The judge signed my Order to Show Cause and required me to serve it today on the client. That's why things have been so quiet here today. In any event, the Order is returnable before the Court on the 23rd, at which point I hope she will let the Firm out of representing the client. In the meantime, the entire action is stayed. That means she froze everything pending the hearing on the 23rd. I always ask for a stay pending the hearing and determination of the motion, but the court attorneys who review these filings always take out the part about the determination of the motion. Either way, I'm just glad she signed it.

Posted by: Random Penseur at 02:37 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 123 words, total size 1 kb.

I had an 8:30 meeting with the client who owes the Firm a lot of money in legal fees. I explained that we could not represent him anymore. The meeting ended on an acrimonious note. I have spent the next several hours preparing an Order to Show Cause which I will present to the Commercial Division Support Office to ask the Court to stay the action to permit the client to get new counsel and to let our Firm out of any further representation.

I suppose I ought to be tougher than this, but some of the things he said I found particularly wounding. Greedy? No, unfair and untrue. I am not greedy. I do expect that bills for services rendered will be paid. I do put my clients' interests first because I am a fiduciary and I understand what that means. I don't, however, work for free and nor does the Firm. The way he called us greedy, however, left me and everyone else in the Firm thinking that the only word he left out was "Jew". It was just said in that kind of way. Maybe I'm overly sensitive here, but the impression struck me the instant he spoke it.

Breakups are messy and this one will be no exception, especially if the Firm chooses to sue the soon to be ex-client to recover the legal fees and expenses he owes.

I feel as if I've had better days, truth be told.

UPDATE

I have just returned from Court where my Order to Show Cause was accepted for filing by the Commercial Division Support Office. It has to be reviewed first by a court attorney to see whether it can be accepted, you see. As with all of these things, she told me that I'd have to come back and pick it up tomorrow morning, which I will do after my Federal Court conference across the street is over. But I tried to take it up to the judge today anyway. I pulled the court attorney to one side and explained that the reason I rushed down here, and why I don't want my name associated with the case for any more time than it absolutely has to be, is that at the conclusion of my meeting with the client today, he called me a "greedy", then he paused, "Neeeew Yoooork lawyer". When I told her that, her head shot up and she said, "gee, the only word missing from that sentence was Jew, wasn't it?" She promised to do what she could to help me get out. She also let out a bit of a whistle when she saw how much was owed.

I didn't think I was imagining it.

Posted by: Random Penseur at 12:30 PM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 463 words, total size 2 kb.

I skipped merrily down to the train station this morning to take the 5:56 a.m. train to work. It gets me to my desk by right about 6:30. This was good today. Why? Because it is really nice to have a little bit of extra time when you find out that there has been a change of plans and you are going to be cross examining the former Chapter 11 bankruptcy trustee today with respect to his reports and the calculation of a credit in the bankruptcy in the context of a hearing on damages.

Gotta run!

Posted by: Random Penseur at 08:46 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 115 words, total size 1 kb.

Sorry so quiet today, but I got to work late after staying home to be with the kids while my wife fled the house early for a long day of job interviews. Keeping fingers crossed!

When I finally got to work, it was only to discover an email from a very good client. My client, also my friend, had been the victim of a vicious assault by a store owner's employee. He had been struck in the head with some unknown object, hospitalized for two days with swelling in the brain, and suffered significant blood loss. He was almost killed. He wants me to help him sue the owner and anyone else we can think of for damages caused to him and consequently to his business (since he isn't there to run it).

I have been feverishly doing legal research on all of the finer points of tort law this morning -- vicarious liability, negligence (maybe for the hiring practices), etc.

I have never taken a personal injury case before and have sworn I never would. However, I feel a great sense of personal outrage and motivation here. Time to make somebody pay, I think. I can't help the healing, but I can help the recovery.

Did I mention that my friend let his medical insurance lapse and will have to cover all the medical bills himself?

