second year in a row, Scott Greenfield is running a contest for the best criminal law blog post for 2010. Because I’ve been so busy these days, I only read a handful regularly – though I also visit posts with headlines that catch my eye or that friends highlight on Twitter or FB. So I’ve already seen many (but not all) of the fine submissions to Scott’s contest, though I don’t feel qualified to nominate any selections (but you definitely should).

Even if you don’t nominate anything, take a look at the submissions so far. Some of the posts are nostalgic or probing, others bleed with a sense of frustration or hopelessness, while others are wickedly funny. Reading these posts, I can’t help but envy the familiarity that these criminal defense bloggers have with their craft and the deft, breezy way that they can sketch out the issues and law. The posts betray an intimacy, a passion and many lawyers never find.

Many of the CDLs are also solos, and as such, some of the posts mentioned offer a peek inside the life of a solo or small firm lawyer who’s either learning his craft or sharing the lessons.
But not all solos are CDLs, and I got to wondering about where the soulful solo blogs are. The ones that write openly about the real challenges of getting a practice off the ground, or lyrically, about the thrill of that first client walking through the door or the agony of losing a case that should have been won, with terrible consequences. The kind of stuff that humanizes you to potential clients.

These days, most solo and small firm blogs (not talking about those on substantive topics – plenty of great ones there) are comprised of a bunch of practice management or marketing tidbits, full of help but short on heart. These days, the strictly solo blogs that touch me most are Peter Olson’s Solo in Chicago which is practical, yes, but grounded in his own experiences and Bruce Cameron’s lyrical Rural Lawyer. I know that there are more, particularly newer solo blogs that maybe haven’t yet found their sea-legs, but I haven’t seen them. Of course, I realize that blogging about starting a practice is a tough sell – after all, if you’re going to go through the trouble of blogging, you might as well spend your effort on showing your expertise in a practice area that will earn you money. But still, it would be nice for us solo and small firm lawyers to have our own genre.

So, I’ll leave you with this. First, if I’ve missed out on other terrific solo blogs written by solo or small firm lawyers, please send me the links below. Second, if you ever feel like writing a post – something honest and raw – about starting your firm or lessons learned or your failures or success – send it my way. I do not want marketing posts. I do not want pat little essays on “I started with nothing and six months later I was on my way.” No cotton candy sweet stuff that dissolves from your memory 20 seconds after reading it. I what the kinds of posts that stick in your mind, months and years later. Like every one of these.

A Match Made in the Blogosphere

Carolyn Elefant — Tue, 12 Oct 2010 13:03:24 +0000

From afar, they seemed like opposites: a tough New York City criminal law trench warrior with disdain for high faultin’ academics and a talent for effortless and abundant insights and a world-travelling, West Coast civil litigator with a global practice and a penchant for literature and a knack brevity. Yet they spoke each others’ language, shared the same thoughts and railed against the loss of old-fashioned values like work ethic or fealty to clients in a decidedly twenty-first century way: through blogging. So it wasn’t any surprise, really, when I heard first, via Press Release from Dan Hull, followed by Scott Greenfield’s public announcement that the two had joined forces, with Scott coming onboard Dan’s firm as of counsel on corporate criminal matters and investigations.

The HullMcGuire and Greenfield collaboration isn’t the only one birthed by blogging. Idaho-based IP lawyer and blogger Steve Nipper last month announced that he’s joined forces with Ohio-based IP lawyer-blogger, Matt Buchanan to form the bi-state law firm, Buchanan, Nipper. And as the prologue to Social Media for Lawyers describes, my co-author Nicole Black and I first met through blogs.

Say what you will about the demise of blogging (though I do agree with Nicole Black’s observation that blogging has changed over the years) but even today with so many other competing social media formats, blogging still serves the craving that humans have had since the days of the Greek Agora, for a public place to debate, to argue, to bond over ideas. Which is why blogging, in some form or another, will forever thrive. Moreover, as technology decimates geographic limits, blogging will take on even more importance for solo and small firm lawyers, as a source for finding like-minded colleagues anywhere in the world to partner with on cases, books and even law firms.

As for Scott and Dan, my best wishes for the success of your collaboration. That which blogging has joined together, let no ghostblogger or slackoisie tear asunder.

