Updates from April, 2010 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Admin 1:20 am on April 16, 2010 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: , ,   

    Solo Practice University 

    I joined up as faculty with Solo Practice University last week. This is a new online educational venture started by Susan Carter Liebel , a coach and consultant to solo practices. Law schools really don’t teach law students how to open a solo practice — they are too busy training students for large law practice for which many of their students aspire but very few achieve. This program will be a welcome addition to bar association CLE courses as it focuses on the needs of solos, who still make up the largest percentage of practicing lawyers.

    I am going to develop a course on how to offer what is known as limited legal services or "unbundled legal services" both online and offline. My plan is to use pre-recorded video, discussion groups, an online blog, and email to help course participants develop a business plan for increasing and diversifying their revenue base. I am looking forward to this learning experience in how to deliver legal services online.


    Law That You Can Afford

     

  • Admin 10:06 am on April 13, 2010 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: , , , , KimbroLaw,   

    KimbroLaw Wins Keane Award in Excellence eLawyering 

    Stephanie Kimbro, a solo practitioner who operates Kimbrolaw.com, a virtual law firm in North Carolina, has been selected as this year’s winner of the James Keane Memorial Award for Excellence in eLawyering. This award is given annually by the eLawyering Task Force of the Law Practice Management Section of the American Bar Association, a group which was founded by Jim Keane an active and long-standing member of the ABA/LPM section who died tragically from lung cancer several years ago. I am the present Co-Chair with Marc Lauritsen.

    Ms. Kimbro’s law firm is a completely virtual law firm that serves individuals and small business over the Web. Our group concluded that Kimbrolaw.com  met the criteria for the Award perfectly as it demonstrates an innovative online model for delivering services to the broad middle class. Clients access their own individual web space where they can consult with their attorney, have their documents reviewed, and conduct other legal tasks — all online.

    The Award was given to Ms. Kimbro at the American Bar Association’s TECHSHOW on April 2, 2009, immediately before the key note speech by Richard Susskind, who discussed his new book: The End of Lawyers: The Rethinking the Nature of Legal Services.


    Law That You Can Afford

     

  • Admin 9:15 am on April 6, 2010 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: , , , ,   

    Lawyers That Offer UnBundled Legal Services 

    When lawyers offer "unbundled legal services" to their clients they offer only those services that the client wants to pay for, leaving to the client those tasks that the client can do for herself. "Unbundled legal services" is also called "discrete task representation" because the attorney only undertake legal fees for the client. The client is back in control.

    A good example of unbundled legal services in the family law area is lawyer preparation of the legal pleadings for a no-fault and uncontested divorce bundled with legal advice for a fixed fee, leaving to the client other tasks such as service on the opposing party and self-representation at the divorce hearing. Hearings for a no-fault and uncontested divorce are primarily administrative in nature, with the Judge or Master conforming the accuracy of the documents and establishing a record that the divorce is consensual and that all the requirements of time of separation and proper service have been satisfied. Most pro se parties can handle these tasks by themselves without the presence of an attorney, thus saving hundreds of dollars in legal fees.

    I know this to be a fact from my own experience, because the virtual law firm family law practice that I operate in Maryland has served hundreds of pro se parties seeking their own uncontested divorce during the last four years.

    If you want to save on legal fees, look for an attorney in your area who is willing to provide "unbundled legal services". I have been compiling a list of these law firms in different states for the past year. If you have a problem finding an attorney in your state, send me an email and I will see if I can help you identify one.


    Law That You Can Afford

     

  • Admin 9:16 pm on February 2, 2010 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Attacks, Connecticut, , , NonLaw,   

    Connecticut Bar Attacks Non-Law Firm Legal Web Sites 

    Attorney Louis Pepe, a Connecticut attorney and Chair of a Connecticut Bar Task Force examining non–lawyer legal information web sites, believes that these web sites are breaking the law by providing legal services in a state in which they’re not licensed to practice, as reported in the Connecticut Law Tribune.

