Chuck Newton

The Tricked Out Law Firm

Okay, the etymology of the term "trick out" comes from the car tuning scene, and refers to modifying a vehicle with as many types of after market parts as supported by a certain vehicle, and really more than anybody can much stand. But, is this not true for most law firms or lawyers starting out as well?

I am not sure what it is among us as people. We just go overboard in everything we do sometimes. Not long ago I saw a House Hunters on HGTV in which a law student was so into Mickey Mouse that literally everything in her apartment in New Orleans had Mickey ears - down to the crown molding that made up the entire place. It was just downright scary to view.

Yet, most of us want to establish a law firm the is the visual equivalent of the monster tuck.  Or, the low rider driving down the road bouncing from its hydraulics, with the top opening and closing, the spinners on the wheels, the speakers blasting base, with furry dice on the rear view mirror and the bobble head dog in the back window.

Sure it is funny to think about. It can be amusing. But, most of us would not buy or operate a car like that for the time involved in maintaining it, the resulting money spent on upkeep, and the image it projects. Yet, metaphorically speaking, that is how many of us starting out design out law firms - like real art cars.

How?

First, there are all of the after market (or after law school) parts that can fit on the practice. There is an office, a desk, staff, partners, phone systems, computer systems, law libraries, conference rooms, file rooms, rec rooms, signage and the like.

To this we add the whole marketing spectrum. There are the yellow pages, the newspapers, maybe TV and radio and billboards if you can do it on credit. Add to this the paid-for website, blog, and social media. There is targeted direct mail, magazines, and then all of the strange things like police association stickers, charity gimmicks, and things you get talked into like sponsorships that have absolutely nothing to do with your message.

Most of what a law office is tricked out with are practice areas. Some like to call it "dead presidents law". I like to call it a recipe for a future disbarment. But, do the image of dollar bills floating down and images of dead presidents everywhere not have the same funky image as the art car or the Mickey Mouse law student apartment? I think so.

I literally saw a law firm yellow page ad the other day that covered everything from family law to bankruptcy to tax prep to real estate to patent law to taking a company public. The law firm was call So-In-So & Associates, but there was only one lawyer associated with the law firm in delving further, and there appeared to not even be any staff beyond the executive suite.

I saw a truck the other day that was so high, the man had to climb up in the cab first, then he had to lean out and down to grab the baby from his wife, and then he had to grab his wife by both hands and help haul her into cab.  And, she was pregnant! Got to love us rednecks in Texas. The truck had a chrome tool box in the back, and I was thinking how in the hell would they even be able to get to it. It had a gun rack in the back window, and the back gate had been removed and replaced with a net, I guess to cut down on drag. it had a diamond plate bed liner and chrome wheels. You could tell this truck had never gone muddin' or off road in any way. Hunting? The paint job would leave that out of the question, not to mention the neon lights under the vehicle. This truck was just crazy funny, not so much because it existed, but because a family was actually trying to impress people with it and use it as their family vehicle.

Yet, this is exactly what we try to do in a sense in the practice of law.

When you think about it, people do not want to be amused by lawyers and law practices like they might tolerate these tricked out vehicles and the Mickey Mouse apartment. They want competence and a feeling that the lawyers knows what he or she is doing, and that he and she time to concentrate on their needs. To them, the tricked out law practice is not going to much work.

I Guess I Am Just A Flaming Liberal

If you think less of me for that statement, fine.  If you want to discount my writing on other aspects of the practice of law, that is okay as well.  Because, I think we know that the most conservative among us are an excluding and dismissive bunch by nature.

Sure we can define the wedge issues as being the difference between pro-choice and pro-life (please do not call it pro-abortion because that is often not accurate), or the sanctity of marriage issues such as whether gay marriage is an abomination or a civil rights issue.  (On the latter issue I think religions get what they deserve given the age old desire to impose religious principals on others by allowing the state to perform the sacrament of marriage. For, if the state can do it, has to be available to everyone.  I guess I am one of the few that believes that marriage should be left to the exclusive domain of the religions and that the government should only grant civil unions to anybody, gay or straight).  But, what seems to really define us and divide us is the issue of transit.

Transit?

Sure. Nothing defines us more as a nation. Nothing brings us together or divides us more than transit. Things like healthcare are important but you have still got to get healthcare to the people and the people to healthcare. Since we brought horses to this continent, transit has been the defining issue. And, where are we on this point?

Admittedly, the Internet and broadband help, but it is not a replacement for a proper transit policy.

Just as with electricity policy, which is going terribly wrong in my opinion, I am fearful that we are not going to ever get to these arguments given the blind discontent and name calling in this country.

