Chuck Newton

How I Effectively Learned To Staff My Law Practice

I had a large bankruptcy practice with five office locations, lots of lawyers and lots of staff, and during that time I tried to answer one of the primary questions of any law firm manager.  How to effectively staff a law firm?

And, let me tell you, I was bad at it.  Some might think I was a bad boss.  I would disagree with that.  I was an ineffective boss.  In hindsight, I thought I should have been more of an ass in dealing with the other lawyers of my firm and staff.  And, therein lies the truth of the matter.  Too often you have to be an ass to run a complicated law firm business.

And, who wants to be an ass?  Oh, it might make you feel tough and in charge for a while, but it wears on you.  Nobody wants to feel like a bad person.

As for me, I would swing to extremes.  Generally, I would let staff walk all over me.  Do not show up to work, answer the phone, have a bad attitude, and not do the job.  I would sit there and worry for weeks about needing to terminate the person.  Sure I did not want to have them around any longer, but I worried about what getting fired would do to the person's family.  I would feel guilt and I had no reason to.

Then I would have had enough, generally over the fear of cash flow, and demand to know everything.  Scrutinize everything.  Yell about everything.

Somewhere in the process I just decided that I did not want to lord over people.  If that was empire who in the hell needed it.  All I recall is that there had to be a better way.  What I wanted was for people to do their work, and not to hoover around trying to find out how and when they accomplished the work.  All I wanted was to be able to determine the firm's profit margin with some degree of accuracy.

Meetings?  Hated them.  Managing staff conflicts?  Resented it.  Meeting a large overhead?  It made me sick at my stomach.

I do appreciate lawyers not long out of law school, especially the business minded among them.  They want to conquer the world, and rapidly grow a legal organization.  They envision themselves as more CEO than lawyer.  I understand.  I did to.  I, by the way, achieved it.  But, what that means is empire building.  That might be fine for some, but I can tell you it is not what it is cracked up to be.

The other thing I generally found is that you cannot effectively staff your office, or any business for that matter.  You will always not have the right combination of people at the right time, doing the right job, to make an organization work as well as you want.  This does not mean you will not survive.  It just guarantees that you will be miserable most of the time.  Trying to solve these problems will mean that you will never have enough time for yourself and your family.  When you do the talk will not be about the kids, or your parents, or church, or your upcoming vacation.  It will be about work and trying to achieve this goal.  You will have too much staff and not enough lawyers.  Lawyers and not enough staff.  Staff and lawyers not doing the right job.  Nobody paying attention to the bottom line.  Nobody will be happy with pay and benefits.  You are firing, hiring, rearranging, and trying to make ends meet.  Is that how you want to practice law?  Is that why you went to law school?

So, what I did was ditched it, niche it and pitched it.  This is to say that I ditched the practice and the firm.  The staff, the attorneys, the office space, and the overhead.  I niched the part of the practice that was most profitable and individually manageable.  I then pitched that new niche to everyone I could find that could refer me clients -- cheaply.  No more TV ads, newspaper ads, radio ads, yellow pages, or phone book covers.  No more landlords, equipment leases, or utilities outside of my own.

I only became effectively staffed when I became a firm of one doing what I knew how to do, and what I wanted to do.

This does not mean that I work alone.  I am just saying that the cases float the overhead and not me personally.  You see, I collaborate.  There are now four lawyers working from diverse locations, in a couple of states, that work with me on cases.  I no longer worry about when they get to the office, leave, how long they take for lunch, who they are dating, the personal time they need, what kind of car they drive, or anything of the kind.  What I care about is that the work is completed on time.  These attorneys are motivate by the same thing I am motivated in doing.  Making a living.  Their ability to make a living is the same as mine.  It requires timely work and an attention to detail.

I no longer have offices; equipment other than my personal computer, printer, phone, etc.; commuting costs; staff; or, paychecks to worry about.

So, the most effective staff for any law firm is you and only you.  The best way to assign work is to collaborate and not to hire.  The best way to peacefully with others existing is to mirror pay to performance.  The best way to find the most personal time is to cut not only the commute, but cut so many layers that you no longer manage much.

It is really up to you.  Do you want to be an emperor?  Or, do you want to do what you want, with a few problems as possible, and make a consistent living?  It is up to you.

