I believe that most lawyers in the USA use what accountants term, "Prestige Pricing" strategy.
Many attorneys desire a demand-oriented approach because they want a high selling price or premium status in the market. This is fine in itself, if you want to restrict access to legal representation to the quality- or status-conscious consumer.
However, in this economy this pricing strategy will hurt the lawyer/law firm. In today's market, more and more Pro Se litigant's are proliferating the market. And if a lawyer or a law firm wants to remain competitive it is crucial that you set your price just below the competition not to restrict access to those who need it most. In the long-run Prestige Pricing will hurt your law firm rather than create profits.
Target Pricing is a better strategy for those who desire a market-oriented approach, and want to set a desired target price before the service is offered. This strategy is focused on cost reduction through out the life of the service.
To be simplistic, a lawyer or law firm can focus on a Cost-Plus strategy. This strategy is best if you desire a cost-oriented approach, the lawyer can estimate service costs with reasonable accuracy, and the lawyer has little concern for service life cycle, demand, competition, or image. It is a simple calculation.
If I were a lawyer, I would use either target pricing or cost-plus strategies. In this way, most consumers whether rich or poor would be able to afford legal representation.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Friday, February 26, 2010
Are You Listening....?
In a philosophical discussion about people not truly listening, my friend
JULIE WROTE:
And another friend, RESPONDED:
--
Sir Tomas
******************************
I have to say that old people do have a bunch of wisdom. This year, recently, my husband's ex-mother-in-law passed away. She was dear to us and closely linked to my Cuban ancestors. I guess some people would call her stories "a bunch of crap" one has to wade through to get to the wisdom, but it is in the stories that the wisdom lies and if you truly listen you will come away with enlightenment.
Old people tend to repeat the same stories over and over again, and this old lady friend, used to tell the same stories over and over again, but I didn't think they were a bunch of crap. For one, being that she was from my mom's same town in Cuba, she knew everyone in on my mom's side of the family tree. She even gave me an old picture of my great aunt (one of my grandfather's sister). This lady and my great aunt were in the same high school class of 19--. I heard the same stories over and over again, but each time they had a different twist. So you got some new insight. Each time, I took away some little wisdom from her life that pieced together pieces of my past.
My favorite quote of her is
"Cada persona es un mundo" --Emma de la Cruz de Serrano
In sum, if people only would listen, truly listen, they would discover pebbles of insight. But it is true, many people rarely truly listen and I don't discount myself from the many. I am at fault, too.
JULIE WROTE:
...it often occurs to me that we rarely listen (I mean truly listen) to
what others have to say
And another friend, RESPONDED:
True. There is a flip-side, though, that being that oftentimes, what
other people have to say isn't really very interesting, or it doesn't
give back something to the encounter. I had a friend in college who
had a particular aversion to the elderly (I never was sure why).
Someone was talking one day about venerating the elderly, because they
have a great deal of wisdom. His response? "Yeah, but you have to
wade through a bunch of crap to *get* to that wisdom."
Takes all kinds to make a world....
--
Sir Tomas
******************************
I have to say that old people do have a bunch of wisdom. This year, recently, my husband's ex-mother-in-law passed away. She was dear to us and closely linked to my Cuban ancestors. I guess some people would call her stories "a bunch of crap" one has to wade through to get to the wisdom, but it is in the stories that the wisdom lies and if you truly listen you will come away with enlightenment.
Old people tend to repeat the same stories over and over again, and this old lady friend, used to tell the same stories over and over again, but I didn't think they were a bunch of crap. For one, being that she was from my mom's same town in Cuba, she knew everyone in on my mom's side of the family tree. She even gave me an old picture of my great aunt (one of my grandfather's sister). This lady and my great aunt were in the same high school class of 19--. I heard the same stories over and over again, but each time they had a different twist. So you got some new insight. Each time, I took away some little wisdom from her life that pieced together pieces of my past.
My favorite quote of her is
"Cada persona es un mundo" --Emma de la Cruz de Serrano
In sum, if people only would listen, truly listen, they would discover pebbles of insight. But it is true, many people rarely truly listen and I don't discount myself from the many. I am at fault, too.
Teaser Friday
--Grab your current read
--Let the book open to a random page.
--Share with us two (2) “teaser” sentences from that page, somewhere between lines 7 and 12.
--You also need to share the title of the book that you’re getting your “teaser” from… that way people can have some great book recommendations if they like the teaser you’ve given!
