Congratulations to Anthony Bushnell of Minnesota! He submitted the winning caption, which you can see above. Anthony will receive a copy of The Business of Law (2nd edition) and a free ½ hour consulting session with me.
Thanks again to everyone who participated. There were many great captions, which made the decision tough.
Remember, The Business of Law, 2nd ed., along with all of my other books and products, are available for sale at our web site.
For the second day in a row, the WSJ ragged on lawyers. It’s front page headline says "How to Surgically Remove Lawyers From Hospitals" …. Without reading more than the front page headline, one would think that lawyers are a problem for hospitals and need to be removed … and here’s how to do it.
But, when you turn to the Personal Journal section of the paper, the article talks about hospitals’ negligence and the fact that many deaths and serious injuries/illnesses are caused by the hospitals and their staffs after the patients enter for other maladies than that which resulted in death.
The writer states that some hospitals are admitting their negligence and approaching the patients and their families with apologies and financial offerings that make sense. Under such circumstances, of course, the patients don’t need to work with lawyers … and that’s one way of keeping lawyers out of the discussion. (There are other issues here from the perspective of the patient’s protection; that’s a subject for another time.)
The real reason for the lawyer is that the institution denies culpability and seeks to stonewall the injured party. What a novel idea — actually talk to the injured party, admit responsibility and seek to negotiate/mediate a solution acceptable to all parties.
That, however, is not the tone of the headline, nor the attitude of the newspaper. Too bad. Truth should be the standard, not paper sales. I should admit that the headline is not false, just conveys the wrong impression of the article’s content.
Paraphrasing a quote I heard yesterday: There have been more causes of action created in the last six months than in all of recorded history before that!
What a bonanza for lawyers … in addition to being forced to deal with changes in the market place, we now have the opportunity to add to our intellectual skills and help people with new ideas never before faced …
Linda J. Popky, "The Marketing Master," recently had to completely change her diet in order to treat a persistent cough. She compared her experience to that of businesses suffering in today’s economy. She says that they will need to change the way they do business, or suffer the consequences…
In today’s economic world, marketing is more important than ever. The people who are bringing in business are the ones who are out there courting it. That’s why I am happy to share with you a special opportunity. For the next 48 hours only, my colleague Paula Black is offering a collection of FREE bonus gifts to anyone who purchases her latest book: “The Little Black Book: A Lawyer’s Guide To Creating A Marketing Habit in 21 Days.”
Designed to help lawyers integrate marketing into their daily lives, this book is quick, easy and inspirational. And by purchasing it within the next 48 hours you will receive special access to information and resources from more than 30 experts. A compilation of advice from some of the most sought-after experts in the legal arena, “The Smart Lawyer’s Toolkit” gives you instant admittance to an incredible collection of tips and information. Click here for details…but do it fast!
Preparing a case budget is the subject of a recent article. Doing such a budget and getting the client to approve the budget goes a long way toward assuring that you will collect your fee as the matter progresses. And, if the client balks at the beginning, you know you will have difficulties. Then, the choice becomes yours … whether to accept this client on a pro bono basis or go cycling …
If you’re looking for some "simple, but smart" ideas to grow your practice, check with Tom Kane today.
An innovator continues to invent even through a recession! In fact, those companies (and law firms) that do, come out the other side of the tunnel in a far stronger than before.
A client of mine asked me whether he should charge a prospective client a fee for their initial consultation, the meeting before being engaged.
There are three approaches to this issue, long debated amongst lawyers:
1. Free initial consultation
2. Paid initial consultation
3. Paid initial consultation with the payment applied to the total bill if they engage you.
There is no one right answer or magic bullet in response to this question. Obviously, everyone wants to get something for nothing. But, we then also run into the bromide that "you get what you paid for." In this case, nothing.
Whether you can charge for the initial consultation is normally a question of the client’s trust in you, their confidence in you … and how long it takes to generate those feelings in the client toward you …
I don’t think “free” connotes expertise … and that’s what prospective clients are looking for. In deference to the current economy, and the need attract clients, you might consider alternative #3 … charge them an initial consultation fee, and apply that amount toward the total fee in the event they should retain you.
This is never an easy choice. But, we must remember that people do believe they get what they pay for … and anything free is usually viewed with suspicion either as to motive or expertise. A discount in an on-going relationship, however, is viewed differently and not to be confused with the issue at hand.
The other day, I was cycling up Red Rock Canyon in Las Vegas, NV.
I went from about 2500 feet to 4713 feet. En route, the road was rolling hills. So, sometimes I went down, but then there was an ascent next … all the way to the top, about 7.75 miles from the start.
Before I reached the top, however, I was complaining to myself about how hard this ride was … and whether I could complete the ride as I had intended. When I reached the final plateau, not having ever ridden there before, I was not sure that was the top. I thought there were more rolling hills ahead of me. I asked a couple of cyclists who were descending. When they told me this was the top, I was elated I had made it to the top, relieved that the pain of the trek was over and quite surprised at how hard I had fought with myself.
How many of our clients don’t realize or appreciate the success we bring to the table for them? What have you done to educate them about the process of your representation? I was fighting myself because I had never been in Red Rock Canyon before. Most of your clients have never been involved in the judicial process before. And even sophisticated clients with previous involvement don’t truly appreciate what lies ahead. What have you done to show them a preview of what’s to come? What have you done to make their journey easier? What have you done to shine a flashlight on the road in front of them?
When you shine the flashlight, and they still agree to move forward, the likelihood is that they will pay you your full fee without question and promptly in accordance with your engagement agreement.
Use the flashlight!