Chuck Newton

Solo By Choice (2011-2012 Edition) And The Companion Guide

Okay, I am a law practice nerd. I will admit it. So, imagine my delight when I received Carolyn Elefant's most recent edition of Solo By Choice and The Companion Guide that goes with it.

I recently attended a presentation by a law school in which their presenters said all of the right things to students in order to get them to select their law school. They have all learned to mouth the phrase "We train practice-ready lawyers". Admittedly, most law schools are a little better at this than when I attended in th dark ages, but not by much. Just look at their curriculum and you will see that what they say is more of an affirmation of what they recognize that law schools must do but, in fact, do not do well.

I can get into the reasons why law schools do not train practice-ready lawyers when the overwhelming majority of their graduates will be going out on their own or associating in small practices, but it is beside the point. Law schools do not help and then when you graduate you do not really know what to do or where to turn.

That is the reason I like Caroly Elefant's books because they offer a valuable resource to attorneys or law students who have decided to start their own law practices.

I am not as prolific in my writings of late, but I do offer bits and pieces of advice to
those looking to start their own law practice. I hope you read and appreciate those tidbits.

Carolyn Elefant, however, has that unusual knack of being able to assemble all that she knows, has learned and has obtained in discussions with other successful lawyers into a comprehensive and cohesive guide that you need if you are intent on starting your own law practice.

And The Companion Guide!

Have you ever thought I know so little about a subject that I do not even know the questions to ask?

The Companion Guide takes care of this for you. It not only asks the 34 most important questions you need to know, but it seeks to help you answer each one.

Marvelous!

If you are thinking about going out on your own, then you need (and I really do mean NEED) Solo by Choice and The Companion Guide. Go online and buy these books right now.

The Paradox Of Toothpaste And Law

When I think about the practice of law, and what makes it ultimately enjoyable to me and appreciated by my clients, I am reminded of the book entitled The Paradox of Choice.

I think whatever problem exists in this regard can be related toothpaste.

My wife and I tend to go grocery shopping together. I hate it when she sends me into the toothpaste aisle. I cannot find what I want, and I often still pick up the wrong thing. I actually feel stress because of the gazillion choices I face in just trying to find a tube of toothpaste. Hell, toothpaste is just suppose to be an accessory to clean and maintain the aesthetics and health of my teeth. I am not buying it to eat for dinner. But now, instead of just choosing between a few brands, the world has decided to make what really is a combination of abrasives, fluoride and detergents into something sexy. As such, I am forced to choose between gel, paste, striped, cosmetic whiting or not, herbal, natural, tarter control, fluoride or not, antibacterial or not, and any number of flavors. There is the entire size thing. There are endless combinations from travel size to jumbo, requiring me to read the tiny cost or value per unit information post on each one. And there is no longer just a tube of toothpaste but any number of containers. Further, with the purchase of each, these days you have to consider the impact on the environment. It is just too much. It produces information and decision overload.  And, what should be a celebration, I guess, of variety just leads to the consumption of my time and causes me anxiety. In the end, I just default to my old fashion tube of Colgate in red box. But even with that default, I will often grab the wrong box and have to make a second trip to the dreaded toothpaste aisle.

The subtitle of the book is "Why More Is Less". Essentially, the World is a contradiction. As stated by Barry Schwartz, "Autonomy and Freedom of choice are critical to our well being, and choice is critical to freedom and autonomy. Nonetheless, though modern Americans have more choice than any group of people every has before, and thus, presumably, more freedom and autonomy, we don't seem to be benefiting from it psychologically."Essentially, the World is a contradiction that we all must strive to tame for ourselves should we seek to be happy in our practices.

Happiness is ultimately affected by the success or failure of a goal achieved. But, the endless and banal choices we face tend to offer more of a distraction. Hell, in most choices not only do we not know enough to choose what is best, we do not even know what we do not know to make the right decision. As such, choices tend to bring unhappiness to law grads, lawyers and their clients. The legal society, which was once a graduation right, has become a series of debilitating and demanding choices. It is what has made the practice of law and the decision to go to law school so painful for so many people.

I personally overcome this by focusing on a regiment, and eliminating the environments that result in many of the choices that would need to be made in my professional life otherwise. This sometimes produces some regret of the roads not traveled, but the overall result is the most comfortable for me. I seek to control my environment thereby eliminating my array of painful and often regretful options.