--from Bentham And The Common Law Tradition
--Let the book open to a random page.
--Share with us two (2) “teaser” sentences from that page, somewhere between lines 7 and 12.
--You also need to share the title of the book that you’re getting your “teaser” from… that way people can have some great book recommendations if they like the teaser you’ve given!
The validation of enacted law can be undermined by contrary practice in one of two ways. First, since the validity of enacted law rests at the outset on nothing but acceptance of the formal constitutional rules by whose authority it is enacted, and since such constitutional rules are themselves liable to change just like any other rules of the system, the validity of enacted law is threatened by constitutional change unless the rules are incorporated into the continuing body of Common Law.
--from Bentham And The Common Law Tradition
Thursday, February 25, 2010
The Life of the Law has not been logic; it has been experience
This is Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes central slogan of legal modernism.
Holmes wrote "It is the merit of the common law that it decides the case first, and determines the principle afterwards." Holmes, Codes, and the Arrangement of the Law, 5 AM. L. Rev. l, reprinted in 44 Harv. L. Rev. 725 (1931)
Holmes found worth in intuitive case-by-case adjudication. On the other hand, Christopher Columbus Langdell shifted the focus of legal instruction from abstract principles to cases and ended up promoting the case-centered view of adjudication that Holmes had stated. Langdell became the first Dean of the Harvard Law School in 1870. He was the one who started the Case Law Socratic Method taught in law school today.
In my opinion, Langdell deprived law students out of a worthy education of legal instruction.
Holmes wrote "It is the merit of the common law that it decides the case first, and determines the principle afterwards." Holmes, Codes, and the Arrangement of the Law, 5 AM. L. Rev. l, reprinted in 44 Harv. L. Rev. 725 (1931)
Holmes found worth in intuitive case-by-case adjudication. On the other hand, Christopher Columbus Langdell shifted the focus of legal instruction from abstract principles to cases and ended up promoting the case-centered view of adjudication that Holmes had stated. Langdell became the first Dean of the Harvard Law School in 1870. He was the one who started the Case Law Socratic Method taught in law school today.
In my opinion, Langdell deprived law students out of a worthy education of legal instruction.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
All lawyers are competent
There is an underlying assumption in legal ethics codes that says "all lawyers are competent."
This assumption is inherently flawed.
First, it is assumed that if one graduates from law school and passes the bar that they are competent to practice law. In theory, law school teaches law students to think like a lawyer. In practice, law school does not teach lawyers how to practice law. Therefore, not all lawyers are competent to practice law.
Second, I speak from experience in law school education and my reasons for not pursuing a law degree go with the belief that law school shortchanges law students. One of the problems I saw as a nonlawyering student were the lack of individual feedback and interaction. Another problem is the combative classroom environment. All these are counter to an effective education.
Third, from my experience in paralegal education, we got the practical overall training lawyers need to be competent in their profession. Our ABA accredited institution focused sufficient attention on practical skills such as interviewing, counseling, negotiation, drafting, and problem solving. And all this we received as paralegals. These are the skills lawyers need to practice law competently, which they don't get in a typical law school education.
As Fred Zacharias nicely put it in his Arizona Law Review piece, section on Fictions of Symmetry, "All Lawyers are Competent" --
This assumption is inherently flawed.
First, it is assumed that if one graduates from law school and passes the bar that they are competent to practice law. In theory, law school teaches law students to think like a lawyer. In practice, law school does not teach lawyers how to practice law. Therefore, not all lawyers are competent to practice law.
Second, I speak from experience in law school education and my reasons for not pursuing a law degree go with the belief that law school shortchanges law students. One of the problems I saw as a nonlawyering student were the lack of individual feedback and interaction. Another problem is the combative classroom environment. All these are counter to an effective education.
Third, from my experience in paralegal education, we got the practical overall training lawyers need to be competent in their profession. Our ABA accredited institution focused sufficient attention on practical skills such as interviewing, counseling, negotiation, drafting, and problem solving. And all this we received as paralegals. These are the skills lawyers need to practice law competently, which they don't get in a typical law school education.
As Fred Zacharias nicely put it in his Arizona Law Review piece, section on Fictions of Symmetry, "All Lawyers are Competent" --
Consider first the unspoken presumption that lawyers are competent, perhaps
even equally competent. This finds its way into numerous code provisions, not the
least of which is the competence rule itself, Model Rule 1.1.42 Rule 1.1 states that
lawyers unfamiliar with particular areas of law may undertake representation
involving those fields if they can make themselves competent.43 The primary reason
for this concession is obvious: it enables lawyers, particularly inexperienced lawyers, to expand their practices. The rule is justified on the basis that lawyers are trained in law school to think like lawyers and that, except in highly specialized fields, lawyers can teach themselves to serve clients as well as the experts do.