Have you ever found a lawyer or other professional to team up with through a blog? Please share your thoughts below.

Yet Another Reason Not to Use Canned Content

Carolyn Elefant — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:32:51 +0000

Courtesy of Professor Eric Goldman, here’s yet another reason to avoid canned content or ghostwritten materials in law firm newsletters, and by extension, blogs: it’s a sure-fire way to convert ordinary, First Amendment protected content into regulated advertising.

Holtzman v. Turza (N.D. Ill. August 3, 2010) serves as a cautionary tale of what happens to attorneys who don’t recognize the difference between content and copy. In Holtzman, an Illinois attorney retained a marketing company to prepare and circulate a newsletter on his firm’s behalf. The newsletter contained articles prepared by the marketing firm without input from the attorney, but was prominently branded with the attorney’s name, contact information and head-shot. Every two weeks, the marketing company faxed the newsletter to a group of accountants whose contact information the attorney had purchased from the Illinois CPA Society.

The accountants brought a class action suit against the attorney, seeking $4,215,000 in statutory damages for violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), 47 U.S.C. § 227. In a motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff-accountants argued that the faxes constituted prohibited advertising under the TCPA.

The court agreed. Among the factors militating in favor of its finding that the faxes constituted advertising, the court emphasized the prominence of the lawyer’s branding, which consumed a full 25 percent of each page of the publication as well as the fact that the publications were sent not by the attorney, but by his agent as “part of a paid marketing campaign.” Accordingly, the court concluded that the attorney:

has provided no facts to show that his genuine, primary motivation in paying Top of Mind [marketer] to distribute the Daily Plan-It was to educate CPAs and his business contacts on various industry-related topics rather than to build brand recognition and solicit business referrals for his law practice.

Goldman opines that this would have been a much more difficult case “if the editorial hadn’t been ghostwritten because the newsletter’s educative intent would have been clearer.” I agree. It’s hard for lawyers to argue that their communications are intended to educate or inform the public when they don’t prepare, or even oversee preparation of, those communications themselves.

Some lawyers may shrug aside this issue, assuming either cynically or ignorantly that the distinction between ghostwritten and lawyer-created content is a matter of semantics; that courts will deem either communication as “advertising” so long as a lawyer’s contact information is attached to it. But that’s not so, at least if the New York Court of Appeals’ 2009 decision in Stern v. Bluestone carries any weight. There, in a landmark ruling secured by the blawgosphere’s own Scott Greenfield, the court held that the unsolicited, informational faxes prepared and distributed by solo Andrew Lavoot Bluestone on legal malpractice issues are not prohibited advertisements under the TCPA. The court was smart enough to recognize the difference between Bluestone’s newsletters — which contained substantive, lawyer-prepared content that varied with each issue and did not promote commercial products — are an entirely different animal from an outsourced piece of advertising fluff.

As I’ve written before, the rulings in these fax cases hold implications for blogs as well. Just as outsourced or ghostwritten faxes are considered advertising for purposes of the TCPA, so too ghostwritten, dreck blogs are more likely to be treated as advertising for the purposes of regulation. It’s just unfortunate that in an effort to save time, those lawyers who outsourcing blogging don’t realize the true cost: the potential loss of our First Amendment rights.

Ghostbusting in the Blogosphere: Is Ghostblogging Unethical & What’s the Best Way to Deal With It?

Carolyn Elefant — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 08:05:07 +0000

Back in 2004, now my departed-from-the-blogosphere friend David Giacalone predicted that Ghostblogging Will Kill the Blogosphere. In a thoughtful post that considered the issue from all sides, David criticized the ethics of ghost blogging and lamented that that mass produced, ghostblogs would be “devoid of the spark of life that has put magic into this way of communicating and created a community.”

Six years later, the blogosphere thrives (though still not the same without David’s wisdom), and ghost blogging remains a perennial topic of conversation. David revisited the ghost blogging issue in 2006 as did several other bloggers in 2007. And this past month, Mark Bennett raised the issue anew at Social Media Tyro, followed by Scott Greenfield at Simple Justice. Both Mark and Scott condemn ghost blogging and link to a Jenni Buchanan’s Legal Ghostblogging site which listed the lawyers who’d used her services. And now, Scott’s and Mark’s decision to call out the lawyers who use ghost bloggers itself has been questioned by DC criminal lawyer Jamison Koehler as well as in more comments at Social Media Tyro.