    There are differences between  legal information web sites that provide legal information and legal forms only, and web sites that offer something called "legal document preparation services" where a paralegal or other non-lawyer reviews a document and assists in preparation prior to sending the form back to the client.  Rather than making a distinction between the different kinds of web sites, Pepe’s  Task Force lumps them altogether into a single "evil" category. If it’s not a  law firm web site, it has no place on the web, at least as far as the Connecticut Bar is concerned.

    As reported by the Tribune, "the task force filed its report with the Department of Consumer Protection alleging that the on-line legal providers also were engaged in deceptive advertising because the companies are offering legal advice by providing relevant legal documents."

    Can it be that the provision of just a legal form constitutes the "unauthorized practice of law?"  If that were the case why don’t we just ban self-help legal software and self-help law books from Barnes & Nobles book shelves? All of the legal information web sites that I know of,  have a clear disclaimer that they are not a law firm and do not purport to give legal advice.

    Does Pepe think that a consumer can’t tell the difference between an attorney and a legal information web site? Is any publication – whether print-based or web-based -  that is a legal form the "unauthorized practice of law?"

    In my opinion, there is a good argument to be made that a legal information web site that states that it’s services and products are the equivalent to what a lawyer provides is a misrepresentation. It would be a misrepresentation in advertising, and consumer protection agencies should monitor the claims made by these providers. However, the claim that the mere provision of a legal form is the "unauthorized practice of law" is an abuse of the legal profession’s self-regulatory power to protect the consumer from harm.

    Catherine J. Lanctot has written an interesting article on the subject in “SCRIVENERS IN CYBERSPACE: ONLINE DOCUMENT PREPARATION AND THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW,” 30 Hofstra Law Review 811 (2002, 44 pp, pdf), where she argues that those who wish to apply UPL enforcement against such software products or document preparers ”must not lose sight of the broader implications.”  Not only do they risk constitutional challenges, but :

    “[W]e must consider the ramifications of such enforcement. The public reaction would likely be negative. Enforcing unauthorized practice of law statutes against online document preparation services would be neither painless nor popular. The lay public, which already detests lawyers, generally perceives unauthorized practice of law enforcement as yet another way for the legal profession to line its collective pockets at the expense of consumers. . . .

    “In addition, it is at least possible that these websites are managing to provide some consumers with a necessary service—basic legal documents at an affordable price. At a time when the bar seems to have abdicated its responsibility to provide routine, noncomplex legal services to the poor and middle class, it could well be counterproductive to try to shut down one vehicle for serving those unmet needs.”

    If  the Connecticut Bar can’t distinguish between their self-interest in maintaining a monopoly over the delivery of legal services and the public’s right to legal information whether in the form of a book, a desk-top software program, or a web-based software program, perhaps the citizens  of Connecticut should either strip the bar of its self-regulatory power, or further define what the "practice of law" means. That is what the citizens of Texas did, when the Texas Bar attempted to ban self-help law books and self-help legal software from being sold in the State of Texas.

     


    Law That You Can Afford

     

  • Admin 1:14 am on January 16, 2010 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: , Employee, Fired, , Leaked,   

    Google Employee Who Leaked Email on Raises Fired 

    a.stbar.chicklet img {border:0;height:16px;width:16px;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:middle;}a.stbar.chicklet {height:16px;line-height:16px;}

    Google Employee Who Leaked Email on Raises Fired - Employment Law - Law and Daily Life FindLaw | Find a Lawyer. Find Answers. Are you a legal Professional? Visit our professional site
    Learn about law firm marketing Learn About the Law Find a Lawyer FindLaw Answers Forms & Store News Blogs Search Law & Daily Life - The FindLaw Life, Family and Workplace Law Blog
    Google Employee Who Leaked Email on Raises Fired By Tanya Roth on November 12, 2010 8:46 AM | No TrackBacks

    By now, you may be familiar with the worst kept secret in America. This week a "confidential" leaked memo announcing all Google employees will receive a 10% raise leaked. No doubt the Google grandees who created the confidential internal email to the company's 23,000 full and part-time employees knew that the good news would be hard for such a large number of people to keep to themselves. One person did not, and he was fired.