No one truly believes this fiction. Specialists undeniably have an advantage
over novices. Bringing a new lawyer up to speed, even if possible, adds to a client’s
expense.
The assumption of equal competence shows up in more particularized
provisions of the ethics codes as well. In many situations, for example, the conflict-ofinterest rules forbid clients to retain their lawyer of choice even when the clients are prepared to waive a conflict or to accept a situation in which a potential conflict may arise. Clients often are forbidden to acquire joint representation. They may not hire an especially good but expensive lawyer by paying the lawyer through assignment of media rights.Other examples abound. The code drafters’ assumption is that the clients are wrong in believing that retaining the particular lawyer will lead to better representation; other lawyers are available and at least close enough in competence that clients should not be permitted to risk conflict-laden representation.
The questionable assumption that all lawyers are equally competent also underlies code provisions that constrain the ability of lawyers to represent clients on a
limited basis. These provisions rely on the faulty premise that clients always are
better off receiving full representation from cheaper (but presumably competent or
able) lawyers. This approach skews the quality of representation some clients
receive and produces other perverse economic effects. And it conflicts with the
position of substantive law; contract, tort, and malpractice standards insulate from
civil liability lawyers who expressly limit their obligations to clients.51 This
inconsistency between the professional standards and the substantive law ultimately
may induce code drafters to confront the counter-factual nature of their assumptions."
To view law review article click here, you may find this piece on Page 838-840
Colo Unauthorized Practice of Law
Legal industry regulation of nonlawyers:
• Unauthorized Practice of Law is a code of ethics and in some states a criminal violations in the criminal statute.
In the United States, only licensed professionals can legally practice law. In general, the practice of law is someone who applies the law to the facts of a particular case.
According to the American Bar Association, Center for Professional Responsibility, as of 2007, only 19 states have defined the "practice of law" by statute or court rule.
In Colorado, UPL is defined by case law and there is NO CRIMINAL STATUTE for the violation of UPL. This is purely a LEGAL ETHICS violation. And while a paralegal is taught to uphold the legal ethics rules lawyers are bound to, we are not bound by it. Legal ethics rules are rules binding the licensed lawyers.
The Colorado Supreme Court has defined it as follows: We believe that generally one who acts in a representative capacity in protecting, enforcing, or defending the legal rights and duties of another and in counseling, advising and assisting him in connection with these rights and duties is engaged in the practice of law. Koscove v. Bolte, 30 P.3d 784 (Colo.App. 2001). [Emphasis added]
To view the facts of the case, click here
Instead of prohibiting other lawyers from practicing law in states where they aren't licensed, a better strategy, as Deborah Rhode mentions in her book, "is to make competence and character evaluations more closely related to performance in practice."
Rule 5.5 Comment 1 of the Colorado Professional Responsibility Code says "persons not admitted to practice law in Colorado cannot hold themselves out as lawyers in Colorado or as authorized to practice law in Colorado."
• Unauthorized Practice of Law is a code of ethics and in some states a criminal violations in the criminal statute.
In the United States, only licensed professionals can legally practice law. In general, the practice of law is someone who applies the law to the facts of a particular case.
According to the American Bar Association, Center for Professional Responsibility, as of 2007, only 19 states have defined the "practice of law" by statute or court rule.
In Colorado, UPL is defined by case law and there is NO CRIMINAL STATUTE for the violation of UPL. This is purely a LEGAL ETHICS violation. And while a paralegal is taught to uphold the legal ethics rules lawyers are bound to, we are not bound by it. Legal ethics rules are rules binding the licensed lawyers.
The Colorado Supreme Court has defined it as follows: We believe that generally one who acts in a representative capacity in protecting, enforcing, or defending the legal rights and duties of another and in counseling, advising and assisting him in connection with these rights and duties is engaged in the practice of law. Koscove v. Bolte, 30 P.3d 784 (Colo.App. 2001). [Emphasis added]
To view the facts of the case, click here
Instead of prohibiting other lawyers from practicing law in states where they aren't licensed, a better strategy, as Deborah Rhode mentions in her book, "is to make competence and character evaluations more closely related to performance in practice."