So what to make of all of this? Here are my thoughts.

First off, on the issue of e-shaming or call outs foremost, that’s the First Amendment at work. (though I agree with much of Jamie’s post, I wouldn’t characterize Mark’s or Scott’s critiques as cyberbullying). Sometimes the First Amendment means that you (or me for that matter) get a little roughed up. That’s the nature of discourse.

Having said that, I don’t criticize Mark or Scott for outing the ghostblogging lawyers, since Buchanan’s clients willingly provided testimonials and in doing so, put themselves out there. Nor do I take issue with Brian Tannebaum’s decision to disclose lawyer marketers with tainted ethics records (in fact I interviewed him about it here) because frankly, that information is public record (even Avvo lists ethics violations).

Nevertheless, I’m far less comfortable with criticisms like this one about the lawyers embroiled in the Total Attorneys ethics mess or “naming names” of lawyers who advertise on what Eric Turkewitz has termed dreck blogs. As I commented on both blogs, the lawyers who subscribed to services offered by Findlaw and Total Attorneys, both of which are ABA sponsors, most likely believed that the ABA had vetted these companies’ practices before accepting their sponsorship dollars. Though an ABA or bar stamp of approval doesn’t give lawyers a pass, at a time where bars are providing little guidance and ethics related to social media are in a state of flux, I think that the more appropriate response in this category of cases is a behind the scenes education or a generally educational post rather than a public tarring. (moreover, the ABA and bar associations deserve criticism – and I’ve got a post coming on this as I promised in these comments).

And ultimately, that’s my biggest problem with some of the e-shaming posts: they focus on the conduct of a group of lawyers and in doing so, waste an opportunity to educate a wider spectrum. Let’s take the issue of ghost blogging. For all of the controversy and hype generated by the recent posts on ghost blogging, the general consensus by a broad cross section of bloggers in 2004, 2006, 2007 and now is that ghost blogging is wrong for the following reasons:

1. Ghost blogging by lawyers is deceptive and therefore unethical

(Actually, the ethics Q is the toughest, so it gets a bit of discussion. In my view, ghost blogging is different from speech writing or “ad copy” since politicians don’t owe the public the same ethical duty that we lawyers owe to clients. And it’s different from outsourcing a brief where the supervising lawyer generally has some input and often lists a contract lawyer or associate. Also, bear in mind that some courts prohibit undisclosed ghostwriting of court pleadings for pro se litigants, finding that concealing the participation of a lawyer behind the scenes gives pro se’s an unfair advantage. Finally, writing web copy, bios and such (discussed in these comments) is also different from my perspective. Though I think lawyers should do it themselves, that kind of writing is descriptive rather than opinion oriented, so I have less of problem with it.

To me, true blogging is personal so I apply the telephone test. I might have my assistant take a call for me, but I’d never ask her to pretend to be me on the phone. And if I did, that would be unethical.) Same with Facebook, Twitter and other media where the public expects that it’s ME communicating.

2. Ghost blogging is inauthentic and ruins an opportunity for meaningful discourse

3. Ghost blogging is ineffective, because without a genuine voice behind blogs, they’re not particularly compelling

4. Ghost blogging is potentially a threat to the public since ghostbloggers are not lawyers and may provide mis-information to prospective clients.

5. In an internet age, ghostblogging, and specifically use of canned content can embarrass you, since clients searching for lawyers online may come across many blogs with the same posts (as is the case with this ghostwritten blog)

So what about lawyers who are dead set on blogging, either because (1) in theory, they like the idea of educating clients but don’t have the skills or time to do it, or because (2) some marketer told them to do it. Here’s my advice:

1. Realize that there are plenty of ways to get the word out about your practice. You’ve got to choose the ones that make the most sense for you. Some lawyers love to go to bar events and participate on committees, some lawyers love to write, so they blog. If you don’t like to write, then don’t blog. There’s no shame in that.

2. If you like the idea of providing educational resources to clients, you can still do so through a blog. Just do it honestly. As I’ve suggested before, you can hire a law student to research and write blog posts under your supervision (as commenters to the post pointed out, supervision is very important since new attorneys may leave out information) and then give them a byline. In fact, in a down economy, paying new grads to write posts for you can help them earn a little cash as they look for work.