Posted by: Random Penseur at 11:35 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 233 words, total size 1 kb.

What do you think, assuming you are not a lawyer, about what the practice of law is? I think that there are many different images. Maybe you think it is like television, all Ally McBeal or LA Law -- lots of well dressed people running about like idiots and arguing with judges. Maybe you think it is the movie image of Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird or Tom Cruise in a Few Good Men. Maybe you have the used car salesman image of the sleazy personal injury or insurance defense lawyer. Maybe it is the tweed coat wearing law school professor image or the ivory tower Supreme Court litigator who sits high above and contemplates serious issues. What else? Maybe the grizzled old criminal defense lawyer or the young earnest prosecutor. Maybe the crusading environmental lawyer or the terribly serious public interest guys with the long hair and earrings who still think that smoking weed is consistent with the oath they took upon admission to the Bar.

Reality? Pretty much nothing like the above descriptions. At least, not in my practice. No, in reality, even at the big firms, a lawyer is a small business operator. He sells services to individuals and to companies and then he tries to get paid for them. Some of the services are measured by the amount of time spent performing them and those are charged on an hourly basis. That hourly basis charge is a very expensive way for an individual to purchase legal services, especially the services I provide -- complex corporate litigation and dispute resolution. Litigating by the hour is a terrible way to go, for most. In fact, just out of curiosity, how much do you think my firm charges out my time at? I'll be interested to see what you come up with.

I spend some of my time dealing with the frustration of making sure my clients pay the firm for the services we provided. I do a good job for my clients and usually obtain pretty good results, but there is no guarantee about anything and I have had some bad decisions and bad results. But, those bad results don't mean that the client is relieved of his obligation to pay his bills. And if the client doesn't pay me, what can I do? I can't stop performing services because I am a fiduciary to my client. I can make a motion to the court to be relieved as counsel but that is not a guarantee that I will be relieved. I may be stuck with this client, as I am probably stuck right now, with a client who has a $40,000 plus bill and has not given me anything on it but empty promises and mumbles.

It is annoying to be lied to about your bills.

So, no, instead of thinking of a lawyer as an Armani suit wearing guy who spends his days yelling at judges, think instead of a small business owner who struggles to get paid. And also sometimes yells at judges, if they get lucky.

Posted by: Random Penseur at 10:54 AM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 528 words, total size 3 kb.

1 I may not be a good participant here, since my wife is a corporate attorney, but she cites legal services in the LA-NY market as $500 and more per hour. I'm curious, though: to what extent does an ordinary small businessman qualify a potential client? A realtor, for instance, is going to make some effort to avoid wasting time showing a house to someone who has bad credit or obviously can't pay. Someone who gets embroiled in a lawsuit and then is a deadbeat over the fees ought to have some kind of a paper trail that suggests this might happen. Or no?

Posted by: John Bruce at December 01, 2004 12:38 PM (RXzI7)

2 No fair since I'm a lawyer, but based on rates here in the middle of the country and my knowledge that you're as old as I am, I'd bet you bill out at $600 or more in the New York market. A great compliment (at least I take it as such) with which I am paid on a regular basis is: "I can't believe you're really a lawyer."

Posted by: JohnL at December 01, 2004 01:40 PM (YVul2)

3 I think you bill for between $650 and $725 per hour. If you are a junior partner(I don't think you would have hit partner, yet.), you might bill for less in hopes for a larger bonus. I would also assume that you have to bill 60 hours a week.

Posted by: Azalea at December 01, 2004 02:26 PM (hRxUm)

4 I find those amounts staggering! It's hard to feel much sympathy for the legal profession when those are the rates they charge for their services. That said, I can understand the frustration of not being paid for your services, as well. And being forced to continue to provide them. That's gotta suck!