Rule 5.5 Comment 1 of the Colorado Professional Responsibility Code says "persons not admitted to practice law in Colorado cannot hold themselves out as lawyers in Colorado or as authorized to practice law in Colorado."
• RULE 5.3. RESPONSIBILITIES REGARDING NONLAWYER
ASSISTANTS (Colorado Professional Responsibility Code)
With respect to nonlawyers employed or retained by or associated with a lawyer:
(a) a partner, and a lawyer who individually or together with other lawyers
possesses comparable managerial authority in a law firm shall make reasonable
efforts to ensure that the firm has in effect measures giving reasonable assurance
that the person’s conduct is compatible with the professional obligations of the
lawyer;
(b) a lawyer having direct supervisory authority over the nonlawyer shall make
reasonable efforts to ensure that the person’s conduct is compatible with the
professional obligations of the lawyer; and
(c) a lawyer shall be responsible for conduct of such a person that would be a
violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct if engaged in by a lawyer if:
(1) the lawyer orders or, with the knowledge of the specific conduct, ratifies
the conduct involved; or [agency law]
(2) the lawyer is a partner or has comparable managerial authority in the law
firm in which the person is employed, or has direct supervisory authority
over the person, and knows of the conduct at a time when its consequences
can be avoided or mitigated but fails to take reasonable remedial action. [negligent malpractice]
• Paralegal Pro Bono Opportunities
Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct, approves the following pro bono legal work for paralegals includes:
(1) work taken on in conjunction with and under the supervision of an attorney working on a specific pro bono legal matter, or
(2) work handled independently for an organization that provides pro bono legal opportunities, provided, however, that such participation does not create an attorney-client relationship and/or involve the paralegal’s provision of legal advice.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Tips for Finding the Right lawyer
When selecting the best lawyer for your case follow my tips:
1. Know your case. So, do a little bit of research work on your own -- google your case
2. Use Avvevo.com. they have a great rating system
3. Your local bar will have a referral service
4. Use Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review, and
5. I would call at least 5 lawyers, and visit those that give you a free consultation
In this way, you can meet your lawyer and evaluate him/her yourself before making a commitment. This will allow you to assess the following:
1. The lawyer's communication skills. Did the lawyer explain things to me in a way that I could understand?
2. Their responsiveness. Did the lawyer and his staff return my call in a timely manner, did they resolve my issues quickly?
3. Service quality. Did I feel like my legal issue was their top priority?
4. Overall value. Was working with this lawyer worth the expense?
1. Know your case. So, do a little bit of research work on your own -- google your case
2. Use Avvevo.com. they have a great rating system
3. Your local bar will have a referral service
4. Use Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review, and
5. I would call at least 5 lawyers, and visit those that give you a free consultation
In this way, you can meet your lawyer and evaluate him/her yourself before making a commitment. This will allow you to assess the following:
1. The lawyer's communication skills. Did the lawyer explain things to me in a way that I could understand?
2. Their responsiveness. Did the lawyer and his staff return my call in a timely manner, did they resolve my issues quickly?
3. Service quality. Did I feel like my legal issue was their top priority?
4. Overall value. Was working with this lawyer worth the expense?
Friday, February 5, 2010
Legal Grind of California
I am wondering if Colorado would allow someone to do the same thing?
Here my is the Legal Grind website, Legal Grind, Inc.
My idea would be similar but not the same to his concept.
About five years ago, I wanted to go to law school and I wanted to open up a coffee shop/ law firm. In researching my idea and seeing if there were other coffee shops with this concept, I came across this guys website.
Well, I didn't go to law school but instead went to paralegal school. But is there a way to do this in Colorado as a paralegal?
California has a Business and Ethics code section 6400 that allows paralegals to assist with doc prep. But only if the person decides to go at it alone. And the company recommends to seek an attorney's advise. click to see the code Document Processing
After reviewing his website and reading their code, is there any code here similar to the one he has. That would allow a paralegal to provide receptionist, secretarial, or typing service to the public and if they put similar language on the website? Is it time to that Colorado allowed for similar assistance to the public?
The company's revenue is $100,000 per year per Mantra.com.
Here my is the Legal Grind website, Legal Grind, Inc.
My idea would be similar but not the same to his concept.
About five years ago, I wanted to go to law school and I wanted to open up a coffee shop/ law firm. In researching my idea and seeing if there were other coffee shops with this concept, I came across this guys website.
