Asked and Answered
By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Q. I am an attorney that has been in practice for 10 years with a large firm (200+) in the Midwest. I represented fortune 500 clients in the area of business and commercial transactions. I was a non-equity partner in the firm. Recently I was let go due to the economy and I have no idea when or whether I will ever be called back to work. For three months I have been applying for positions with no success. I am considering starting my own solo practice. Where and how should I start?
A. Being an attorney in solo practice will be a much different experience than what you are used to. You will have to handle more of the nuts and bolts of running and operating a practice. You will not have people to do everything for you like in your last firm. You will need to learn how to be an entrepreneur and think like a businessman.
First, I suggest that you give some thought as to whether you have what it takes to operate your own firm and plan out your business. The best way to go about this is with a business plan. Click here for an article on the subject.
After your have developed your plan, begin developing your business identity, firm name, tag line, website domain name and related graphic package.
Practice News
-
February 24, 2010 |
Practice News
-
February 23, 2010 |
Practice News
As most ISBA members know, the estate tax disappeared (poof!) at the stroke of midnight on January 1, 2010. If you're rich, it's a great time to die. But just because there's no tax at the moment doesn't mean clients can get by without a lawyer's learned counsel. As Jodie E. Distler Hanzlik explains in the latest ISBA Trusts and Estates newsletter, there's more to estate planning than tax avoidance. Such as? Such as planning for incapacity. And probate avoidance. And deciding what happens to the kids. And lots more, as Jodie expertly describes. Read her article here. Make sure you get more articles like it by joining the Trusts and Estates section here.
-
February 23, 2010 |
Practice News
Chief Circuit Judge Stephen J. Culliton is pleased to announce that two finalists for the Office of Associate Judge have been selected and certified by the Illinois Supreme Court. The finalists are seeking to fill the vacancy created by the elevation of Associate Judge Daniel P. Guerin to Circuit Judge. The Circuit Judges will select the appointee by secret ballot. Scott M. Hardek received his J.D. from the Law School at the University of Notre Dame in 1990. He is currently a partner with the law firm of Dykema Gossett in Lisle. Michael A. Wolfe received his J.D. from the John Marshall Law School in 1984. He is currently the Chief of the Criminal Division of the DuPage County State's Attorney's Office.
-
February 23, 2010 |
Practice News
Fastcase Tips: Make Your Own Annotations on Fastcase Annotated statute products are great for statute research – especially for providing lists of cases that cite a particular code section. But did you know that you can make your own annotations on Fastcase? To SEARCH for cases that cite a particular statute:
- Enter the statute citation in quotes in the Advanced Case Law Search box. Or, enter the statute citation with keywords that discuss your issue: “720 ILCS 125/2” or “720 ILCS 125/2” AND specific intent
- Choose Boolean Phrase as your Search Type.
- Select the appropriate jurisdictions for your statute under Select Jurisdiction.
- Click Search.
-
February 22, 2010 |
Practice News
Wheaton lawyer Don Ramsell posted the following comments to ISBA 's criminal law discussion group about the Illinois Supreme Court's ruling last Friday in People v. McKown (the Peoria Journal Star's account is here). "Good News [for DUI defense lawyers]: The Illinois Supreme Court ruled in favor of my client...and reversed her conviction, finding that the [horizontal gaze nystagmus] test that was not proven to be properly performed and therefore was wrongfully admitted into evidence! "The case also deals with the admissibility of HGN as proof of actual impairment under Frye v. United States. The court held that it does not prove actual impairment, and that it can be used only for the possibility of impairment; just like consumption of alcohol. "There are many good points for the defense in this case. For the first time in Illinois, the court limited the HGN as follows: 1. The HGN cannot be portrayed as proof of actual impairment; 2. The HGN cannot be used to establish an alcohol concentration, or to suggest greater than 0.08 3. The HGN now requires strict compliance with NHTSA (no more cop saying "I don't know what NHTSA is, but I did it according to my training"....) 4. The court also stated that on a case-by-case basis, the trial court can rule that the admission of HGN is inadmissible on grounds of undue prejudice. 5.
