Solo In Chicago…Grow Your Practice!

 Powered by Max Banner Ads 

I recently finished up Ken Gormley’s, The Death of American Virtue, an excellent and balanced analysis of the Clinton Impeachment saga. Mr. Gormley is the dean at Duquesne’s law school and a former biographer of Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox.  Just briefly on the subject of the book, it’s a wonderful, descriptive read dredging up those 1970s Arkansas land deals through the early and undisciplined Clinton Administration, the rise of Newt, appointment of Independent Counsel Ken Starr and the Senate’s failure to convict President Clinton of the articles of impeachment. Personally, I spent two years of my life working on Capitol Hill, 1998-1999 so I have more than a little first-hand knowledge of the initial Drudgereport leaks in January ’98 to Clinton’s “I have never had sexual relations with…that woman” and Newt’s subsequent demise after the November ’98 elections.

But why am I posting here about political trivia when Solo In Chicago is all about the practical steps necessary to grow a great law practice?

Two words:  Bill Ginsburg (Monica Lewinsky’s first lawyer). I wasn’t a lawyer back during my Washington years so perhaps I didn’t care about Ginsburg too much but now it’s a great and instructive point for lawyers everywhere. And that’s where this post’s title comes from. Ginsburg was one of the best attorneys in the business when it came to defending hospitals and physicians in nasty, high-stakes medical malpractice litigation (pg. 369). In early years of practice, he had defended swimming pool manufacturers in horrible death and accident cases, racking up an astounding won-loss record (pg. 394). So he was likely primarily a California state court litigator. But of course Monica was facing a potential federal, criminal indictment regarding her possible perjury in only the most publicized legal proceeding of all time.

But put aside the media maelstrom, and it’s the same decision we all face every so often…when to take and not to take that case that’s outside your “regular” practice area.  So what’s the answer…should you take that case? Consider 6 questions/factors:

• Would the case involve practicing in a totally “foreign” court/legal system? Meaning a different state/county or federal vs. state court or civil/criminal.  I think this might be the first level and most challenging hurdle and one that should be crossed most carefully. Personally, I do get to multiple counties although not too frequently…it’s awkward but doable since the underlying state law is the same but the different local rules and customs need to be known too. However, the federal to state court and criminal to civil practice (or vice versa) are far more challenging. I’ve handled 5-10 low-level criminal matters and even those have been dicey, not in terms of results but just the criminal procedures and proof standards and the potential criminal punishments/ramifications.
• Is the case/subject a logical or potential future extension of your current practice? If yes, I think this would be a great reason to take a case outside your regular practice area. For example, my practice is some 75% involved with parentage, divorce, and various modification/enforcement issues involving parentage and divorce cases. If someone calls about an adoption or child abuse related allegation to me those would be obvious extensions of “family law.” Further, our firm has thought about some non-family law areas of expansion such as elder and immigration law due to certain demographic trends. Again, new cases come in those areas, I’m takin’ them.
• What are the ramifications if you screw things up? It’s true and critical. I wouldn’t take on any felony level criminal matter because I don’t want many years in prison on my conscience for the next 40 years. A few years back I took over a real estate transaction for a friend of mine who been trying to handle it for a relative of his and he had really had not known what he was doing. So I picked-up the ball, there was a slight delay in the deal and because of the delay the Buyer (I had the Seller) got a $2,000ish price drop out of it, but the deal eventually closed uneventfully. Was it mishandled? Yes. Were the potential ramifications serious enough that he shouldn’t have taken on the matter? I think not.
• Do you have access to people/resources to help you? Here I think you need to balance the difference between the occasional question that you might pose to a mentor or an online group which we always have vs. the need for constant hand-holding which might be too much to expect. Second, simply how are your legal research skills and do you have access to the proper resources to handle the case? Just recently I’ve been dealing with a replevin matter and a rare temporary restraining order issue. And these weren’t issues I knew just off the top of my head but I did know generally what each situation involved and it was simple legal research within the Illinois Compiled Statutes so no biggie.
• Balance the Opportunity Cost. Meaning, we shouldn’t just look at the effort necessary to handle the new case outside of your regular practice area, no, we also must weigh the lost opportunity to work on other things that you can’t spend time on due to the new case. This is very unique to the individual lawyers circumstances both currently and her future plans. I think the primary consideration here is what are you giving up (if anything) to take on the new, unfamiliar case? Subject to some of the previous analysis above, simply, if you’re practice is less than full and taking on the new, unfamiliar matter would have no impact on servicing your regular practice areas, ya take the case. Conversely, if your practice is 110% full taking on one unfamiliar matter likely would take the time for more than one of your typical cases due to familiarity with the subject matter, you probably don’t take on the unfamiliar matter. My exception to that simple analysis would be any future expansion planning for your business. We want to grow into the elder law market so I would selectively take a case or two in that area as a trade for 3 divorce matters based on future planning goals.
• Can you help a client, former client, or referral source? Since this group is so critical to your business you should bend-over backwards for them. Personally, this ends up of being some simple estate planning in my practice. Of course the key word here is HELP not screw-up their cases.

So what about Attorney Ginsburg? I haven’t heard any of his personal analysis of his role in Monica-gate. Personally, even leaving aside the media glare unique to that case, I’d have a hard time taking on the case due to point #1 above. The jump from state/civil court to federal/criminal would be too big of a jump for me.

But, in general, my observation is that lawyers are too conservative in taking on new, less familiar matters. Don’t leave that $$$ on the table if you can put it into your pocket.

Know your research, be aware of the resources available to you, and be confident in your ability to solve problems and find solutions…that’s what lawyering is!