Or, if you’re dead set on buying canned content, include a prominent disclaimer. I suggest something like this:

The Model Code of Professional Responsibility encourages lawyers to educate the public about the law. At the same time, I owe a duty to zealously represent my clients, which leaves me little time to provide public education. Still, because I believe in the importance of providing these resources, I have purchased and reviewed [educational articles/materials/blogpost] from X company which offer a good overview of the [bankruptcy, estates, wills - you fill in the blank] and that will inform you about the basic issues. Bear in mind that these materials are not written by lawyers, but are simply intended to explain basic concepts in a general manner. If you have any further questions about your matter, please feel free to contact me. THIS IS ATTORNEY ADVERTISING.*

In this way, you’re providing a valuable service and further, showing clients that education is important enough that you’re willing to pay to provide it.

David Giacalone was spot on when he predicted that mcblogging might cheapen the quality of debate in the blogosphere. After all, most of those blogs are not necessarily anything to write home about. But even with ghost blogging, the blogosphere still thrives. As this very debate over ghost blogging shows, so long as enough lawyers blog authentically, vigorously, intelligently and passionately, the blogosphere will rock on.

UPDATE – Two more ideas for busy lawyers who want to blog. First, group blogs. If you don’t have time to write more than one or two posts a month, you could band together with a few other lawyer/bloggers whom you trust. You’d each have a byline for your own post, but your clients would get the benefit fo a steady stream of content, plus any discourse between the participating bloggers. Second, dictation. Dictate posts on a drive to court and have an assistant transcribe them. Again, perhaps this won’t produce the most substantive post, but at least it’s your work.

*An advertising disclaimer is appropriate because there’s a specific call to action associated with the disclaimer that I proposed. For blogs that provide pure educational content without a specific call to action, it’s my opinion that an advertising disclaimer isn’t necessary (in my view, general contact information or a link to your blog on your about page, is not, a “call to action” that would convert an otherwise educational blog into advertising). Of course, check your bar’s rules on this one!!!

Blogging: It’s a Matter of Trust

Carolyn Elefant — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 17:49:14 +0000

Call me old fashioned, but I believe that my word is my bond, something that you can trust. My blog is comprised of many, many words, all of which form a trusted bond with my audience and other bloggers. I worked hard to establish this trust and I take it seriously, as do most legitimate bloggers. We know that if we are dishonest with readers, we betray their trust and degrade the institution of blogging. Moreover, as lawyers, we have an added ethics obligations to portray ourselves honestly.

Now that I’ve explained my perspective, perhaps you’ll understand why I’m so upset about the recent revelation by prominent copywriter blogger James Chartrand, the so-called front man at Men With Pens, that “he” is really a “she.” As Chartrand explains over at Copyblogger, she created a male persona because as a woman, she faced so much gender bias that she couldn’t earn enough to support her family. But as a male, Chartrand found the financial success that eluded her as a female.

So what’s wrong with this picture? Well, nothing, except if you consider that Chartrand used her blog to preach the importance of transparency at posts like this or this. Yet, Chartrand apparently didn’t believe that the rules of transparency applied to her.

Even worse, Chartrand didn’t simply omit information about her identity – for example, by hiding her gender behind an ambiguous name, ala JK Rowling or SE Hinton or a cloak of anonymity. Anonymity signals to readers that the blogger is trying to avoid disclosure but in many sensitive situations (for example, like that of Gideon, the public defender blogger or when David Lat blogged at Underneath Their Robes), it may be the only option, and readers can respect that choice.

But Chartrand did more than simply leave out information about her personal life or use a fake name. Instead, she intentionally created a completely false persona. Chartrand called herself a front man for her all male company, and described herself several times as a dad. She dissed mommy bloggers for being intolerant when she (then posing as he) “risked [her] balls” to comment in their online fora. She concocted a bogus excuse for not putting a photo of herself on the site. Even taking at face value Chartrand’s contention that her kids would have starved if she didn’t pose as a male (and it’s hard for me to take anything that this blogger says at face value anymore), there were many other less offensive ways that Chartrand could have kept her gender hidden without creating an entirely fake facade.