    The leaked email, posted in part on The Huffington Post (and many, many other news sources), states clearly it is for internal use only. However, thanks to the former Google employee who leaked the memo, we all get to be a part of that "internal" audience. Whether this was a genuine leak, or whether Google knew it would be leaked and would give them a PR boost, is a question raised by The Huffington Post.

    Another question that should be asked here is how did this person become not just the only Google employee not to get a raise, but to be fired? Sharing information that is clearly marked "confidential" seems to be obvious grounds for dismissal, but since this intelligent person did not think about it, or thought he or she could get away with it, the issue bears repeating.

    Information leaks bedevil everyone from the White House on down. Remember the "leak" of the new iPhone 4 when a young engineer accidentally left it in a bar back in April of this year? That episode led to the search and seizure of computers from a journalist's home, reams of media speculation and criminal charges. Not all breaches of confidentiality are criminal, but nearly all can have employment and even civil law repercussions.

    Breaches of confidentiality that are protected by law are more serious, like those based on attorney/client privilege or doctor/patient confidentiality laws. However, any employee with fails in his clear duty to keep information confidential is in violation of, at minimum, company rules and, at maximum, looking at civil damages for lost profits. He could even face criminal charges of theft of property, intellectual property or trade secrets.

    Let's end on a lighter note. In its report on the story, Wired passed on a few friendly tips for those employees who, law and job be damned, just have to be the source of a leaked memo. Bottom line: if you are going to leak a story, use your head. Per Wired, do cut and paste; do confirm there are others with the means and motive to leak; don't use your work email account or your main home account; don't use your employer's computers or network. The biggest don't, which it sure seems this Googler forgot: never let it leak that you where the one who leaked.

    Related Resources:

    Google Fires Worker Who Leaked Memo About Raises (AoLNews)Can Bloggers Invoke the Journalist's Privilege to Protect Confidential Sources Who Leak Trade Secrets? (FindLaw's Writ)Hold the iPhone: Did Blog Break the Law in iLeak? (FindlLaw's Blotter)

    ShareThis    Tweet

    Categories: Employment Law Tags: confidential information, employment law, Google, leaks
    No TrackBacks

    TrackBack URL: http://blogs.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/17598

    See All FindLaw Blogs >>
    Go To Law and Daily Life Main Page >>

    About Law and Daily Life Law and Daily Life strives to address the legal questions and circumstances that arise in our everyday lives, including the laws that affect our family life, workplace and personal finances. Have a comment or tip? Write to us. Subscribe to feed Subscribe to this blog's feedSubscribe to feed See all FindLaw RSS feedsSubscribe via Email Newsletter Subscribe to this blog's email newsletter Popular Topics California child custody child support civil rights discrimination divorce employment law foreclosure alternatives gay marriage gay marriage legislation gay rights health care health care reform health insurance immigration marriage same sex marriage same-sex marriage school taxes Recent Entries Still Time for ,000 FindLaw Video Contest Jury Fines File Sharing Woman .5M Apple Sues Motorola Over Smart Phones. Again. Debt Collectors Use Fake Courtroom on Debtors Wells Fargo Admits Foreclosure Filing Problems Categories Bankruptcy (34) Civil Rights (188) Employment Law (151) Estate Planning (19) Family Law (162) Finances (66) Health & Safety (49) Immigration Law (45) Insurance (38) Military (16) Real Estate Law (54) School Law (55) Tax (34) Traffic Laws (17) Archives Select a Month... November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 More Acknowledgments Acknowledgments - Page 2 Acknowledgments - Page 3 Acknowledgments - Page 4
    FindLaw Legal VideosFind Chicago Personal Injury LawyersFind Chicago DUI Lawyers Search Law and Daily Life More Recent News Injured
    Parents Sue After Coach Whips Teen Players FindLaw Blotter
    Ex-Glaxo VP Indicted in Off Label Drug Cover Up Injured
    Do Airport Body Scanners Pose Health Risks? Free Enterprise
    Can Boss Fire Employee for Facebook Work Criticism? FindLaw Blotter
    'Barefoot Bandit' Indicted for Thefts About this Entry This page contains a single entry by Tanya Roth published on November 12, 2010 8:46 AM.