There was an interesting article the Public Discourse published by The Witherspoon Institute entitled Why Conservatives Should Care About Transit.  Here is what the article says in part:

"Sadly, American conservatives have come to be associated with support for transportation decisions that promote dependence on automobiles, while American liberals are more likely to be associated with public transportation, city life, and pro-pedestrian policies. This association can be traced to the ’70s, when cities became associated with social dysfunction and suburbs remained bastions of ‘normalcy.’ This dynamic was fueled by headlines mocking ill-conceived transit projects that conservatives loved to point out as examples of wasteful government spending. Of course, just because there is a historic explanation for why Democrats are “pro-transit” and Republicans are “pro-car” does not mean that these associations make any sense.

"Pro-highway, anti-transit, anti-pedestrian policies work against the core beliefs of American conservatives in another and even more important way: they create social environments that are hostile to real community. Once again, the ways in which automobile-oriented development prevents communities from forming are too numerous to list exhaustively. They range from the very obvious to the very subtle.

"Walkable settlements are not just a pleasant lifestyle choice. They are a precondition of the strong, inter-connected communities that social conservatives desire. It is not difficult to envision how these communities can make our lives comprehensively better. Americans are not obliged by any law of nature or rule of the market to live in mediocre, anti-social places. With changes in public policy, over time we can begin again to create neighborhoods that promote real community".

I basically agree with this analysis.  Certainly it is easy to blame our current plight on these policies.  You can ignore these other social issues for the sake of this argument.  But, for me it is a bigger issue.  The definitional definition of conservative does not work for me -- a blind adherence to the past.  It too often represents a stubborn opposition to progress.  Even the modern conservative movement defines a key tenant of a belief in established institutions, and an belief in exceptionalism.

Liberalism is really a belief in positive law and a faith in progress.

Contrary to the ideologues, we are not Utopians or the search for a Utopian end.  It is a belief that every tomorrow can be made better than the last and that the world can be substantially improved from its present state.

It is really not a debate about capitalism because liberals and conservatives both support capitalism.  Capitalism, after all, is essentially about the economy an nobody wishes to abolish the economy.  It is not about socialism because we all believe that property needs to be primarily privately owned, and that profits need to provide incentive for investment and the employment of labor.  And, this talk about socialism, fascism and communism is just idiotic.  Getting past the name calling, most of these arguments are simply discussions over efficiency vs. fairness and freedom vs. equality.  Conservatives want an informal capitalistic system that leave the system alone to do what it wants (freedom) no matter what its ultimate impact on the self-interest of anybody else.  Liberals want a more formal system (equality) that provides some protection for everyone.

Sure conservatives would like to classify liberals as bent on economic and social experimentation, but I think that is too harsh because what we promote here at the Third Wave is a break from the old Second Wave structures that hold us back.  The Third Wave concerns itself in the perfectibility of us individual lawyers in the reworking of our business lives.

That is why the transit debate is so important. That is why the debate over what is and what is not the true conservative vs. liberal debate is important. We have just got to get past the name calling and back to the discussion over freedom vs. equality and the proper balance between the two.

David Logan On Tribal Leadership

Mutually Assured Distraction

Call it timidity, fearfulness, faintheartedness, or maybe even cowardice. It might be shyness in the sense people like to get lost in a crowd. It is apprehensiveness, I guess. But, for some reason people starting out in the practice of law tend to do two things that might not be the best.  

First, they tend to buddy up, which is to say they want to partner with someone even before they have one stick of business, any money, and nothing but overhead. It is harder to feed multiple mouths and families than one.

Second, they move into office space really for no better reason than to feel part of the bunch or congregation or horde.

They think by partnering up and/or becoming a groupie that they are bettering themselves and they think, for some strange reason, that they are improving their chances of success.

I doubt this.

How many actually got the work they wanted to get done while studying at the law library? I never did. I reviewed a little. Highlighted a little. But who likes being befuddled or confounded? Right? So, my mind would wonder. Maybe I would just read the newspaper or surf a little. That was bad enough, I suppose, but too often I would get help in my distraction. The library typically turned into a series of exchanges and detours with people who were more than willing to venture off course with me. They would leave, I would read another page, and then another distraction would appear.

I know we are all absent from the task now and then, but more often than not the buddy or the workplace ends up being more like the law library. It results in mutually assured distraction. You know, where we all act to distract each other in a manner assuring that nobody gets any substantive work done.

We are all prone toward cognitus interruptus, or the disruption of the normal thought process as a result of external distraction, especially where are mental focus is necessary. Social media is enough of a culprit really. Our own procrastination is bad enough without having an army of people to help us in our distraction.

