Chuck Newton

Are Violent Video Games Preparing Kids For The Apocalypse?

I just love the Onion News Network.  Let us listen in -

Charlotte School Of Law Deserves Special Recognition

Charlotte School of Law has a lot for which it deserves to be proud.  A new state of the art building.  ABA provisional accreditation in record time.  And now, the law school has graduated its first law school class of Juris Doctors.  The class of 2009 began their legal studies with the opening of Charlotte’s first and only law school in August of 2006.

The keynote speaker for the event will be Honorable Allyson Duncan of the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals.  Hon. Duncan is the only North Carolina judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th circuit, and is the first African American woman ever to serve in that capacity.

Oh, and I like that whole beagle mascot thing.

Niche Marketing Secrets For Law Firms

I found this video online  by David V. Lorenzo who operates RainmakerLawyer.  He is discussing niche law practices and the benefits of such a practice.  This is a lot of what I have been saying for a long time, but I think he brings a different light or perspective to some of it.  Let us listen in -

Congratulations Are In Order For Elon University School Of Law

Graduation ceremonies are taking place all over the nation for law school graduating classes.  But, maybe an honorable mention should go to Elon University School of Law.  This is because the law school marked a milestone with its first ever graduating law school class.  107 members makeup of the the law class of 2009.  The keynote speaker and adviser to four U.S. presidents, David Gergen, spoke at the Graduation.

Elon University School of Law occupies the former public library building in downtown Greensboro, North Carolina. Students enrolled when the school opened in 2006. Former Supreme Court of the United States Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor delivered the Dedication Address for the School of Law.

Referral Clients Are Simply Cheaper To Obtain, Easier To Close, Pay Better, And Are More Profitable

Oh, that is a mouthful, but it is true.

I read this recently about business in general and I think from my experience it applies to law clients as well.  A referral has a 60% chance of becoming a sale, with other methods coming in a distant 10% or less.  It is actually a lot less.

Does this mean that an attorney is not closing 90% of the clients that go through his office based upon advertising, let us say?

No.  But, what it does say, and what we know is true, is that 60% of those people referred to you by a reliable source are likely to make their way through your entire system, from calling, to booking an appointment, to actually showing up at your office, going through the legal options available with you, agreeing to retain you and actually paying you money.  With TV advertising primarily, but all advertising and other marketing in general, the percentage of those that respond to your spot in the same way is probably less than 1% over all.  We know, for example, that targeted direct mail probably has no better than a 2% response rate, and then many potential clients that do respond fall out somewhere along the process so that the attorney makes no money on these these prospects.

Now, it is true that a TV market is much larger than a referral base and that 1% if convinced through repetitive and saturation levels involved in a TV rotation will yield many more clients, but at what costs?  The advertising is extremely expensive if done effectively.  The added inquiries, even from the many that do not set an appointment, or do but do not show up, or do show up but do not retain, add many more staff hours even in comparison to the amount of business or number of clients retained.  It was not unusual, for example, for my old consumer bankruptcy firm to spend (consciously so) 20% of every dollar made on marketing costs.  This did not include all of the other overhead.  After all, staff costs money, and they require a lot more office space, computer and phone systems, health and other benefits.  The list is really endless.

Also, there is the issue of a qualified prospect.  I think it is no secret that advertised for clients come with a lot of healthy skepticism with which an attorney and the attorney's staff must deal.  You have to generally work harder to convert this potential into a client.  Referrals generally come pre-qualified, or better so, with less resistance to the fees involved, and mainly ready to retain you as their attorney.  After all, somebody else has already pre-sold you and your services as an attorney, and probably explained the issues to the prospect before they booked an appointment.

And, what did this cost?

Hardly anything.

So, you compare.  What type of practice to you want?  A large advertised practice, or a smaller practice, with less overhead, based on a steady set of referrals?

I know which one I prefer.

Religious Right Fanatics Just Go Too Far In Their Hate For America And Americans -- And Lawyers And Law Students

... And, that goes for conservatives that align themselves on the periphery of these types of movement, or act as apologist for these terribly abhorrent and loathsome malcontents.

