Practice News

Asked and Answered By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC Q. Our firm is a 12 attorney general practice firm located in the Phoenix metropolitan area. In additional to general practice, we do a fair amount of insurance defense work as well. In an effort to improve firm profitability we have been considering alternative fee arrangements - particularlly contingency fees - with some of our existing clients as well as venturing into personal injury plaintiff work. Can we improve profitability by doing more contingency fee work? A. The CEO of the Howrey LLP, when interviewed about the law firm's recent dissolution, advised that deferred profits from contingency fee work led to the firm's demise.  Howrey is a good illustration of what can happen when the risks of contingency fee work is not considered or managed. Contingency-fee work can pose major risks for law firms, as they earn no fees if they lose those cases and sometimes have profits deferred in protracted litigation. In addition, cases can be lost with no fee whatsoever received. Whether your firm is considering "big deal" litigation or bread and butter run of the mill personal injury litigation you may want to consider the following: 1. Don't dabble in contingency fee work. Take it seriously and insure that your case portfolio is adequately diversified. 2. Reduce case portfolio risk and improve case profitability by implementing a sound case intake system to insure that you are selecting quality cases. 3. Realize that you have to spend money to make money and that you simply may not have the financial resources to take on certain cases. Learn how to say no and when to refer these cases out to others. 4.

There isn't much money in it. Often there isn't any. But serving as appointed counsel is a way to gain invaluable courtroom experience and remind yourself why you went to law school in the first place. Find out more in the May IBJ.

By Peter LaSorsa Most lawyers have a presence on the Internet in the form of a website. Of course a website is a form of advertising and therefore the rules regarding advertising must be followed. I did a recent random survey of websites in the Chicago area (checking out the competition) and found an interesting trend. On the front page of many websites there is a form that the user can fill out and send to the law firm. Most have a place for name, address, phone number, email and a brief synopsis of what the issue is. At the bottom of the form by the submit button there is a box that the user checks agreeing to the terms and conditions as defined by the law firm. There is usually a hyperlink on the words terms and conditions, which allows the user to view the actual terms and conditions prior to checking the box. On my website instead of terms and conditions I utilize the word disclaimer. The same action takes place, as the word disclaimer is a hyperlink that takes the user to a page or two of information regarding the disclaimer. I actually chose the word disclaimer instead of terms and conditions for the following reason. The language of most legal websites starts with something to the affect that by visiting the website or sending in a form with your name and address the action does not imply or infer a legal agreement or contract of any kind with the firm. In my opinion the problem with utilizing words like “terms and conditions” are that those words are inherent with agreements and contracts. I mean terms and conditions to what? To an agreement or contract that you are then denying has been formed?

Chief Justice Thomas L. Kilbride of the Illinois Supreme Court and Chief Judge Michael Brandt of the 10th Judicial Circuit announced Tuesday a new mediation program to help ease the financial and emotional burden of homeowners, lenders and taxpayers caused by residential mortgage foreclosures in Peoria County. Chief Justice Kilbride said he is hopeful that the foreclosure mediation program will help keep some families in their homes and help prevent vacant and abandoned houses that drive down property values and destabilize neighborhoods. The Illinois Supreme Court approved the program which is modeled after one which began last June in Will County. Both programs operate with no expense to taxpayers and are sustained by an increase in filing fees paid by lenders seeking to foreclose. "This is an important step forward for those who have suffered the effects of our nation's economic crisis in Peoria," said Chief Justice Kilbride. "The Supreme Court has a keen interest in programs that have the strong promise of achieving timely and lasting resolutions to tough problems." The program in Peoria County not only mirrors the one in Will County, but comes after another mortgage foreclosure initiative was announced last week by the Chief Justice and the Supreme Court. On the recommendation of Supreme Court Justice Mary Jane Theis, the Court appointed a special 14-person committee to study ways to ease the burdens of homeowners and to ensure fairness throughout foreclosure proceedings. It is anticipated that the Committee will propose procedures that can be implemented throughout the state. The Committee will examine the program in Will County and Peoria County as well as the one operating in Cook County, which is partially funded through county funds.