    Still Time for ,000 FindLaw Video Contest was the previous entry in this blog.

    Airport Body Scanners: Pilots Urged to Opt Out is the next entry in this blog.

    Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.


    Copyright © FindLaw, a Thomson Reuters Business. All Rights Reserved.

    A Member of the FindLaw Network var linkwithin_site_id = 341326;Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

    View the original article here




    Legal Fees Make Me Sick

     

  • Admin 5:44 am on January 15, 2010 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: , Chief, Concept, , Justices, , , ,   

    Chief Justices of New Hampshire and California Support the Concept of “Unbundled Legal Services” 

    Last week, in a New York Times Opinion article, entitled, A Nation of Do-It-Yourself Lawyers, Chief Justice John T. Broderick, Jr. of New Hampshire and Chief Justice Ronald M. George of California endorsed the concept of the legal profession offering "unbundled legal services" to the broad middle class. Recognizing that there is a large "justice gap" with the number of self-represented parties increasing monthly in the nation’s court systems, the Justices called for the legal profession to provide limited legal services as a way of getting at least some representation to unrepresented parties.

    They write, " Forty-one states, including California and New Hampshire, have adopted a model rule drafted by the American Bar Association, or similar provisions, which allow lawyers to unbundle their services and take only part of a case, a cost-saving practice known as “limited-scope representation” that, with proper ethical safeguards, is responsive to new realities."

    State courts are facing severe budgetary cuts in staff and resources. The current recession has increased the level of disputes landing in those same court systems while at the same time stripping the ability of citizens to pay full service legal fees. Current circumstances make it  even more urgent that the legal profession provide innovative approaches to closing the gap between those who need access to the legal system but who cannot pay full service legal fees.

    If citizens cannot access the legal system because they cannot afford it, our legal system will exist only for the "rich", resulting in further stratification of American society. As the Justices write:
    "If we are to maintain public trust and confidence in the courts, we must keep faith with our founding principles and our core belief in equal justice under the law."

     


    Law That You Can Afford

     

  • Admin 6:00 pm on January 14, 2010 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: LegalZoom, ,   

    LegalZoom Sued for UPL in Missouri 

    It seems like LegalZoom’s practices are finally catching up with it. The company is being sued in Missouri on the grounds of unauthorized practice of law and the plaintiff’s are requesting class certification. To give an example of how popular LegalZoom’s services have become, LegalZoom in its petition for removal to Federal court claims that it has served over 14,000 Missouri residents in a five year period, generating over ,000.000 in sales. Missouri is a relatively small state, so you can get some idea of what kind of business LegalZoom is doing nationwide. No wonder the legal profession is getting nervous and starting to pay attention to this disruptive player in the legal industry.

    A good discussion of the case can be found on the IPWatchdog Blog in an article by the Blog’s Founder Gene Quinn.

    Click here for a copy of the Missouri Complaint,  LegalZoom’s petition for removal to Federal court, and a copy of a letter from the North Carolina Bar requesting that LegalZoom Cease and Desist from operating within North Carolina because it is violating North Carolina’s UPL statute when it prepares incorporation papers.

    In its defense, LegalZoom in its removal petition,  claims that it is:

    " a company whose principal business consists of providing an
    online platform for customers to prepare their own legal documents. Customers choose a
    product or service suitable to their needs and input data into a questionnaire. Where applicable,
    the LegalZoom platform then generates a document using the product and data provided by the
    customer."

    It this were the case, LegalZoom would be functioning only as a "scrivener" transcribing the client’s information into a form. It is well established in some states, including California, where LegalZoom is based, and also Florida for example, that non-lawyers, often called "legal technicians" can help consumers prepare legal documents, as long as they don’t give legal advice.

    The question of whether LegalZoom’s  staff do more than they say, and actually provide legal advice, even if it is limited legal advice, is a question of fact to be determined. It  would be interesting to see what the discovery process turns up and what the  LegalZoom, "platform" actually does and how it works.