According to The Miami Hurricane, protesters from the Christian (?) fundamentalist group, Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas, that operates under the URL GodHatesFags.Com, picketed the University of Miami's Law School graduation ceremony carrying signs with messages critical of gays, abortion, liberals and lawyers.

Zach Phelps-Roper, the 18-year old nephew of the church's pastor and founder declared at the protest that "Lawyers now blaspheme God and promote filth," and suggest that lawyers will be sentenced to hell on judgment day.

The religious group is primarily known for loudly protesting at military funerals, amongst the grieving families, with signs that read things such as, "Thank God for dead soldiers", "Fag troops", and "God blew up the troops".

On the groups website they show their followers carrying signs which call President Obama the anti-christ, contemning people for being Jewish because they killed Christ, and show them stomping on the American flag.  And yet, I hear even the parents and family of military espousing many of the same issues and hate as this group.

This group has been known for synagogue invasions and picketing stating that the Jews killed Jesus Christ.  They invade mainstream churches calling the pastors "whores".

There is still time to catch this for yourself, according to the group's website.  On May 26, 2009 they will be protesting the Jewish Federation and the "filthy apostate Jews" that have "not repented of what [they] did to the Lord Jesus Christ".  And, on the same day they will be at the Renner Funeral Home in Belleville, Illinois protesting the grieving family of a dead soldier with "God still sends IL brats home in bags".  If you missed this, there will be a repeat performance on May 29, 2009 at the Jewish Federation of Rhode Island in which the group will declare "Just like their spiritual forefather, Saul, these Jews are rebels."  And, then the same day they will protest at the Holocaust Museum in Providence, stating " The sorrow which some Jews experienced during the WWII Holocaust, at the hands of the vicious Germans, and other Gentiles is NOTHING compared to what the Lord Jesus Christ is going to inflict."

What gets me so badly are not these fanatics.  They are homegrown terrorist that vary little from, except for the religious leader they claim to follow, those that attacked this country on 9-11.  What gets me is that when you discuss these actions with otherwise conservative religious people, including lawyers, they do not contemn these them or find the actions too personally offensive as to speak against them.  They want to talk about church invasions by gays, or abortion or the misguided issues of others.  What they will not do is contemn for themselves this atrocious, heinous, loathsome, poisonous people and their vile and wrathful conduct.  They become apologist for it because they feel offended by somebody else's actions or, more importantly, beliefs.  Like sleeper cells they simply cannot deny that they do not disagree with this repugnant, pernicious behavior.  It is not that someone else is doing something disagreeable or wrong, as that is not the point at hand.  It is that these people are being wrathful and the sleeper cells cannot deny to that which they more quietly subscribe.  Although for a different purpose or direction, this mindset is another Holocaust waiting to happen.

And, what personally gets me about the sleeper cells is that during the last administration, instead of just being content with disagreeing with opinions of others they took to saying that those with whom they disagreed "hated America".  But, the point is that this group hates America.  Their websites show a impressionable CHILD holding up a pre-printed sign stating "God Hates The U.S.A," and "God Is Your Enemy", and "American Is Doomed".  And, now when the apologist repeat that they "want the President to fail", instead of merely disagreeing with issues at hand, they are rephrasing and taking up this cause.  As this group will tell you, these statements are "pregnant with meaning".  In the least, you would think, the apologist and sleeper cells would know where their behavior and opinions lead.

As for the arguments of church invasions, which I also find despicable, it is really just a matter for these people of which churches are invaded.  After all, it is these Baptist that invade mainstream Christian churches declaring that "Your Pastor Is A Whore".

The problem with the Miami Law protest was that it was so out of context.  Lawyers and law students being contemned for being lawyers.  Not as bad as protesting funerals certainly, but trying to disrupt a moment of what should be a great deal of joy and feeling of accomplishment for so many families, now to be scared by such a thing.

Of course, I grew up being taught that God (and Jesus) is loving and merciful and promotes peace.  Yet, when Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson preach that God punished America with 9/11, they are preaching the same philosophy that God and Jesus concerns itself with hate.  They are singing from the same hymnal of hate.  And, it is from this same hymnal of hate that Liberty University banned the otherwise innocuous young Democratic club on campus.  That maybe their right as a private university, but that does not make it acceptable.