To Chartrand’s credit, she’s built up enough of a fan base that her flock has either applauded or forgiven her. As for me, I’d have reservations about hiring a service provider who’s not been honest on her blog. I’m a lawyer and even an inadvertent ethics related misjudgment could put my license on the line. There are already too many seemingly legitimate lawyer marketing scams and schemes to get lawyers into trouble. So why take a chance on working with someone who’s demonstrated a willingness to cut corners on the truth just to make a buck? [edit - I might change my views on Chartrand down the line because I don't believe that one error of judgment should doom one's career permanently. But rebuilding my trust will take time, especially when Chartrand does not even express any remorse about misleading readers].

Let’s just be clear about one thing, though. The reason that I wouldn’t hire James Chartrand has nothing to do with gender, and everything to do with lack of transparency. As Kevin O’Keefe says here, lawyers need to know whether a prospective blog or social media consultant whether they walk the walk. In this situation, if the only way that a copywriter can figure out how to sell services is by being dishonest, well, then, that’s probably not the kind of person I want to work with. As a female lawyer, I don’t have the luxury of pretending to be a guy to generate business – unless I want to lose my license.

Some might argue that one’s gender or identity isn’t material to the substance of the blog or the product that one can produce. I disagree, for several reasons. First, when it comes to truth-in-blogging, a bright line test is critical because otherwise the line will keep moving. If we say that it’s alright to create a false persona around something like looks or gender, does that mean that it’s alright to lie about our credentials? Can we claim that we handled cases that we didn’t? Create war stories about glory days in court that never happened? At what point do lies completely destroy a blog’s credibility? .

If this were just a story about a single blogger or a service provider, I could let it pass. But it speaks to a bigger lesson: the obligation that we bloggers owe our readers. Blogging gives us a powerful tool – the ability to create an authentic image online and to build trusted relationships with readers that they don’t have with other forms of media. When we betray that trust, we ruin our relationship with readers and open ourselves up to increased regulation (as the FTC is already doing with recently announced policy on blogger endorsements). At the end of the day, blogging is a matter of trust. Those bloggers who aren’t willing to honor the trust with our readers, shouldn’t be calling themselves bloggers. Marketers, advertisers or hucksters, perhaps. But not bloggers.

[note - last 3 paragraphs modified, 12/15/09, 8:15 am]

Blawg Review #215

Carolyn Elefant — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 02:25:49 +0000

It’s 2:30 am on the morning of World Oceans Day, as I sit here drowning in a sea of submissions for Blawg Review #215. Buoy, I’m in trouble, with a sinking feeling about all I have yet to do. But before I sail into the heart of this post, let me share with you why I accepted Ed.’s invitation to host this particular issue of Blawg Review.

Today, June 8 marks the first official World Oceans Day, which has been unofficially celebrated since 2009 when the concept was first propsed by Canada at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janiero. The United Nations’ World Ocean Day Resolution explains that “The official designation of World Oceans Day is an opportunity to raise global awareness of the current challenges faced by the international community in connection with the oceans.”

But what’s the connection between MyShingle — a blog that inspires solos, small firms and aspiring solos — and Oceans Day? Well, for those of you who don’t know me outside of my life as a splashy, celebrity blogger, turns out that I actually have a rather pedestrian day job paddling along as a practicing lawyer. One of my areas of expertise is marine renewable energy development, a specialization that I developed as a baby solo because no one else was doing it (fittingly, that’s called a Blue Ocean Strategy – the process of identifying uncontested market space so that competition is irrelevant).

Having blogged about marine renewables for nearly six years, I know that the marine terrain offer all kinds of swell puns that could help me structure Blawg Review #215. (Can you count how many I’ve floated already?) So without further ado, let’s plunge in and explore the treasures of this week’s blogosphere.

Let me first caution you to hang on – I’m way behind schedule now, so you’re in for a choppy ride. We’ll start with some of the current posts ocean related law, such as this summary of Mineral Managements Service regulations for issuing leases for renewable energy projects on the Outer Continental Shelf, what the Waxman Markey Energy Bill means for marine renewable energy and efforts to protect oceans from increased acidification. There’s also an interesting post at Hawaii Ocean Law blog on Supreme Court nominee Sotomayor’s decisions on maritime law.