    For comparison, We the People, a retail chain of 35  "Legal Document Preparation stores  operating in six states, operates under the same principles. Customers complete paper questionnaires which are faxed to a central processing center where a technician simply inserts the client’s data into a desktop document assembly program which generates a form. (This is  the same process that many lawyer’s use, except lawyers provide legal advice and analysis).  This document preparation process is essentially the same as LegalZoom’s except that it takes place off the Internet through a network of retail stores. We the People has been attacked by the Bar in several states for UPL, but the company has worked hard to assure bar authorities that its staff and franchisees don’t provide  legal advice.

    In theory, We the People, stores are able to reach a market of customers that do not have Internet access and prefer to deal with a human being directly. This market base is likely to have even lower incomes, and ignored by  both attorneys as a target market, and have too much income to qualify for legal aid.  Ironically, however, the We the People pricing is even higher than the LegalZoom pricing, probably because of the cost of maintaining a  retail location. Yet the remaining We the People stores, ( down from a high of 140 stores), seem to be sustainable, if not thriving.

    Both companies provide a needed service in the sense that they provide an alternative to consumers who are willing to invest their own time and resources to make sure that the forms offered are the correct forms for their particular situation. Neither company can advise a consumer about what form they should use for their situation, as that would be a form of legal advice. Consumers may be taking a risk when they buy from a self-help document preparation forms company, but it seems this is a risk that consumers are willing to take to avoid what are perceived by many as high legal fees for the same  transaction. For these consumers, what they get is a "good enough" result at a price they can afford.

    The other reality is that it is deceptive for LegalZoom and We the People , to claim that using their services will save hundreds or thousands of dollars in legal fees, when two very different category of services are being compared: 
     

    • one a legal information service;
    • and the other a true legal service from a licensed attorney.

      The content of the services are fundamentally different and to compare the services to each other is like comparing "apples’ and " oranges". 

      Sometimes you get the same legal result when you use a document preparation service, but often you don’t.  Apart from UPL issues, it seems to me that this is a misrepresentation in advertising and these claims should receive closer scrutiny from state consumer protection agencies. (Although I am sure that many of LegalZoom’s satisfied customers would say that they don’t need any protection).

    Both companies demonstrate the principle that you can solve certain legal problems by having access to "legal information." Legal information by itself is a problem solver for many consumers, and the access to legal information and legal forms on the Internet, has simply accelerated this trend at a much faster rate in the last five years than the self-help law book industry has been able to accomplish in 30-35 years of its existence. This means that lawyers will have to do more to demonstrate their value to the consumer, particularly solos and smaller law firms that serve the broad middle class.

    A better solution for consumers, as we have advocated in these pages, is for attorneys to offer legal forms bundled with legal advice at an affordable price, perhaps slightly higher than LegalZoom, but offering much greater value, over the Internet. This is often called. "unbundled legal services," enabling a consumer to purchase just the legal services they need, and no more.

    Using virtual law firm technology, like DirectLaw’s virtual law firm platform, lawyers can be even more efficient that the LegalZoom or We the People models, because the entire document assembly process is software driven creating a legal document instantly from the user’s input, ready for the lawyers further review, drafting, and advice-giving. The increased productivity that results from a web-enabled document automation process enables the lawyer to offer a very price competitive service that in fact offers more value. The value of each sale is lower, from the attorney’s point of view, but volume can be much higher if effectively marketed. (Neither LegalZoom nor We the People have such a technology in place. No wonder there prices are so high for what you get!).

    As long as the legal document preparers don’t give legal advice, they should be able to coexist with the legal profession, for certain kinds of common legal transactions, but not all.

    But lawyers will have to work harder to provide their value and start offering true legal services online over the Internet. Driving non-lawyer legal document preparers out of business on UPL grounds is not an answer. At the end of the day prosecution efforts, will seem to the consuming public as just another attempt by the legal profession to maintain high legal fees for common transactions, while avoiding the cost of innovation.
     