Google Google

Ave Maria School Of Law Prepares Students For Law School By Scrubbing Toilets

Of there is no secret that I like Ave Maria School of Law.  And, I appreciate this story on the local NBC station.

Before beginning classes, more than 200 Ave Maria law students boarded buses at Ave Maria to travel where they will scrub toilets, wipe cabinets, and clean ovens as a way to learn how to be better people and attorneys.  Simply, by learning to help others on the smallest of levels, Ave Maria officials say the art of giving back will only blossom on a larger level.

(Video on the NBC station site).

The Automatic Stay Violation Law Niche

It is an arcane area of the law, and admittedly it is one area about which I have not much written.  Maybe it is because I might be a bit protective in that this is the area of law in which I practice -- in which I have pioneered in fact.  But, the truth of the matter is I have encourage countless attorneys over the years, with little success, to consider this legal niche as a full time practice.

The practice concerns one particular provision of the Bankruptcy Code - 11 U.S.C. § 362.  This is the automatic stay provision of the Code.  In other words, it represents an injunction issued upon filing of most bankruptcies, which prohibits creditors and others from undertaking collection action against the debtor and against property of the bankruptcy estate.

The automatic stay is born of two parents really.  The mother is federal injunction law.  The father is federal fee-shifting law, or what is commonly referred to as "private attorneys general" statutes.  The mother is the automatic stay provisions of 11 U.S.C. § 362(a). The father is the enforcement provision of 11 U.S.C. § 362(k)(1).  (Before bankruptcy reform, this provision was known as 11 U.S.C. § 362(h), which still applies to all cases filed before the enactment of BAPCPA).

The purpose of the automatic stay is to tell creditors and others what they cannot do after a bankruptcy is filed. So, somebody or some entity is suppose to read § 362(a) to determine what is prohibited, and then § 362(b) to see if there is an exception.  In most consumer situations there is not an exception.  Then if one of the proscribed acts is committed, the automatic stay is violated.  It is really that simple.  And, the automatic stay is violated whether the violator knew of the bankruptcy or not.

The question is whether the violation is compensable?  In other words, the question is whether the person or company or entity violating the stay has to pay someone for the damages, including all attorneys' fees and costs incurred in litigating the violation?

This question is answered by § 362(k), which allowed an individual injured by the automatic stay to recover all damages, including attorneys' fees and costs, and the possibility of punitive damages, if the violation is "willful".

Understanding that the terms injury and individual are simply standing issues, all United States Circuit Courts of Appeal have answered in some version what constitutes strict liability under § 362(k)(1).  Although the language varies to some extent, the four basic things that must be proved to recover are: (1) that the automatic stay was in place when the violation occurred; (2) that the person, company or entity violating the stay knew of the existence of the bankruptcy either when it violated the stay, or failed to immediately remedy the violation after learning of the bankruptcy; (3) that the automatic stay was violated; and, (4) that the violator intended the action in which it engaged.  (In other words, it does not matter if the violator intended to violate the automatic stay, and all that matters is that the violator intended the action it undertook, such as sending out a demand letter, repossessing a car, or filing or continuing with a lawsuit against either the debtor or the property of the bankruptcy estate).

What is important to remember is that there is no good faith defense that can be raised as to a willful violation, with the exception of an inability to comply with the automatic stay that goes beyond a mere allegation of inability.  This defense can almost never be met as it has to be specific and fact intensive, and most automated processes do not meet this standard.

It is becoming pretty clear in all jurisdictions that creditors can also bring a cause of action against a violator for violating the stay under § 362(k)(1), if that creditor is an individual.  It is unlikely that a trust, trustee, corporation, partnership or other entity can bring such an action under § 362(k)(1).  But, these parties can bring a cause of action under the Court's equitable powers contained in 11 U.S.C. § 105.

Although it is unlikely that you are going to retire or get rich off of the typical violation, my point is that proving up a violation is not overly difficult because most of the time the violation can be proved from the objective facts and notices contained in the bankruptcy court's own file.  And, all such records are viewable online.

