“Perception is reality,” is an old phrase known to all marketing and sales people.
The issue of the shaky status of older lawyers at large law firms refuses to die, as the de-equitization of partners “past their prime” continues.
Although corporate law firms have seen business improve since the depths of the Great Recession, things hardly are robust even today.
It’s no secret that law school does little to prepare young lawyers for practice realities in any size law firm. And now it has become increasingly clear that reality is catching up to law schools.
The law ultimately is a people business.
This column has regularly discussed how law school does little to prepare young lawyers for practice realities in any size law firm. It has become increasingly clear that reality is catching up to law schools.
Rule of Professional Conduct 1.15 states that lawyers have a professional duty to protect all documents relating to clients by requiring that client property and files be “appropriately safeguarded.”
Although corporate law firms have seen business improve since the depths of the Great Recession, things are hardly robust, according to an analysis from one of the best-known legal consulting firms that recently appeared in Bloomberg Businessweek.
In George Orwell’s novel “Animal Farm,” cows and sheep and horses threw off their human oppressors and united to govern themselves under the slogan “all animals are equal” … until the pigs took control and modified the slogan to say, “all animals are equal – but some are more equal than others.”
Years ago, when I managed a company in the food industry, I met with a retail buyer who pulled out his computer analysis of how quickly products moved through his billing system. He made the criticism that my company’s products didn’t sell so quickly when compared to cheese or soap that were also tracked on his printouts.
In the current law firm world, everyone — lawyers and staff — is affected by the ongoing transformation in client expectations and legal service delivery.
Several years ago the movie “Charlie Wilson’s War,” about the political maneuvering behind the war in Afghanistan, contained this description of the conflict from the congressman who was the film’s main character: “We changed the world, but we had no endgame.”
As large law firms have developed into “corporate” organizations to better serve corporate clients, the practice group structure has become an accepted organizational model.
It might seem that nothing is more temporary than a quick email, text or Twitter message. Yet these messages are increasingly subject to a duty of preservation, whether that duty is for a lawyer or on behalf of a client.
The fact that lawyers can sell their practices is no longer in dispute. However, reaping value from the sale of a law practice presumes that the value is recognizable.
Every lawyer should make a financial plan for retirement.
People are still talking on the phone and texting while driving despite the statistics that prove it can be deadly and despite it being against the law.
Interest in the sale of law practices continues strong and unabated. This may reflect continued economic stress, the aging of the profession or simply greater desire to look for greener pastures outside the law.
The stresses of what has become “the holiday season” – an all-encompassing period stretching from before Thanksgiving to after New Year’s Day – are well known.
For many lawyers, retirement is out of reach because the value of their homes, investments and retirement plans took heavy hits over the last few years. But for those lawyers who can retire, their firm typically represents a “pot of gold” in their minds. It is the asset on which they can depend.
An opinion this year by the New Jersey State Bar’s Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics raises a major alarm bell for any lawyer who has trouble collecting money from a current client.
Bruce MacEwen, whose long-running blog, www.adamsmithesq.com, is subtitled “An inquiry into the economics of law firms,” recently made provocative comments about where the profession’s economics are heading.
When lawyers enter legal practice, they understand that certain aspects of what they will be doing will change during their careers.
The legal profession has reached a point where upheaval is the “new normal.” Certainly large law firms are changing in response to recession, technology and client demands; those firms that don’t change quickly enough, like Dewey & LeBoeuf, are doomed to swift failure.
A client receives the lawyer’s bill, contends that it is too high, and refuses to pay it unless the invoice is written down. That’s a dilemma that is occurring with increasing frequency in these tough economic times.
The question arises whether lawyers can effectively and ethically represent opposite types of clients – for example, insurance carriers and insurance coverage plaintiffs. The ABA’s Rule of Professional Conduct 1.7 addresses this.
In recent months press reports have discussed the Justice Department’s attempt to control bankruptcy lawyers fees.
Law firms, like the players in any other economic sector, have a life cycle.
A recent opinion by the New Jersey State Bar’s Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics raises a major alarm bell for any lawyer who has trouble collecting money from a client.
The lawyer who has not taken the possibility of his or her untimely death or disability into account for planning a practice’s future is playing with fire.