I am not saying we do not need friends, mentors or a social network. I still believe in network marketing or relationship marketing. But, success does not require mutually assured distraction. It requires a sense of purpose and an effort to meet goals. Really it requires a sense of self. That is often lessened by others whose job seems to be to keep you focused toward goals that are not yours.

So, think twice about partnering up and placing yourself into permanent groups when starting out on your quest to practice law. You are probably better off all by yourself. If you think that is a recipe for loneliness, so be it. You do not have to be lonely all of the time, but you do need to stay focused like a laser beam on building your practice. You do not need to also deal with the goals, attributes and distractions of others as well.

Video Game Law Niche

The Wall Street Journal brought it up. That demonstrates the importance of this growing practice area. I do not much play video games any more, so I am not up personally on the niche, but nobody can deny how big the industry is.  According to the WSJ it is a $50 billion industry and growing.

The Los Angeles Times has covered it as well. The passions of gaming and law are just irresistible for too many lawyers.

There are a number of legal seminars dedicating to introducing lawyers to the practice. One that just recently past, for example, was the Gamer Technology Law seminar by Law Seminars International. And, expensive as well. Only a successful emerging area could get away with charging $1,245.00 for a two day seminar.

Seth J. Steinberg actually left the job as counsel to George Lucas to practice gaming law.  How crazy is that?

Where there is so much money, trademarks, intellectual property and the like there is going to be litigation. There is going to be abundant contract work. There is going to be employment law issues. There is going to be non-disclosure issues. There is simply a need for lawyers.

Read about some of this area at Law Of The Level blog, The Game Attorney, Video Game Law Blog, Law Of the Game, Patent Arcade, Game Politics, Video Game Law, and Lawyers In A Gamer's World, to name a few.

I would like to give a special shout out to Jay Moffitt's Gamers Rights Lawyer blog.

Do you like gaming and law. Then you need to delve in deeper and find out if this niche might be right for you as well.

The Bloom Box

I have often thought electricity and the grid is the last tether for law practices and prosumers, not to mention that electric companies and the system they used are just infuriating.  Like the Internet and applications it was thought in the 50s that electricity would become too cheap to meter. That did not happen because of the industrial and financial complex.  A top down revolution. Solar, and wind are not constant and take up too big of a foot print to fully succeed. Most Americans, or anybody else for that matter, cannot really generate their own energy well with these methods. This leave big energy lording over us.

Japan has already set its sights on fuel cells because it democratizes energy. It puts the average home owner in charge of producing what they need and distributing the rest whether it be to the public at large or to power their automobiles through electricity or hydrogen.

The Bloom Box was recently covered on 6o Minutes.  I have embedded the broadcast below. But, what it demonstrates is that finally some meaningful company is working toward this goal of un-tethering us and democratizing energy in this country.  Further, to hear them tell it, the Bloom Box might be available to the average homeowner, and hence the carpet, with this decade.  Let us hope.

Watch CBS News Videos Online

(Video) 4 Ways To Fix Our Broken Legal System

The land of the free has become a legal minefield, says Philip K. Howard -- especially for teachers and doctors, whose work has been paralyzed by fear of suits. What's the answer? A lawyer himself, Howard has four propositions for simplifying US law. What do you think?

School, Debt, Governors And The Cultural Attack To Soak Our Students

There are any number of concerning stories of late abouta college education and debt. It makes you wonder about our priorities. I know Fox News believe that a college education make you liberal and dumbs you down, but still does this justify the attack on our children posed by rising debt and tuition?

The Huffington Post has started a series entitled "Majoring In Debt" in which students hold up signs of how much debt they owe, and report their personal stories.  So far the study reports on one law student, Todd Sussman, who is about to graduate from law school with $180,000.00 in debt and no prospect of a job after graduation.

The great Republican revolution in New Jersey has led to Governor Christe taking the state's budget problems out on its college and graduate students.  People who bemoaned federal assistance with our economic crises, are now slashing $18.5 million from Rutgers University's budget.  And, they are doing this at a time when private giving is down substantially.

And, hitting my family closer to home, the University of Houston Law Center will see a 16.5% increase in tuition and it will be even more for new student's entering.  Dean Ray Nimmer and the board must be out of their ever loving minds. Their model, according to the Houston Chronicle, is the tuition at private law schools that do not get state funding. Erin Ferris, a third-year law student, states that she believes the tuition increase is necessary to "preserve rankings and get better", as if there is anything wrong with UH Law.  Maybe Fox News is right. If the state law schools seek to match the tuition of the private law schools in the state, then they realistically have no additional benefit to their students and probably should not receive any state funding at all.