What makes the practice niche generally enjoyable from a practice building standpoint is that the referral sources are readily identifiable and reachable.  The referral sources are by and large bankruptcy attorneys.  These attorneys generally are not set up to prosecute these matters, and many times because of the notice requirements the attorneys are prohibited or discouraged from bringing these actions on behalf of their clients under the lawyer-witness rule.  This means simply that the bankruptcy attorneys or the law firms are witnesses in the case, as to an essential element to be proved, and they are generally not allowed to be both the attorney and a witness in the case.

Because the clients are generally referred by the bankruptcy attorneys, and the claim can generally be researched fully from the notes of the bankruptcy attorney and the court records online, you generally do not have to meet with a client in person, unless the matter goes to trial.  This is not to say there is not client contact, but it is almost always online and over the telephone.  Like all litigation, most cases settle if you and your client are reasonable.  If an in-person meeting is necessary on occasion for trial or discovery, I just use the courthouse or the bankruptcy attorneys' office.

Because of the work at home and low overhead possibilities, and the need to forgo most in-person consults (as most creditor also do attorneys do by the way), and the limited number of bankruptcy courts or locations in a state, you can generally cover the entire state in which you practice.  This reach increases your ability to obtain enough referrals to make a living.

My firm's practice site is StayViolation.Com.  Although there are attorneys in this country that bring a few of these cases each year, as part of their bankruptcy practice, I am not aware of any other group of attorneys that limit their practice to this practice niche with the exception of my law firm.  This means, of course, that the referral sources are not being overwhelmed by offers to help them.

It is a practice niche that might be worth pursuing.

Okay, I am still a little protective, and I would prefer that you stay out of Texas and Arizona, the two states in which my virtual law firm practices in this area.  But, if you are in the rest of the country, you might want to consider this niche.

. . . And, if you become aware of a stay violation in another jurisdiction in which I might of help, and in which you are licensed, I am more than willing to accept that referral and work with you in preparation of the court appearances you will have to make, if any.

Dangerous Law Practice Myths, Lies and Stupidity

I was recently introduced to a wonderful little book entitled Dangerous Law Practice Myths, Lies and Stupidity, which recently hit number one on Amazon in its category.  It is not a long read, and yet it capsulizes in a number of different ways the great misconceptions that especially young and new lawyers have about the practice of law.  Misconceptions that often times prove harmful both in a practice sense and in a financial sense.

A number of authors and attorneys contributed to the book, but it was primarily spearheaded by Judd Kessler of Abacus Law Complete Law Office Software.

If you want to learn more about the book, you can visit it's special website at LawMyths.Com.

I am sure the authors do not want me to give away all of the myths discussed in their book, but I want to give you a few I find important.

The Paper Myth.  Paper based offices are not better.  In fact, they can be a disaster in many way.  Often it is just a mess.  It is error prone.  You need to read why.

The Yellow Pad Myth.  I have got to admit, I no longer have a yellow pad in my office.  It has become a relic the last few years.  The point of the book is that although pen and paper is convenient upfront, you have trouble in this day and age retrieving it.

The Low Fee Myth.  This seems to me to be the biggest myth from new law graduates who contact me.  I think they are so concerned about obtaining business when they start out and, as a result, they actually argue with me about this point.  The writers of this book illustrate that big checks fix big problems, and that is true.  You will never make a living charging less money for more work than a more experienced lawyer has to put in the case.  It is a recipe for disaster if you ask me.  I know because when I started out I lived that disaster.

So, I would recommend you pick up this book and at least scan through it and take the advice of the authors to heart.  It is the myths and misconceptions of what you believe is important in the practice of law that will kill your ability to practice comfortably and profitably.

Pennsylvania Winery & Hospitality Lawyer - Judy Young

It really is not often that you find someone that combines the best of a Third Wave practice into something exciting, but I think that is what Judy Young is up to.  A niche practice primarily representing wineries, a niche practice, a virtual practice, blogging, relationship building, all combined with a carpet commute.  It is, when you think about it, why many of us went to law school - to work in an area that interest us and in a way that we can find enjoyment.

I have blogged about the wine law niche before, and I am glad to see someone make a go of a legal market that primarily caters to those that dedicate themselves to making that jewel-like color of a drink.

With the launch of Pennsylvania Winery & Hospitality Lawyer, Judy Young is well on her way.  As she says, her "passion for the law just barely exceeds my passion for wine, vineyards and beautiful destinations".