-
February 19, 2010 |
Practice News
The Illinois Supreme Court today ruled that imprisoned ex-Gov. George Ryan should not receive any of his state pension because of his conviction on corruption charges. Here's the Court's summary opinion: No. 108184 Ryan v. Board of Trustees Appellate citation: 388 Ill. App. 3d 161. JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Chief Justice Fitzgerald and Justices Freeman, Kilbride, Garman, and Karmeier concurred in the judgment and opinion. Justice Burke dissented, with opinion. In 2006, former Governor George H. Ryan was convicted of multiple federal felonies committed, between 1990 and 2002, as Secretary of State and as Governor. After his convictions, the Illinois State Retirement System notified him that his pension benefits from the General Assembly Retirement System were being statutorily suspended. Ryan had been a member of this system since 1972, when he joined the General Assembly, and continued in it through his holding of the offices of Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State and Governor. However, his service in the General Assembly and as Lieutenant Governor did not give rise to any felony convictions and, Ryan asserted, he was entitled to benefits based on those earlier years of service. The administrative termination of benefits was upheld by the circuit court of Cook County, but the appellate court reversed in February 2009. In this decision, the Illinois Supreme Court held that Ryan had forfeited all of the benefits he earned from the General Assembly Retirement System, regardless of the fact that he had not been convicted of any felonies in connection with his years in the General Assembly or as Lieutenant Governor.
-
February 18, 2010 |
Practice News
The Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts announced today that Christopher B. Morozin received most of the votes cast by the circuit judges in the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit and is declared to be appointed to the office of associate judge. Mr. Morozin received his undergraduate degree in 1986 from Marquette University and his Juris Doctor in 1990 from DePaul University. Mr. Morozin is currently affiliated with Soffietti, Johnson, Teegen, Philips, Morozin & Argueta Ltd., Fox Lake.
-
February 18, 2010 |
Practice News
A recent first district case, Glass v. Dot Transportation, makes ruling on forum non motions easier by drawing some bright lines to guide the decision, report Judge Dan Gillespie and law student intern Matthew Friedlander in the latest issue of Trial Briefs. First, they write, Glass makes clear that "filing suit in the county of plaintiff’s residence should rarely be disturbed [when that county] bears a substantial relation to the litigation." And the case also "firmly reinforces the notion that plaintiff’s choice of forum will almost never be disturbed if he or she chooses to bring suit in the county where the cause of action arose." Read their analysis here. Subscribe to Trial Briefs by joining the ISBA Civil Practice Section here.
-
February 17, 2010 |
Practice News
In the latest Tort Trends, Tim Kelly reviews the relevant cases and concludes that -- despite arguments to the contrary by hopeful plaintiffs' lawyers -- trial judges in Illinois have discretion to admit photos showing only minor damage to the plaintiff's car. Not surprisingly, the plaintiffs' bar would prefer that defendants be required to provide expert testimony showing a relationship between damage to the car and injury to the plaintiff (just because the car wasn't hurt much doesn't mean the plaintiff wasn't, they argue). But expert testimony isn't required, at least not since the first district's 2003 ruling in Dicosola v Bowman, Kelly writes. But in a comment to Kelly's article (yes, section members can now comment on newsletter articles!), Bob Park says that recent first district cases "leave little doubt that the [court] has abandoned the rule of trial court discretion in the admission of photographic evidence and now requires expert testimony to admit vehicle photos." A bad thing, he argues. It's an interesting, informative exchange. View it here. For more articles like this, join the Tort Section here.
-
February 17, 2010 |
Practice News
Asked and Answered By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC Q. I do a good job of collecting initial retainers before doing work for my family law and criminal clients. But then I fall behind on retainer replenishments. Do you have any thoughts or ideas? A. This is a common problem I hear from clients in all practice areas. Here are a few suggestions:
- Try to collect a larger retainer initially.
- Actively push the use of credit card.
- If it is capable, set your time and billing system to alert you when you are at say 85%-90% of time used. Some systems will alert you when entering a time sheet after this level has been reached.
- Have someone assigned to review your Work in Process Report daily to identify any client reaching the 85%-90% level and notify you accordingly.
- If more work is to be done insure that the client is promptly billed for additional retainer before work reaches the 100% mark.
- Consider billing the client electronically if this is a method that works for the client.
- Postpone work until an additional retainer is received. If this course is chosen insure that this does not violate any ethical guidelines or responsibilities.
- The key here is assigning someone the daily responsibility of monitoring retainers, having a good time and billing system, and using the management reports from the system to stay on top of retainer usage.