Posted by: Mick at December 01, 2004 02:57 PM (VhRca)

5 $600 an hour is kind of staggering, I agree. Although I do know attorneys who bill out at that rate. But $750? That is really over the top. No, John Bruce was the closest, although he was just a titch on the high side. Maybe the firm ought to adjust my rates! That was an interesting question you posed, Mr. Bruce, and I will try to answer it in a post later as opposed to a in the comment section.

Posted by: RP at December 01, 2004 09:44 PM (X3Lfs)

6 $16 an hour here. I'm in the wrong business.

Posted by: Tuning Spork at December 01, 2004 10:03 PM (HOezO)

7 Well, TS, keep in mind that the hourly charge does not go directly to my bank account but instead to the firm. The charge is what the firm rents me out at. I certainly don't see anything at all like that figure in my check. In fact, when I was a baby lawyer, I ran the numbers once to see what I was actually being paid an hour and was so depressed that I vowed never to perform that calculation again!

Posted by: RP at December 02, 2004 09:48 AM (LlPKh)

8 RP, I just applied the 150-200% premium that seems to reflect the difference in costs between anywhere in Texas and NY City. Most partners in big firms around here bill in the $300-400 range, so I just multiplied by 1.5 to 2.0 and came up with the $600 number. Your point about the money going to the law firm is a good one. If I ever left in-house practice and stayed with the law, I doubt I would go back to a firm, as I could make a comfortable living undercutting law firm rates and providing GC-for-hire services. I know a few lawyers around here who do just that.

Posted by: JohnL at December 02, 2004 10:39 AM (YVul2)

9 Well, John, all you'd need then would be someone like me who could provide the corporate litigation side and you'd have a nimble, full service, boutique! Hey, we could be on to something!

Posted by: RP at December 02, 2004 10:49 AM (LlPKh)

10 I mentioned this post to my wife last night, and she was a little puzzled by the implication (as I see it) that you have to do your own collection. She works with a lot of ex-white shoe law firm types from downtown LA, and she doesn't think they have to do their own collections. What's the point of working for a firm if you have to do all your own non-legal work? Or is your firm just cheap????

Posted by: John Bruce at December 02, 2004 11:49 AM (je4Eg)

11 Well, ultimately every lawyer is responsible for making sure that his or her client is paying the bills. This is doubly true at a small firm like the one I'm at. A lawyer who takes on a client and is not involved with the collection side of the relationship, especially if there is a problem, is not cheap, he's stupid. The first time a lawyer will hear about a malpractice claim from a client is when the client stops paying the bills and the lawyer presses the issue. You need to be involved with that process if you were the contact point on the case or transaction. No, the lawyer who doesn't stay involved in the economics of the lawyer/client relationship is exposing himself needlessly to the client and risks having others strain the relationship. It isn't cheap, it is good practice.

Posted by: RP at December 02, 2004 11:57 AM (LlPKh)

12 "Real" Lawyerin defined: Six million hours of tedium followed by six seconds of sheer terror. That's if you're lucky enough to get to enter a courtroom. I actually think those rates are pretty moderate; considering the area of the country and firm size/specialization, etc. A lot of it depends on the support staff as well. When I worked for the immigration law firm, we did "flat fee" arrangements and that was the last time I saw those deals. I, for one, LOATHE billable hours -- especially when *I* had to come up with them. Of course, that was my brief stint as LA to a family law/criminal attorney. Sole practitioner. Asshole. He was a great attorney to his clients but a complete and utter jerk to his support staff. And I had more billable hours than HE did. Don't let this get around but: I actually like those that choose the profession. Mostly. Except the above-mentioned jerkoid. And those like him. The reality is: lawyers are just like everyone else. There are "good guys" and "creeps." And it's been my experience that you get what you pay for.

Posted by: Margi at December 02, 2004 07:09 PM (rKX9f)

13 I think you have a pretty accurate picture of it, Margi, which is not a shock. I detest keeping track of my time on the hourly billing thing. I am also very bad at it.

Posted by: RP at December 03, 2004 12:18 PM (LlPKh)

Hide Comments | Add Comment