I don’t expect that we’ll be fighting off any pirates today, at least the run of the mill kind from Somalia who terrorized the high seas last month. But over at Sonya Smith Valentine’s Consumer Law Blog, we’ll pass three other varieties of pirates: fraudulent charity-telemarketers who are now under attack by the FTC, aggressive debt collectors (now shut down by the state of New York) and those villanous credit card companies who may have to reform their usurious ways under proposed federal legislation. Meanwhile, if you’re interested in preventing mutiny on deck by your summer work force, be sure to comply with the laws governing unpaid interns, highlighted at Joseph Dang’s San Diego Small Business Law Blog.

As we head further out, we’ll hit the deep sea, where little or no light penetrates. There’s little known about the deep sea because of the difficulty of exploring this zone of the ocean, but many scientists would love to expand knowledge of this unknown area. By contrast, when it comes to bloggers whose identities are unknown, there’s been recent debate in the blogosphere about the propriety of a great reveal. In this instance, the recent outing of John Blevins of Obsidian Wings by National Review’s Ed Whelan (purportedly in retaliation for Blevins’ critique of Whelan here) set off the debate. James Joyner at Outside the Beltway says outing is OK in some circumstances, Ron Coleman doesn’t have much sympathy for those who blog under cover (“And I say if you’re prepared to shoot out someone else’s lights, whether or not he is “blogging for a living,” then be prepared to have your’n popped, too.”) and Instapundit rounds up more posts on both sides.

Out here in the ocean, we’ll pass some whales – or at least by Wales, where one school is banning goggle from swim class, according to Cathy Gellis. And don’t miss the sea cows, which may reshare early origins with the elephant (not to be confused, as some have with the Elefant). But that kind of evolutionary process will probably never occur in literature, where Marc Randazza points out that existing copyright law severely restricts derivative works – for example, the recent “sequel” by JD California to JD Salinger’s original work, Catcher in the Rye. And be careful if you choose to snap pictures of the Loch Ness Monster - because the images that you obtain may not reflect reality – a problem that some law firms are encountering when associates depart the firm, but their image links linger on the website.

Of course, we’ll pass some reefs (or more accurately, reefer) at Legal Juice, where a student was arrested for drug possession after pulling out a joint and smoking it following his recitation of an essay on why marijuana should be legalized. There’s a shipwreck at Adam Smith Esq. – that would be Bruce Macewen’s lengthy analysis of the demise of GM and what it means for law firms (“the challenge facing 21st Century law firm leaders is how to reconcile sophisticated business side management with a culture of professional excellence and innovation in legal practice and client service.”) If you’re interested in salvage, you can learn more about the bankruptcy issues and government rescue attempts concerning GM at the Ohio Practical Business Law Blog, The Congomerate and Concurring Opinions.

At this point, I can see shore and what looks like berries (though they’re just artificial). No girls gone wild in sight, just Courts Gone Mild. And I hear what sounds like a whole lot of Twittering – so lawyers and mediators may want to tread carefully in these parts. And speaking of treading, though some lawyer may feel as if they’re treading water these days, dissatisfied with careers, some are buoyed by the opportunities over the horizon as they embark on the solo practice journey later in life. Still others cling to pieces of driftwood, like the occasional telephone interview that could lead to new employment.

Fortunately, the law of the C didn’t have much applicability at my law school (or I might have been completely sunk!). But seems like some judges might rate a C these days – Supreme Court nominee Sotomayor for her possible ethics violations as using a law firm name that included “and associates” when she didn’t have any (H/T to Eric Turkewitz) and other New York appellate judges for the grammatical errors identified by Lisa Solomon at Legal Resarch and Writing Pro.

Anyway, we need to take care now, as there’s a recent maelstorm brewing over the recent Total Attorneys Get A Life Conference. Adrian Dayton celebrates the party-like atmosphere while Niki Black is feeling a little sea sick (well, depressed, but that’s off theme) that there’s such a need for conferences that reinforce the importance of getting a life. Meanwhile, Scott Greenfield accepts the decidedly unglamourous role of the Old Man and the Sea, reminding attendees that some lawyers are too busy representing clients and earning a living to attend these conferences – and that constant travel to conferences that don’t bear directly on one’s practice can compromise (rather than enhance) lawyers’ work life balance.