A graduate of Temple University Beasley School of Law in Philadelphia, Judy is not only a lawyer but also a graduate of the famous New York's Windows of the World Wine School.  So for her the mixing of law and wineries is a blending of her passions.

Her website and blog were designed by G2WebMedia, using their innovative Headway theme.  But, what is embedded in the site is the powerful and productive virtual law office technology of VLOTech.

When you get a chance, check out this new site and wish Judy the best in her pursuit of her passion.

The Economy Harms Even The Top Law Students' Prospects And I Say So What

As reported in the New York Times, the economic downturn is diminishing the prospects of even the top law students at the top schools as the job market for new law grads is the worse in 50 years.

Of course, I think it should be pointed out, the article centers on law students looking for Big Law careers.  Big Law firms have been plummeting over the last year.  Firms have closed and most have cut way back.  Mainly the Big Law firms have cut associates positions as even partners are sent walking.

For example, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom has slashed its hiring by more than half. Morgan Lewis & Bockius has canceled its associate recruiting entirely. Many Big Law firms such as DLA Piper and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe have postponed recruiting until the market improves.

At Yale students were stunned when Big Law firms canceled interviews in on their campus.  Other top law schools have confirmed that interviews are down by a third to a half compared with a year ago, and the situation is worse at lower-ranked schools.  And, in regard to those still conducting interviews, the law firms are not certain if they will fill those slots.

This is not going over well with students who have mortgage their future on the bet that attending the right law school and the right ranking could buy them a future.  The New York Times reported, for example Derek Fanciullo, a former TV reporter, betting on what he thought was a historically sure thing, took out “a ferocious amount of debt" in the range of $210,000 and enrolled at School of Law at New York University.

To me, however, the economy is certainly to blame, but the disappointment is more a function of improper emphasis on the part of law school in the hope of rankings.

In reality, most law students, even at the best law schools, do not get Big Law offers.  Yet, this seems to be the goal of most law students in both applying to and attending law school.  This is unfortunate because with the right perspective the nation's law schools would probably recruit students who are more accustom to the private practice of law.

With technology and the downward push on pricing of legal services the argument can be made that Big Law is just dead as we know it.  Regardless, law is an entrepreneurial enterprise in the final analysis.  There are a number of smart people that just are not entrepreneurial at heart and, whereas that is perfectly fine, it seems wrong to actively market services to those that are not.

It might affect rankings, but the truth of the matter is we are quickly becoming a nation and an economy of freelancers.  Law schools need to come to grips with this fact and start marketing the practice of law instead of the potential glory of law that only a select few might experience.  The overwhelming majority of law school graduates will end up in the solo practice of law or small firms.  Therefore, it is just wrong to gear most of the law school objectives and recruitment to Big Law prospects.

Law schools act like they are almost embarrassed by the fact that their graduates might actually go out on their own.  In fact, they are worried that such solo pursuits, although admirable, will drastically hurt their rankings.  The problem is that the image does not meet the reality.  That is sad because the reality is not that bad if you understand it going in.

I think it is time to fess up to the fact that freelancing is the likely goal of most law school students, and strive to change the curriculum to train more practice ready graduates. 

ABA Launches Its Legal Rebels Project

Over the course of the next three months, the ABA will be profiling 50 of the profession's leading innovators at its Legal Rebels site. The first profiles, along with videos and audio slideshows that illustrate the changes they are trying to make in the practice of law, are now online. The ABA will add at least three new profiles to the site every week until Thanksgiving.

The Blogfamation Law Niche

Okay.  Fine.  I will admit it.  I made the name blogfamation up, but people combine words all of the time for fun and profit.  For me it this is really more an amusement.  You see I have a online buddy, Corinne Tampas over at What's Your Authority, who, like me, gets a kick out of scouring the blawgosphere looking for possible overlooked legal niches.  Corinne is a little bit better at it than I because she is a legal researcher and writer, and as such she tends to fall across these issues more easily.  We do not necessary look for practices areas that have not been tried, but rather those that are not well positioned or not well identified.  We look for sub-practice areas at which some attorney should be able to make a full time living if he or she wished.  Anyway, this is more Corinne's discovery than mine but, for better or worse, I made up the word.