This really must stop.

As to the University of Miami Law School graduates and their families, I say congratulations and the best to each and every one of you.

U.S. District Court Upholds Montana Law School's Refusal To Fund Christian Legal Society

Liberty University removes its college Democrats group recently because it felt that Democrats (generally or generically speaking) do not uphold the University's ideals and religious beliefs.  We all remember the news about Regent University School of Law expelling a 2L student, Adam Key, for posting an unflattering photo of founder Pat Robertson on his Facebook page where it looked like Pat Robertson was shooting the bird.  Then last month the California Supreme Court left intact a lower-court ruling that allows private religious schools to expel students based on just perceived beliefs that they are gay.

So, private, religious schools, universities and law schools fight to move deeper toward restricting their membership to only those groups and people that they like in regard to political issues, moral beliefs, and the respect of their students for the religious leadership of the school.  That might be their right.  I do not know.  But, it also become apparent that religious groups cannot use the public institutions to deny those with whom they do not want to associate access to their organizations.  In short, private is private and public is public and whatever group, person or cause they wish to discriminate against on their private property, should not be allowed on the public's property.  That is probably the way it should be.

On December 17, 2007 the Christian Legal Society filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the University of Montana School of Law's de-recognition of its local student chapter.  The lawsuit claims that this action was taken on account of the organization's Christian beliefs.  Montana Law argued it was not because of their religious beliefs but due to the fact that the Law School did not allow non-discrimination and required an open-membership policy for any student group to be recognized.  The CLS requirement to vote on anybody it admitted and to sign a statement of faith to be a voting member, violated the Law School's requirement for non-discrimination and open-membership policies for the recognition of any student group.

The CLS lost with first the federal magistrate and now the United States District Court uphelding Montana Law's right to not recognize the CLS finding that its policies in doing so were viewpoint neutral and were not intended to single out or limit CLS's rights to free expression.

From my standpoint, I do not know all of the answers to these questions, but I have always thought it is a strange argument for religion to argue that the public institutions discriminate against it and to deny its rights to free expression by prohibiting it from discrimination and denying others a right to free expression in public institutions.  Their own institutions are probably another matter.

The Thug Law Niche?

I am convinced you can find the niche practice of law in every area and nobody has thought out or sought out all of the possibilities.  But, this is an interesting one.

According to The Morning Call, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania attorney Eric Dowdle targets his services as a criminal defense attorney to inner-city defendants accused of firearms offenses, drug charges and violent crimes.  This begins with his website ThuggLaw.Com.

A former prosecutor, the main page of Dowdle's website proclaims, "Defending the Streets."

Dowdle says that the design of his law firm is to appeal to these inner-city defendants, and it does not stop at his website.  As he explained to The Morning Call, when launching his practice six years ago he provided his existing clients bumper stickers that read, "Protected by Thugglaw." He also put ads in a local newspaper saying, "It's nice to feel wanted but being wanted sucks."

It is an interesting concept.

The Legal Fee Auditing And Litigation Niche

Back in April of 2008 I proposed the establishment of a niche practice to keep personal injury attorneys honest (or at least working on their cases diligently).  After all, clients, doctors and other medical professionals do not get paid anything until the case is settled (hopefully for the best value) or a judgment obtained.  As far as I know, nobody took me up on this niche, but I have thought about it from time to time.

Now, Susan Cartier Liebel of Solo Practice University fame alerts me to the Legal Blog Watch article of an England-based law firm that has developed a niche practice of going after other law firms for overcharging.

According to Crain's Manchester Business, the law firm of Boote Edgar Esterkin has launched a legal service, which will open formal negotiations on behalf of clients who believe they have been overcharged by their law firms, or bring suit.

The associate in the firm that operates this unit states that he has seen a sharp rise in the number of clients experiencing problems in this regard.  Undoubtedly, this is probably related to the worldwide recession that is severely hurting some law firms.  Law firms get more aggressive in billing and collecting, and clients get more aggressive in keeping costs under control.

