« December 2006 | Main | February 2007 »

What happened?

No, the Practice is not dead. I received emails from some people wondering what has happened. I am, unfortunately, dealing with a family issue that, as you know from reading this, takes priority. So, in addition to running my practice, I was dealing with that issue. Therefore, I had to take a break from The Practice. I expect it back up and going in 2 weeks or so and I will let you know then.

Thank you for the emails (especially the one wanting to make sure I was alive!!). Look for a return soon.

Litigation by the numbers?

Yes, it exists. Holy cow! Litigation by the numbers is a California book that walks you through litigation. It starts with the filing of the complaint and goes through enforcement of your judgment.

Now, I don't normally recommend products. Remember, my list is very short. And this makes my list. Of course, it helps that my friend Eugene Lee recommends it. Since Gene is so much more eloquent than me, here is what he writes:

"I had to do a fax filing of a demurrer yesterday.  I flipped to the right section in your book and, voila!  Everything was right there, with simple, easy-to-understand and comprehensive step-by-step instructions.  I have to say, I honestly think your book is even more valuable than Rutter and CEB.  No lawyer should be without it.  This book should be at the top of the list of gifts to give any budding lawyer who has just pased the bar.  It's the gift that keeps on giving!  Julie, many thanks for writing this book!  You've helped lawyers everywhere!"

Look, if you are a law student or a new lawyer who actually litigates, you need to read this. Where else are you going to get one book to tell you everything you need to know? Oh, and the price is right!

The book is written by Julie Goren. I think this is something that you need to take a look at. It is a great book written by an excellent attorney (who happens to be very nice).

Stop the madness!

I know I post on this every so often. I still don't get it. Why do lawyers insist on playing games in trying to resolve disputes? Why do we try to hide the ball? What is hoped to be gained?

Look, my goals are very simple in handling cases and yours should be too: resolve the case most favorably to a client at a fair price. It is that simple. So, if you have a choice of doing A, which does not move the case towards conclusion and costs the client money, or doing B, which moves the case towards conclusion at some cost to the client, go with B. You will be happier every time.

Okay, so I am idealistic. Want a dollars and sense reason to do it? Imagine your client challenges your bill at the end of the case. In California, we have mandatory fee arbitration. You go to the fee arbitration and the arbitrator says to you "Mr. Stein, why did you force your opponent to file a motion that you lost when you knew you would lose? You charged your client 2 hours for that." It doesn't matter what your answer is. You just lost credibility to the fee arbitrator and that statement may get the client to think that not only does he have a fee arbitration issue, but he may also have a malpractice case.

It doesn't matter if he actually has a malpractice case, if he thinks he does and files a claim with your insurance or files a lawsuit against you, you have to pay your deductible. Now you are out of pocket the money for the fee arbitration and your deductible.

So, before you do something, make sure that you are moving your cases towards resolution.

LawGuru

Are you on Lawguru yet? No? Why not? What are you waiting for?

Lawguru is a site where people can ask questions in a number of legal categories. You sign up with them and when a question is asked in your area, you get an email. You can then answer the question if you want to.

Now, you do get some garbage questions. But, the delete key works well. And a folder in Outlook to capture the emails makes it so you can spend a few minutes at the start or end of your day and answer questions. It takes up about 10 minutes per day. In return, almost 900 people have read my 150 or so answers.

You get to provide a service to people who probably cannot afford an attorney, you get exposure and you get some free marketing. Now, why aren't you on Lawguru?

Oral Arguments: What not to say

I was listening to oral arguments last week in court. The judge had issued a written tentative ruling. I had read the ruling (it wasn't one of my cases) and the ruling made sense. The losing side requested oral arguments. The argument went something like this:

"Your honor, you don't cite any case or rule that supports your position. We want to know the authority for your decision."

Judge: "Counsel, you can argue your case, but you cannot get argumentative with the court. Do you have any argument about the merits of your motion?"

(I took the liberty of not citing this word for word.)

The message here: if there is a tentative ruling that you belive is wrong, argue the merits of the motion. Do not tell the judge that he/she is wrong. Judges make mistakes, but that is why we have an appeal process. Unless this is some bizarre situation, you will be in front of the judge again. Don't make enemies over one ruling that you may not like.

You need another reason not to talk to the media?

I have been a proponent over here of not talking to the media. I don't think anything good can come of it. And, now, more evidence of that.

The DA in the Duke lacrosse rape case has been charged with ethics violations arising out of his comments to the press. Apparently, some of the comments he has made may have been "improper." At least one person thinks the defense attorneys may have also made improper statements.

Look, you never want to try a case in the media. You won't win. No one really wins. Let your lawyering speak for itself and if you absolutely MUST make a statement, make it as boring as possible. Try something along the lines of "We will let the legal system determine the outcome of the case." It is not sexy, but it will avoid you worrying about ethics charges down the road.

Happy New Year

So, last week was a light week for posting over here. I was finishing up the move, working and relaxing a bit at the end of a busy year. I want to thank all of my readers who read this nonsense on a regular basis. I appreciate it. I look forward to a great 2007 with more insights, more tips and more good "stuff" for you.

Happy New Year - may it be a prosperous year for you!

DISCLAIMER

  • Notice
    This blog is made available by the lawyer publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog publisher. The Blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state. Jonathan G. Stein, is licensed to practice law in the state of California only. ATTORNEY ADVERTISEMENT