Solo In Chicago…Grow Your Practice!

Few things bother me professionally more than lawyers and law firms who seem to have the following business philosophy:

—First, take exceedingly large retainers up front.
—Second, churn the case for approximately 6 months by filing unfocused, fruitless pleadings and discovery.
—Third, withdraw from the case and file a fee petition against their former client for even more $$$.

We just got retained recently in a simple dissolution of marriage matter so I pulled the case file and took a look around. The previous firm filed the case some 9 months ago and took a $1,500 retainer up front. The case was filed and service was made on the Respondent; some 5 other court dates came and went; and, the firm withdrew with the case no closer to conclusion. Perhaps even worse was a matter against a gentleman who to my knowledge owes more past due child support than anyone in the state of Illinois. The firm brought several pleadings such as petitions for rule to show cause and motions to modify child support and visitation, never even got the pleadings they filed to hearing, then withdrew, and the last I saw had brought a $10,000 fee petition against their former client. It’s quite sad actually in much of my court-appointed contempt defense work, which is quite often procedurally post-divorce, the amounts of attorney fee judgments I see against former clients and the dissatisfaction of so many former clients with their attorneys.

What to do?

How about being a results-oriented attorney. How about starting with a specific end in mind and communicating with your clients specifically what you and her/his expectations are. Sadly I think these “lawyer churn” cases are almost the norm in the domestic relations field. Rule of Professional Conduct 1.5 disallows contingency fees in most domestic relations matters (child support collection being a notable exception). I suppose a contingency case for say custody of a child is rather unseemly, but some of my examples above aren’t exactly peachy either. Flat or capped fees? I’ve capped fees in some of the most common domestic relations matters like a motion to modify child support, for example. But in an early stage divorce it’s nearly impossible to gauge things like the opposing party/lawyer and the general tone of a case.

In my opinion at the end of the day you’ve got to create the personal policy of pushing your cases relentlessly towards settlement, hearing, and final resolution. And much of the pushing is about driving action BETWEEN court dates…that’s when the progress MUST occur. Waiting on those 15-minute court dates every couple of months is a recipe for disaster.

The phone ain’t ringin’…it’s Christmas Eve! So I decided to skim some articles I’d been wanting to get around to reading…the highlights:

1. Some news for those of you on the front lines of lawyering in the Circuit Court of Cook County. First, here’s the piece announcing the creation of a new domestic violence division within the Court.  My understanding is this will primarily impact the life of judges (and less that of me as private lawyer) over at 555 W. Harrison since previously the judges over there had been split between the criminal and domestic relations divisions.  As a citizen of Cook County I was a tad saddened to see this proposal regarding the closure of 4 suburban courthouses over the weekend to save $$$. Am I missing something or isn’t there an obvious compromise to close a couple versus the only choices being close 4 or none?

2. The Double-Edged Sword of Suing a Client. A nice analysis from our friend Ed Poll with an analytical process to undertake before suing a client…first, there’s the loss of future business/referrals; second, possible negative publicity; third, possible negative press/perception. Remember regarding these sorts of matters, client communication is key. And I must say I’ve frowned a bit of late on using collection agencies who can be as much of a pain in the butt for creditor or for debtor.

3. One Lawyer’s Definitive Guide to Video Marketing for Lawyers. It’s hard to think of reasons NOT to do this as any cost barriers to entering the camcorder/video market have virtually disappeared. I’m going to make a big push here in 2010.

4. How to Market Your Business with Facebook. Well, since I only use FB to criticize Notre Dame football, converse about golf, and for the occasional political rank this blog ain’t the place to learn about FB marketing. But I WILL have a Facebook Page up shortly! As a non-expert on all things “social networking” it sure seems like FB and Twitter are where the buzz is. A separate link on 21 small to mid-sized Chicago businesses using social media effectively.

5. Total Attorneys:  For-Profit Lawyer Referrals? I honestly had never heard of Total Attorneys until the Tribune ran this piece a couple weeks back (it is a Chicago-based company). It doesn’t sound that different than LegalMatch that I used a couple years back although the article makes it sound like Total Attorneys directs the prospect to a single lawyer whereas LegalMatch merely allowed me as one of 5-10 lawyers respond to a prospect’s fact pattern. Far from being a legal ethics expert, I would only ask why it’s okay for bar associations to have referral services but not private, for-profit companies? SOME of the bar referral services are fairly lame w/o that profit motive.

6. Far From Field, Lawyer’s Blog a Player in N.F.L. A little off topic but I liked this piece because I am more jock than lawyer & it does emphasize a point that I and likely many lawyers should open their eyes to which is something to the effect that social media – Internet business likely has much better business potential than merely providing traditional, bricks/mortar legal services. Florio, 44, an erstwhile Vikings fan living in Steelers country, began his blog in 2001 as a sideline to his law practice. Is 2010 the year your blog income exceeds your lawyer income?

7. And to close with some “light” reading…a primer on international child abduction. Because if you’re a domestic relations lawyer like yours truly one of these IS going to walk into the office sometime…likely sooner rather than later. It’s got something to do with the Hague Convention, no?

This was last Sunday’s front page story in the Tribune about two young boys murdered by their father on his visitation weekend down in McLean County (the largest county in IL…a new tidbit for me). It highlights some of the key pressure points you need to know in these cases.

I legitimately feel for the judge in the case. The reality is that Illinois custody/visitation law favors the involvement of both parents in the lives of children & the burden is placed on a parent attempting to restrict visitation to prove that the other parent is a threat. Not easy to do if you can’t get any independent experts involved. Most eye-opening was the 26 hour delay it took for an Amber Alert to be issued because the local police department didn’t believe that the childrens safety was at risk.