Hence, blogfamation.  Either bringing or defending defamation suits because of all the crap and careless trash talking on the web.  Some have called cyberlible.  Let us face facts.  Real or not, truths or untruth, fact or fiction, gossip and rants spread across the web like wildfire.  Sometimes people are hurt.  Sometimes people are not hurt but think otherwise.  Sometimes people and companies are unduly helped by this wrong information.

There are sites the touch on this phenomena.  Dan Abrams help launch Gossip Cop recently, it which the site states that it is "Busting bad dish!"  There is FactCheck.Org.  It is a problem that even the best organizations have to fight.  Now Public recently reported that Wikipedia, for example, is changing how members contribute to online articles.  Under its old system, anyone could write and edit an article without revision, but under the new system articles about organizations and people will have to be fact checked by an editor before it is published.  There are sites that try to alert you and help you repair your online reputation.  One is called Reputation Advocates.  Another is Reputation Defender.  IRM Consultants claim to "neutralize negative publicity" on the web.  Of course, negative publicity is not the same as defamation, and consultants are not law firms.

There are some law firms that dabble in this area, as well as other practice areas, such as Kroneenberger / Burgoyne.  The Nissenbaum Law Group has a blog on the subject, but with most of these firms this is just one of many practice areas in which this subject matter can get lost.  For most online defamation is a sideline for technology lawyers and law firms, but defamation falls more in tort than it does in little tech disputes.  Other defamation lawyers are more broad based than this.  Nobody nationally or locally is really the blogfamation expert that I can see.  Few limit their practice to this area.

Presently, you see this problem in everyday life.  Clarksville, Texas attorney Mark Lesher and his wife filed a defamation lawsuit against anonymous posters on the Internet forum Topix.  They were just unmercifully trashed by a bunch of posters as they were charged in a what can only be considered a frivolous criminal charge of sexual assault in which they were summarily acquitted.

A Florida woman was awarded $11.3 million in a defamation lawsuit against a Louisiana woman who posted messages on the Internet accusing her of being a "crook", "con artist" and a "fraud".

Bloggers sued by Anna Nicole's mother have been going to jail, not because of any potential defamation but because, in one case, they failed to follow court orders, such as turning over computers for inspection.

Most of us read where Sarah Palin's lawyer threatened to serve libel papers on a blogger at a local kindergarten where the blogger worked.  That was probably a bit unnecessary and a represented a little too much grandstanding, but the blogger speculated on whether Palin had marital problems that might be leading to a divorce between Palin an her husband.  This represented an unproven or unsubstantiated rumor.

I do not know if Sarah Palin is right or wrong in pursuing these matters.  After all, she is a public figure.  Also, she starts plenty of these kind of unsubstantiated rumors herself, such as coining the phrase, it seems, "Obama death panels".  But, the point is that rumors, some damaging, can be rampant on the Net.  People and companies do not like it and they want to pay someone a lot of money to vindicate themselves.

The situation is not always helped with the proliferation of so-called "gripe sites".  Some are more general, such as Ripoff Reports.  But, others have more specific targets, such as ScrewPayPal.Com, FarmersInsuranceGroupSucks.Com, and ChaseSucks.Com.  MyVWLemon.Com boasts 2,000 members and 15,000 message board postings from VW buyers.  You can find a ongoing list of these on WebGripeSites.Com.  How long these sites will stay up before being removed is anybody's guess, but whether someone has a grievance or not, does not mean all of the statements posted on these sites are correct or innocent.  Public Citizen tends to get a lot of criticism itself, but it has been know to defend the existence of grip sites.  You have to think that when those griped about gripe about gripe sites it is often called litigation.

The question is which one of you is going to become the first lawyer known exclusively as the blogfamation expert in your area?

First New California Public Law School In 40 Years Opens

It finally happened.  The University of California - Irvine School of Law opened its doors with an inaugural class of 61 top-ranked students on full tuition scholarships.

Dean Erwin Chemerinsky said at a ribbon cutting that the School of Law at the University of California, Irvine, has already exceeded his expectations.  The students selected for the three-year full tuition program had grades comparable to those at top-20 law schools, and private donations are approaching $30 million.  The school's faculty was recruited from major law schools and its curriculum is billed as innovative, stressing public service and unique legal challenges of the 21st century.