    Law That You Can Afford

     

  • Admin 4:48 am on January 7, 2010 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Americans, , , Smoking, Worked   

    Smoking Bans Worked: Less Americans Smoking 

    a.stbar.chicklet img {border:0;height:16px;width:16px;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:middle;}a.stbar.chicklet {height:16px;line-height:16px;}

    Smoking Bans Worked: Less Americans Smoking - Health & Safety - Law and Daily Life FindLaw | Find a Lawyer. Find Answers. Are you a legal Professional? Visit our professional site
    Learn about law firm marketing Learn About the Law Find a Lawyer FindLaw Answers Forms & Store News Blogs Search Law & Daily Life - The FindLaw Life, Family and Workplace Law Blog
    Smoking Bans Worked: Less Americans Smoking By Jason Beahm on November 8, 2010 2:21 PM | No TrackBacks

    Smoking is down in the U.S. and smoking bans are up. Of course that's not to say that the decrease in smoking is distributed evenly or that everyone is happy about smoking bans. According to Slate, less than 13 percent of Americans smoke every day. However in states such as Kentucky and West Virginia, 40 percent of the population smokes on a regular basis.

    When it comes to smoking in bars and restaurants, cities and states continue to fight a back and forth between those who want all-out smoking bans and those that believe there should be some places left to smoke.

    Meanwhile, The Netherlands, a country that is often ahead of the curve on such matters, passed a smoking ban in 2008 and has already overturned it. Smokers' rights advocates successfully argued that the ban was unfair and was putting small bars out of business. Dutch smokers can now freely smoke in more than 2,000 small bars or pubs, as long as the venue complies with certain rules. For example, smoking bars must be under 743.5 square feet and be staffed solely by the owner.

    According to the Daily Mail, the Netherlands is the first country in Europe to reverse a smoking ban. Weil Maessen, a smokers' rights advocate said: "This is great news for small bars and the common man. Lower-class people tend to drink in these places and they were being punished ... Small bars have an important social function."

    The Netherlands has never been afraid to go its own way on social issues. The country already tolerates the sale and possession of small amounts of marijuana as well as allowing prostitution. According to public health minister Edith Schippers, the reversal is a good thing, because it promotes freedom of choice, something that is important to the Dutch. "A sign will inform customers whether or not they are allowed to smoke on the premises,' Schippers said.

    It will be interesting to see how the new rules play out for the Netherlands versus the current approach in the U.S. At the moment, the tide certainly seems to be in favor of expanding smoking bans in the U.S. as opposed to relaxing them.

    Related Resources:

    Belmont to debate smoking ban in public parks (Boston.com)Smoking Banned from Kansas Restaurants, Bars and Workplaces (FindLaw's Blotter)Smoking Ban at CA State Parks Gets Vetoed (FindLaw's Blotter) ShareThis    Tweet

    Categories: Civil Rights, Health & Safety Tags: civil rights, Dutch, free market, freedom of choice, Holland, Netherlands, public health, smoking
    No TrackBacks

    TrackBack URL: http://blogs.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/17447

    See All FindLaw Blogs >>
    Go To Law and Daily Life Main Page >>

    About Law and Daily Life Law and Daily Life strives to address the legal questions and circumstances that arise in our everyday lives, including the laws that affect our family life, workplace and personal finances. Have a comment or tip? Write to us. Subscribe to feed Subscribe to this blog's feedSubscribe to feed See all FindLaw RSS feedsSubscribe via Email Newsletter Subscribe to this blog's email newsletter Popular Topics California child custody child support civil rights discrimination divorce employment law foreclosure alternatives gay marriage gay marriage legislation gay rights health care health care reform health insurance immigration marriage same sex marriage same-sex marriage school taxes Recent Entries Adverse Possession: Empty Houses to the Needy NLRB: Facebook Complaints Are Protected Speech Naked Baby Photos Lead to Parents' Arrest Rutgers Suicide Case to Test NJ Privacy Law Jury Fines File Sharing Woman .5M Categories Bankruptcy (34) Civil Rights (186) Employment Law (150) Estate Planning (19) Family Law (162) Finances (65) Health & Safety (48) Immigration Law (45) Insurance (38) Military (15) Real Estate Law (54) School Law (55) Tax (34) Traffic Laws (17) Archives Select a Month... November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 More Acknowledgments Acknowledgments - Page 2 Acknowledgments - Page 3 Acknowledgments - Page 4
    FindLaw Legal VideosFind Chicago Personal Injury LawyersFind Chicago DUI Lawyers Search Law and Daily Life More Recent News Injured
    FDA Unveils Gross-Out Cigarette Warnings FindLaw Blotter
    Lawyer Shreds Murder Case File to Free Defendant FindLaw Blotter
    Mumia Abu-Jamal Death Sentence Back in Court Free Enterprise
    Public Domain: When Can You Lift Content? FindLaw Blotter
    Is Philly's 'Stop and Frisk' Racial Profiling? About this Entry This page contains a single entry by Jason Beahm published on November 8, 2010 2:21 PM.