Well, I didn't go to law school but instead went to paralegal school. But is there a way to do this in Colorado as a paralegal?
California has a Business and Ethics code section 6400 that allows paralegals to assist with doc prep. But only if the person decides to go at it alone. And the company recommends to seek an attorney's advise. click to see the code Document Processing
After reviewing his website and reading their code, is there any code here similar to the one he has. That would allow a paralegal to provide receptionist, secretarial, or typing service to the public and if they put similar language on the website? Is it time to that Colorado allowed for similar assistance to the public?
The company's revenue is $100,000 per year per Mantra.com.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Unauthorized Practice of Law
Lately there have been company's popping up who have been offering certain legal services to the public. Generally speaking, UPL is defined as follows:
A nonlawyer (or paralegal) may not 1. advise a client on any legal matter, 2. represent a client in a court of law, 3. set fees, and negotiate a settlement.
Now it really isn't a criminal offense to practice law, a nonlawyer if caught will get a no-no from the Colorado Supreme Court and be put on a list. The only real consequence to UPLing is if you one decides to go to law school and take the bar, one may be prohibited from obtaining a license.
To illustrate how the elements work, consider the following facts:
Nonlawyer sets up shop to provide assistance to pro se litigants. Nonlawyer sets prices for the different services like document prep, document review, legal research, writing and analysis, translations, notary, etc.
Right here, setting up a price for these services is practicing law because a nonlawyer may not set fees. Now if pro se litigant were to say, "I want to hire you for $30/hour" --pro se litigant is setting the fee not the nonlawyer.
A pro se litigant is allowed to practice law so a nonlawyer being hired by a pro se litigant may assist the pro se litigant but may not advise the pro se litigant on what forms to pick. A nonlawyer may provide the best "OPTIONS" but cannot advise them on what forms to pick.
A nonlawyer may assist with research in the same way he/she assists an attorney, may draft documents but every draft must be a 1st draft, it cannot be final. If the pro se litigant wants to play lawyer on him/herself they must do all "THINKING"--a nonlawyer cannot help him/her think about the legal theories because that is practicing law.
A nonlawyer find the rules but cannot interpret the rules for the pro se litigant because that is part of the thinking.
A nonlawyer may not represent him in a court of law and may not negotiate a settlement for the pro se litigant. However, just like a nonlawyer may help a lawyer prepare for trial, so too they may help the pro se litigant prepare for trial. But the nonlawyer may not set the fee.
And in Colorado, if you don't have a license to practice law then I would not recommend you assist the public. If this is your goal, move to California where the laws are more liberal and your able to provide such services.
A nonlawyer (or paralegal) may not 1. advise a client on any legal matter, 2. represent a client in a court of law, 3. set fees, and negotiate a settlement.
Now it really isn't a criminal offense to practice law, a nonlawyer if caught will get a no-no from the Colorado Supreme Court and be put on a list. The only real consequence to UPLing is if you one decides to go to law school and take the bar, one may be prohibited from obtaining a license.
To illustrate how the elements work, consider the following facts:
Nonlawyer sets up shop to provide assistance to pro se litigants. Nonlawyer sets prices for the different services like document prep, document review, legal research, writing and analysis, translations, notary, etc.
Right here, setting up a price for these services is practicing law because a nonlawyer may not set fees. Now if pro se litigant were to say, "I want to hire you for $30/hour" --pro se litigant is setting the fee not the nonlawyer.
A pro se litigant is allowed to practice law so a nonlawyer being hired by a pro se litigant may assist the pro se litigant but may not advise the pro se litigant on what forms to pick. A nonlawyer may provide the best "OPTIONS" but cannot advise them on what forms to pick.
A nonlawyer may assist with research in the same way he/she assists an attorney, may draft documents but every draft must be a 1st draft, it cannot be final. If the pro se litigant wants to play lawyer on him/herself they must do all "THINKING"--a nonlawyer cannot help him/her think about the legal theories because that is practicing law.
A nonlawyer find the rules but cannot interpret the rules for the pro se litigant because that is part of the thinking.
A nonlawyer may not represent him in a court of law and may not negotiate a settlement for the pro se litigant. However, just like a nonlawyer may help a lawyer prepare for trial, so too they may help the pro se litigant prepare for trial. But the nonlawyer may not set the fee.
And in Colorado, if you don't have a license to practice law then I would not recommend you assist the public. If this is your goal, move to California where the laws are more liberal and your able to provide such services.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)