1.    I NICHED MY LAW PRACTICE. This is more difficult than it sounds. But, I have greatly narrowed my practice area to what is just a few pages of the United States Bankruptcy Code. I try not to vary from it. My goal is to know, understand and apply every nuisance of this part of the Code better than anybody else. I traded some of my freedom for commitment. This is so difficult because most lawyers view this opportunities missed. I know the feeling well as I tend to be like a kid in a candy shop when it comes to practice areas. What I have learned, however, is that the real joy in life is knowing one thing, no matter how obscure, better than most anybody else. You cannot achieve that unless you are willing to take the leap of faith and commit to the niche. For me, geographic and affinity niches do not work. I need a universe the size of which I can master -- a universe that narrows the choices.

2.    I MOVED MY LAW FIRM HOME AND ON THE WEB. Call me a hermit, I guess. But, I have a lot of attorneys venturing to my home and to The Woodlands, Texas to see how I do it. Outside office space, and traditional law firms so overwhelm with choices and options, without consideration of the consequences. It can just ruin the practice of law, emotionally if not financially. What type of space? Is there room to enlarge? The terms of the lease? Staffing issues? Overhead issues? Furnishing issues? Location of the space? Amenities? To partner up, to share space, to market the space, and that brings with it the whole ongoing drama of "The Office". And, then there is the commute. That raises issues of transportation, parking, gas cards, maintenance, and the like. And then clothing. Not so much as to whether I dress appropriately, but what will those around me think? Each of these decisions result in endless choices, each with an endless number of consequences the result of which you cannot possibly know. It is time consuming, it is unprofitable, it is anxiety ridden, and it can be ultimately painful. I have never had one of these areas, no matter how successful overall, not lead to regrets.

3.    I TAKE CONTROL OF MY CASES. Because I have put myself in a position where I cannot do everything, I have to try to chose my cases and clients well. The practice of law is more of an art than a science. Not every case works out well for the client or the attorney, for that matter. You want the cases to work out all of the time, but they need to work out most of the time. This very much relies on the relationship with your clients, and your decision of how you chose to practice. It seems to me that a client is retaining a lawyer for his or her expertise. If the client wants to analyze the situation legalistically and make the decisions that arises, if the client wants those choices, then the client does not need my expertise that much. People use to go to a lawyer with a problem, and the lawyer would say, "This is what we are going to do"? The client would agree, or not. The client decide on the lawyer and had faith in that lawyer. Today, the client goes to the lawyer and, especially because the law is so much more complicated and full of nuisance, the lawyer says here are the choices. Here is the risk of each choice. Then the lawyer asks, "What choice do you want"? The client asks, "Which should I take", and the lawyer again says, "Here are your choices and the risks".  Then the client asks, "If you were me, which would you choose", to which the lawyer says, "But, I am not you".  Today, we shift the burden to the client. We shift the burden to the one that does not know the answer and that does not have the legal knowledge or experience. We shift the burden to the one that does not know enough to know what they do not know. Further, we shift the burden to the one who is emotional blinded by the event or problem faced. It is not that I do not explain the options and the risks to my potential clients and clients. It is not that I do not let them decide to settle or litigate a case. I do. I do so thoroughly, openly and above board. What I do is explain to them the choice we, together, are accepting and why. If they do not want that choice, they are free to go elsewhere, and there are no hard feelings with the client making the choice to either not retain me or ending my representation either.

For happiness in the practice of law we attorneys have to shrink the toothpaste aisle of choices. It is really that simple.

What Kills Most Small Businesses Kills Most Law Practices

There is a problem with this view by attorneys that the practice of law is not a business.  It is a profession.  We are professionals.  That we are, but it is also a business.  When that aspect is denied a lawyer does so believing the profession is not subject to the same business pressures with which most small businesses must endure. So yes, by all means wear a coat and tie, meet your deadlines, be polite to your clients and opposing counsel, show up to court on time, keep your money and your client's money separate, and do not sell yourself on TV like Crazy Eddie.

Once lawyers get acclimated to the idea that they are not immune from the same business pressures as everyone else -- get past the ideas that the World is flat and the Sun rotates around the Earth -- then they can accept the key to most business failures and deal with it at the outset.

The two most common culprits for a small business failure are undercapitalization (a cashflow crises) and overexpansion.