Of course, nobody is matching the blood bath instituted against state law school students in California.

Whether federal or state, rich or poor, we need to reaffirm what is important to us in this country. We either cherish education and the engine of our future economic growth or we do not. We cannot keep doing this to our youth. It is nothing but indentured servitude or a future of poverty and bankruptcy. No one party is to solely blame, but the fact that it is the GOP in New Jersey, Florida, Texas and California that believes the most expedient way to deal with their problems is to soak those who seek a higher education is not encouraging.

In Reality All Legal Services Are Unbundled

Recently, I filed an adversary proceeding relate to a creditor violating the automatic stay issued in a bankruptcy.  It was a relatively small claim, which might have cost the creditor a few thousand of dollars to resolve.  The reason the lawsuit was filed was because the creditor (debt buyer) would not stop sending billing statements to the bankruptcy debtor despite the fact the bankruptcy attorney had called the creditor and reminded them to stop, and sent two demands by fax informing the creditor of the violations and asking the creditor to stop free of litigation. It was not as if efforts were not made to get the matter resolved without the need for litigation, which was unfortunate because violators who have knowledge of the bankruptcy and who violate the automatic stay are generally held strictly liable.

Now, once I file a suit as here, the creditor usually notices the error and someone is on the phone apologizing and seeking to resolve the matter. Why? Because, again, it is costly to move forward on such a suit, you can usually prove up a violation by use of objective facts, and because the creditor is strictly liable not only for the violation, but for the cost of the litigation.

That is what normally happens, but not always.

The other day I get no phone call, no discussion, and no warning.  What I receive is a motion to dismiss my adversary proceeding from the creditor claiming that the Bankruptcy Court lacks jurisdiction to enforce its own injunctions and orders.  A pretty amazing statement when you think about it. And, one not likely to prevail. It is the legal equivalent of a Hail Mary pass.

So, I call up the opposing counsel, remind him of the strict liability nature of the suit, that the willful nature of the violation is proved by objective facts from the Court's own files coupled with the actual billing statements sent and the faxes to the creditor from the bankruptcy attorney.  The response from the lawyer, I would assume to the shock of his client if known, was that his creditor/client "pays like a slot machine", and as a result the creditor will get everything that creditor is due.

The conversation was interesting.  Contrary to my intent, the conversation did not center around the perceived needs of the Plaintiff of Defendant. It centered on the need for lots of cash of the attorney for the Defendant.  It centered on the need for Defendant's counsel to offer as much service, at the highest price possible, on what is likely a Don Quixote defense for no better reason than his debt-buyer client is huge and will pay his bill pretty much without question.  The attorney would rather have the $10,000 to $20,000 in his pocket, from his client, as compared to the $2.000.00 or $3,000.00 the Defendant might have to pay now.  We know this because the remark of Defendant's counsel did not indicate any larger legal issue that needs to be resolved, or even his client's good faith need for the extension or change of the law.

Florida International University College Of Law

It seems that in everything I read about Florida International University College of Law the one point that seems to be first made is that it is ranked a 4th tier law school by U.S News.  But, I think who cares?  The law school has three things that you need if you want to practice law, and rankings really only serve branding and are not an indicator of success in the legal profession.

FIU Law has (1) location, (2) a high bar passage rate, and (3) cheaper than average tuition and costs.  In applying to law school that is what should count.

Location - Miami, Florida, the 7th largest city in the United States.  A global city that is rich in finance, commerce, culture, fashion, media, entertainment, arts and trade. All of this equals law and a demand for legal services.

Bar Passage Rate - Although a very young law school (it graduated it inaugural class on May 22, 2005) it consistently ranks 1st or 2nd in bar passage in the State of Florida.

Tuition - The tuition is only $13,226.50 for full time students and $9,069.30 for part time students if you are in state.  But, even if not, at $27,470.69 for full time students, it is substantially cheaper than many private schools in worse locations.

FIU is a public university made up of 26 schools and colleges.  The law school was only founded in 2000, but it is fully accredited by the ABA.  This means, of course, that a FIU Law graduate can pretty much take the bar and practice law anywhere in the United States.  Undoubtedly, much of its ranking is as a result of its young age.

The law school is now housed in the award winning Robert A. Stern designed building called the Rafael Diaz-Ballart Hall.  It cost $36 million to build and because it is part of a large university, on campus housing is available.

Florida International University College of Law is certainly a law school to consider in your quest to be a lawyer.