Our panel of leading appellate attorneys review Thursday's Illinois Supreme Court opinion in the Criminal case In re Austin M.
CRIMINAL
Austin M.
By Kerry J. Bryson, Office of the State Appellate Defender
Our panel of leading appellate attorneys review Thursday's Illinois Supreme Court opinion in the Criminal case In re Austin M.
By Kerry J. Bryson, Office of the State Appellate Defender
ISBA Director of Legislative Affairs Jim Covington reviews bills in Springfield of interest to ISBA members. In this episode he covers the New probate fee, Juvenile Records, Adoption and Disabled adults. More information on each bill is available below the video.
New probate fee. Public Act 97-1093 (Silverstein, D-Chicago; Feigenholtz, D-Chicago) creates a $100 fee to open a decedent's estate to fund the State Guardianship and Advocacy Commission. It exempts indigents, the State Guardian, any state agency, any local public guardian, and any state's attorney. (2) It also allows the court to appoint a limited guardian for a disabled adult who lacks some but not all of the required capacity. If the court finds that the ward is totally without the required capacity, it may appoint a plenary guardian. (3) It adds criteria for the termination of the guardianship or modification of the guardian's duties. Effective January 1, 2013.
United States Bankruptcy Judge Carol A. Doyle of the Northern District of Illinois has
applied to be reappointed by the United States Court of Appeals to a new 14-year term when her current term expires on July 25, 2013. A United States Bankruptcy Judge is a judicial officer of the United States District Court who exercises the authority of the district court with respect to any action, suit, or proceeding under Chapter 6 of Title 28 of the United States Code. 28 U.S.C. § 151. Comments are invited from the public and the bar as to whether Judge Doyle should be reappointed. Those comments should be in writing and sent by November 15, 2012 to:
Asked and Answered
By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Q. I am managing partner with a 12 attorney general practice firm in St. Louis. As part of our marketing program we recently completed an informal client survey and were surprised at some of the feedback. The feedback was less positive than expected. Our clients advised us that our services took longer than expected and fees were also higher than expected. We work hard for our clients and I don't see how we can improve turnaround or reduce legal fees. I would appreciate any thoughts that you have.
A. Based upon client satisfaction surveys (telephone interviews) that we do for law firms we find that one of the biggest problems is that the attorneys are doing a poor job of managing client expectations. Your clients get frustrated when you promise one thing (timeline or fees) and the result is very different - especially when the work takes longer than promised or the fees are higher. Even though you don't structure it as a promise your clients take it that way. The key is to under promise and over deliver. I suspect that upon the initial client meeting you are under estimating the timeline and low balling the fee range. Reduce the promise - increase the - timeline and fee range and then shoot to deliver under that range. This will do wonders for improving the client relationship.
Click here for our blog on client service
Click here for our article on the topic
E-mail is a persistent and annoying issue in every lawyer's professional and personal life. To help lawyers manage e-mail, Jim Callaway, the Director of Oklahoma Bar Association's Management Assistance Program, has posted EMail Issues for Lawyers Today. In it, he explores the ethical ramifications, security risks, benefits, and best practices associated with using web based e-mail services such as GMail and Outlook.com. He also gives advice about guarding against security breaches from the client's e-mail service; and considers the potential of insisting that clients set up a new e-mail account dedicated exclusively to communication between the client and lawyer. In addition, he reviews the current debate about encrypting e-mail. Finally, he suggests making up false answers to security questions in 2 step verification systems and the use of password managers.
Along the same lines, Kashmir Hill at Forbes Magazine posted, 10 Incredibly Simple Things You Should be Doing to Protect Your Privacy. It includes such basic security tips as password protecting your mobile devices, such as your smart phone, iPad, and other tablets. She also suggests creating a Google Alerts with your name, being careful about giving out your email address and identifying information in public, encrypting your computer, clearing out your browsing history, and turning on 2 step verification in Gmail.
Chief Judge John T. Elsner has announced that following the Aug. 23 meeting of the Circuit Judges of the 18th Judicial Circuit, Robert G. Gibson and Jeffrey S. MacKay have been selected as finalists for associate judge. This vacancy was created by the retirement of Associate Judge Cary B. Pierce.
Gibson graduated from the University of Illinois College of Law in 1983. Judge Gibson was appointed a Circuit Judge by the Illinois Supreme Court effective Aug. 2, 2010 to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Circuit Judge Perry R. Thompson.
MacKay graduated from IIT/Chicago-Kent College of Law in 1992. He is currently an associate with the law firm of Ekl, Williams and Provenzale. MacKay is an active member of the DuPage County Bar Association and the Illinois State Bar Association.
ISBA Director of Legislative Affairs Jim Covington reviews bills in Springfield of interest to ISBA members. In this episode he covers the Health Care Services Lien Act, Personal property exemptions and trusts, Child-support enforcement (Public Act 97-994 and Public Act 97-1029), Sanctions for visitation violations, Domestic violence form, Adoption and Article 9 of the UCC. More information on each bill is available below the video.
An ISBA special committee is exploring the role of campaign contributions in judicial elections and the perception that they influence judicial decision-making -- and considering whether recusal standards should be changed to address that perception. Find out more in the September Illinois Bar Journal.
Asked and Answered
By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Q. Our law firm is located in San Antonio, Texas. We have a total of 18 attorneys which includes me and two other equity owners that founded the firm and contributed capital, three equity partners that were made partner that did not contribute any capital, two non-equity partners, and 10 associates. The original three partners control the firm and make all of the decisions with little involvement or input from the others. They are not provided with financial statements or reports. The original three partners bring in virtually all of the business. We are faced with some hard decisions concerning partnership admission - non-equity to equity, associates to non equity, etc. Our compensation cost for attorneys is eating away at our earnings for attorneys that are worker bees and don't bring in any business. Your thoughts?
A. You may want to ask yourselves whether you want employees or partners. It sounds like the other three equity partners are not part of the inner circle and are not really functioning as part of the partnership. What are the criteria for becoming an equity partner? Is client development part of those criteria? Should they contribute capital? If they are not adding value to the firm - growth - you are diluting the earnings pool and reducing the size of the pie for yourselves. Personally, I think in a firm your size criteria for becoming an equity partner should, among other things, include client development and a capital contribution. They should have some skin in the game, contribute capital, and signup for their share of the liabilities. I also believe they should then be included in the inner circle.
This morning I was reading a petition that had been filed in the appellate court and kept stumbling over the phrase “the instant case.” What? Did the writer mean “this case?”
Steven Stark is his excellent book Writing to Win wonders if the phrase “in the instant case” means, “if you mix powder with milk, you get a case.”
Not to get my knickers in a knot here, but what’s wrong with “this case?” Just as silly to me are the phrases “the case at bar” or “the case at hand.”
“This” is a useful and accurate word. You use it all the time in casual conversation. Don’t be afraid of it.