    Neighbors Behaving Badly Caught on Tape was the previous entry in this blog.

    Jury Fines File Sharing Woman .5M is the next entry in this blog.

    Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.


    Copyright © FindLaw, a Thomson Reuters Business. All Rights Reserved.

    A Member of the FindLaw Network var linkwithin_site_id = 341326;Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

    View the original article here




    Legal Fees Make Me Sick

     

  • Admin 5:26 am on December 27, 2009 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: , , ,   

    Using the Internet to Research a Lawyer 

    There is a vast amount of information that can be found online and much of this information can be helpful while trying to obtain certain services, especially while inquiring about legal services. While considering the various lawyers that can be chosen from the potential client can jump online and research the lawyers and the outcome of their past cases while taking into account their fees and other information that is available through the internet.

    It is important to realize that although there are pages and pages of information that is available the client should consider multiple reviews to ensure that an unbiased opinion is founded through the information that is being read.

    Using the internet, the client can easily find the contact information of the lawyer that is being considered and use this contact information to contact the lawyer. Depending on the type of case or the type of lawyer that is being obtained the client can easily find that they are able to make use of free consultations with the lawyer to determine whether a case is available or the client should consult other services for assistance.

    As well as the directories and review forums are available for various lawyers, the client can easily make use of the business or firm websites of the lawyer or legal services that are being obtained and learn more information about the firm and the lawyers, but also learn about the types of law that the lawyer is experienced in, which can be essential to winning the case.

    Legal Network

     

  • Admin 3:58 am on December 5, 2009 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: , based, , DirectLaw, , , launches, , Leone, Noble, , , Seate, Store, ,   

    The North Carolina based law firm of Leone Noble & Seate, LLP launches an Online Legal Forms and Advice Store using DirectLaw technology 

    The Raleigh, North Carolina based law firm of Leone Noble & Seate, LLP , whose practice is focused on personal injury, has launched an "On-Line Unbundled Legal Service" offering legal forms bundled with legal advice.

    The firm made its decision to expand its services after repeated requests from existing clients for legal help outside of their main practice areas of personal injury, workers’ compensation and bankruptcy. Partner Beth Leone Noble says, “We felt the time was right to expand our business, but knew that we needed to do so with deference to our shaky economy. It was important for us to be able to offer affordable and convenient services to our clients because that is what they really need right now”. The firm based its pricing on a competitive review of other legal form services available online. “We are very competitive with other online form services,” says Leone Noble, “but with our services, you get an actual N.C. licensed attorney creating and reviewing your legal product”. Leone Noble also makes sure to point out that the forms only apply to residents of North Carolina.

    Also available is flat rate legal advice by email. If you have a simple issue that you just need to get an attorney’s advice on, you can submit your issue through the secure server and an attorney will provide you with the advice and direction you need.

    Beth Noble founded LN&S with Jennifer Slate in December, 2006, with the mission of helping defend people’s rights. Ms. Noble says that she wanted to become a trial lawyer since she was 15 years old, when she started working for a personal injury firm doing filing and running errands.

     

     


    Law That You Can Afford

     

← Older posts

Newer posts →

c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
esc
cancel