Stormy weather also predominates in biglaw land, where layoffs persist. But are the legal secondments that law firms like Mayer Brown are offering a safe harbor. Or are law firms’ pay-for-play offers just a temporary life boat, as Jordan Furlong suggests – in which associates will drift until someone builds a better vessel, beginning in law schools.

We’re making our way back to port now, only to be tossed back out to sea. And on that topic, Drug and Device Law Blog analyzes Carlsbad Technoloogy Inc. v. HIF Bio, a recent Supreme Court case holding that appellate courts can review remands in those situations where a federal court dismisses claims under federal law and tosses the case back to state court for consideration of the remaining state claims under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1367(c)(3).

In spite of the push back, we’re back in port – and I wanted to end on a positive note by reminding you that there’s still time to register for the FREE Going Solo in the New Economy (click the link to register) presented by Susan Cartier Liebel and me tomorrow (June 9) at noon EDT. Though the legal profession is embarking on troubled waters, we hope to show lawyers that by becoming the captain of your ship, you can chart a course for open seas or exciting adventure just over the horizon. So Carpe Diem – or, as we marine renewables lawyers like say, SEAS THE DAY!

Be sure to return to the good-ship Blawg Review next week for hop a across the pond to Family Lore for Blawg Review #216.

Do You Read Blog Archives?

Carolyn Elefant — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 07:45:17 +0000

Having blogged for over five years now, I’ve amassed a considerable body of archives, both here and here (pre 11/2004). But does anyone read archives? With so much currently available information, do blog readers ever re-visit the past?

I don’t want my older posts to fall into obscurity, so please let me know (1) whether you read archives and (2) in what situations you tend to read them. Also, let me know how you use blog archives – do you use the search tools at a blog to locate past posts of interest or sit down and read through past posts by topic or date? Please post your results in the comment section below — and I’ll try to do a follow up on this issue. And if you’ve already written about this topic, send me the link!

Reach Out And Make A Connection

Carolyn Elefant — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 16:05:23 +0000

Arnie Herz at Legal Sanity offers a great tip, echoed by What About Clients: reconnect with your business network so that you can continue to nurture and reinforce the trusted relationships that produce not only business referrals, but personal fulfillment. Taking a page from Curt Rosengren, Herz recommends that you try speaking with someone personally whom you know via email or the Internet, but haven’t actually spoken with. Why don’t you give it try?

Some Disparate Thoughts on Empowerment and Creating Opportunities Through Blogging

Carolyn Elefant — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:44:24 +0000

Many of us who decide to start a law firm do so to gain autonmy and take charge of our careers; to “own, not loan” our talent. So it’s no wonder that so many solo and small firm lawyers have an affinity towards blogging, which is just as empowering as starting a law firm. For example, over at my Legal Blogwatch beat, I wrote about how blogging offers an antidote to depression by giving lawyers a voice:

For lawyers who aren’t necessarily clinically depressed (which is a serious illness requiring medical intervention and professional help), but feeling angst or lingering malaise, one possible antidote (and by far, not the only one) is… blogging. Whereas law practice enslaves lawyers, blogging empowers, giving lawyers a unique voice in a world where they usually serve as a mouthpiece for others, giving them control over a domain, even if it’s just a tiny little piece of the Internet. Most importantly, blogging builds connections and conversation with others, and eradicates the sense of loneliness and isolation that serve as a breeding ground for depression.

And already, one commenter has agreed that blogging helped him to recover from a low point in his career.

But blogging goes beyond personal empowerment; it can create huge, life changing opportunities. In her comments to a post at Simple Justice, Sui Generis blogger, Nicole Black attributes her most recent credential as a Thomson-West book author to her blog.

But here’s one of the most exciting ways that blogs can change a life. Back in July, at my Renewables Offshore blog, I posted about William Kamkwamba, a twenty year old who blogged about his experience of building a windmill for his remote village in Malawi, and as a result, helped find funding for his education. His blog was featured as a Typepad Blog of the Day and more recently, Kamkwamba was featured on the cover of the Wall Street Journal.

If you think these results can’t happen to you, think again. As I’ve written before, some of the greatest opportunities for solos to soar happen by sheer, serendipitous accident – and if you blog, you just may find, some accidental success waiting to happen.