Obviously, rules are different in England than here.  But, according to the Devil's Advocate, Americans spent over $100 Billion in legal fees each year.  And, it is not that legal fee auditing and litigation services are not being provided in this country already.  For example, the litigation law firm of Meckler Bulger & Tilson of Chicago, Illinois maintains a "Legal Audit Group", and promotes itself as "one of only a handful of law firms nationally with a full service practice group concentrating on issues involving professional services provided by attorneys and other fiduciaries".  The firm, in short, assesses the reasonableness of attorneys' fees and costs.  They audit, litigate and hire out as expert witnesses in such disputes.

There are also hybrid firms that employ some attorneys, such as Stuart Maue that not only manage professional costs for clients, but audit legal fees.  In one case study, for example, the firm saved Kmart Corporation in excess of $15 million in legal and professional fees in their Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

It could be said that these disputes are a direct result of hourly fees.  That of course would contribute to any dispute, but it is more than that.  It seems fee disputes would occur no matter what the fee agreement or structure, including fixed fees.  I would imagine that disputes would be very prevalent in success fees as well because in the end these fees are subjective.

Legal fee audits, negotiations and litigation concern, as I stated, not just fees themselves but whether legal work was done or done in the most effective manner possible.  It concerns itself with whether legal work is completed in the most efficient manner possible.  It compares not as much how fees are billed or agreed upon, but what others are paying for similar legal work.  In other words, what are the law firm's competitors charging overall.  It concerns itself with whether the lawyer or law firm did the best job possible and at the most cost effective price.  And, in regard to law firms with different strata of attorneys it concerns itself with whether the most effective lawyers and attorneys in the firm worked on the project.  Anyway, these are some of the issues in fee disputes I have gleamed.

Some attorneys and law firms, such as Jim Schratz and Associates in Sonoma, California, which operates nationally, apparently takes legal fee audits and litigation on a fixed fee basis with a guarantee that if the client is not satisfied, they do not owe the firm anything.  The law firm claims to have, in once case, reduced a $4.1 million fee request by $1.1 million dollars.

These audits seem to be common in insurance defense issues and business bankruptcy issues.  And, although law firms and audit firms like to tout their best recoveries, the truth of the matter is there must be a bunch of smaller cases reviewed.

It seems to me that this could be a great stand alone niche or an add on for possibly a legal malpractice practice.  It would probably lend itself well to a mediation practice as well.  In any event, it is a niche that is worth a look.

The LSAT Scam

I think I am not the only one that is getting tired of the profit making motive of non-profits off the backs of those that can least afford it.  Nowhere is this more true than in the education industry.

First, we must deal with the investigation of big Bush and GOP supporter, Catherine B. Reynolds, apparently using her influence, and government guarantees, for extravagant purchases and self-dealing with her non-profit run student loan company, EduCap.  According to the Washington Post the non-profit company bought a Gulstream jet worth about $30 million that she uses to fly friends and relatives around the world.  The company's foundation also donated, for example, $9 million dollars to a non-profit run by her husband, Wayne Reynolds, that then paid his for-profit management company $1.7 million.  All the while EduCap has been charging students up to 18% interest (near credit card levels) for student loans.

Now, probably not as bad but certainly in the same category, we learn of the LSAT money from the blog Lessig. 

As the blog points out, to get into law school you must take the LSAT, which is administered by the non-profit LSAC.  However, to get copies of the old tests to prepare for the exam, a student has to go through a test prep company, which are usually for-profit.  And, according to Steve Schwartz of the LSAT Blog, LSAC receives $194 for each student who receives a full set of the exams. Since the LSAC does not print the test, the money is pure profit.  Of course, the for-profit companies sell these test for a huge multiple over what is paid to the LSAC.

What is next, charitable hospitals that do not perform any outward charity to the poor?  Oh right, that is already the case.

As the blog points out, to get into law school you must take the LSAT, which is administered by the non-profit LSAC.  However, to get copies of the old tests to prepare for the exam, a student has to go through a test prep company, which are usually for-profit.  And, according to Steve Schwartz of the LSAT Blog, LSAC receives $194 for each student who receives a full set of the exams. Since the LSAC does not print the test, the money is pure profit.  Of course, the for-profit companies sell these test for a huge multiple over what is paid to the LSAC.

What is next, charitable hospitals that do not perform any outward charity to the poor?  Oh right, that is already the case.