Now, as to the first factor, I know almost all lawyers come out of school or another law firm with not much in the way of resources.  Therefore, the common statement is that all new lawyers are undercapitalized.  Maybe so.  From this perspective, I was undercapitalized when I started out in the practice of law.  But, undercapitalization is more than the amount of money you have in the bank to run a business at a deficit or to pay for start up cost.  It is more than the amount of cashflow coming into the practice coffers each month.  The truth of the matter is that if most lawyers had a bunch of money to start out, they would waste it on nonessentials like nice office space, a new desk, fancy and expensive tech, a law library, and all of the trappings they believe they need to present an air of being established.  In short, most lawyers starting out spend money (either money in the bank or debt) to create a business lie. They are not being honest with themselves and they are not being honest with the public. The problem with this, and why it is so wasteful, is that in this day and age it is so unnecessary.

The World's Shortest eBook

Oh, brevity!  It was not a talent with which I was blessed. I do still appreciate it, and it is a good trait for management consultants. Get to the crux of the matter or problem and get to it quickly.

Michael McLaughlin of the blog Beating Feast of Famine has The World's Shortest eBook: 34 Sources of Client Value available on his site.

Well, this is about as brief as I get, but I do believe the categories and lists are informative in thinking through your personal situation.

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.

"The First Thing We Do, Let's Kill All The Lawyers"

We are all too familiar with this line form Shakespeare's King Henry VI, are we not?  But, what is interesting is that Shakespeare did not mean this line as a cut or dig against lawyers, but a dig against commercial life and government.  The point in the play is that the surest way to chaos and tyranny is to remove the guardians of independent thinking -- the lawyers.  Today people use this quote out of context as in doing so would restore some kind of sanity to commercial life, but to Shakespeare it was an attempt to underscore the important role that lawyers, like you and I, play in society.  It was not meant in the sense of a contemplated revolution, that some would like to see.

Yet, despite the gripes and the whining about lawyers in general, in this day and age we do not have to look far as to the excesses in commercial life by the elimination of lawyers.  You severely restrict shareholder litigation and the ability to pursue bad things, and you get Enron, Worldcom and the like.  Today we have the financial world falling apart because of greed and lies and deceptions because we have so greatly reduced the role of law and lawyers in this arena for everyone except the giant commercial outfits themselves.

But, the mantra like a constant drumbeat continues with some, blaming lawyers for all of the ills of this  world.  It is really pitiful.

The newest entry into this area is Life Without Lawyers by Philip K. Howard.  Someone else that cannot seem to read Shakespeare in proper context.

Mr. Howard is also author of the best seller The Death of Common Sense:  How Law is Suffocating America.  You can read them if you wish.

From the book jacket on Life Without Lawyers: "Americans are losing the freedom to make sense of daily choices -- teachers can't maintain order in the classroom, managers are trained to avoid candor, schools ban the game of tag, and companies plaster inane warnings on everything: 'Remove Baby Before Folding Stroller.' ... Today we are flooded with rules and legal threats that prevent us from taking responsibility and using our common sense."

Of course there are those that try to scare us with high exaggeration.  We like to believe are school systems have failed, but we all like our teachers.  The truth of the matter is that teachers by and large maintain order in their classrooms and this is an insidious remark.  The law by and large attempts to punish managers for lack of candor.  Kids today rarely want to play tag as that is so last century.

Take the laws, whether you agree with them or not, concerning drunk driving and the civil penalties that follow them.  These laws are enforced by lawyers.  As with most laws, these do not discourage people from taking responsibility or using their common sense.  Most of these storm warnings that the law encourages act as just the opposite.  They bolster people to think and employ common sense.

There are lots of conflicts in this world, and the law and lawyers are an effective exercise in how to resolve these many issues in a peaceful and capitalistic way.

There are those in business that want to be the independent arbiters of what is right and wrong.  It falls in along the lines of "who died and made you king".  The problem with this is that these people want to make that decision based upon what makes them the most money.  The health, happiness or morality of of others be damned.  This book appeals to these people.

Sometimes I think we forget that some husbands beat their wives, some companies put some terribly bad thought out equipment on our play grounds, that businesses want to deceive and unduly profit, some doctors make horrific mistakes, some shareholders are taken to the cleaners by management, and not all of us are the best drivers.  Who stands up for these people?  They are victims.  Not Mr. Howard.

If lawyers are guilty of anything it is that they sometimes do over think disclosures to the extent a company warns parents to take babies out of a stroller before folding it up.  That is unnecessary.  But, such disclosures do not impinge on common sense.  People with a good dose of common sense already know such things, affirm their thinking and move on in light of such warnings.  Otherwise it is nothing more than fodder for late night comedians.

What I think evades common sense are books such as these.  Does suggesting that we need a world without lawyers even suggest good sense?  I do not think so.