The Bar News

Bar News Sections

Practice News

  • May 4, 2011 | Practice News
    Best Practice: Law firm strategy - where to start
    Asked and Answered By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC Q. I am the Executive Director of a 75 attorney firm in Miami. We are meeting in a few months to revise our strategic plan. Some of our partners have suggested that as a result of the current business and economic climate that we start with a clean sheet of paper. Where should we start? What do you see as the key questions that we should be addressing? A. Strategic planning is essentially a five-step process. The first step begins be asking questions. Start by asking the following questions: 1.      What substantive issues does the firm face today? 2.      What issues will the firm face tomorrow? 3.      How has technology impacted (or will impact) how the firm conducts business and delivers services to clients? 4.      What are we doing and doing well? 5.      What are we not doing well? 6.      What do we need to improve or enhance? 7.      What metrics will tell us how we are doing? 8.      What should be eliminated? 9.      What are we not doing that we should be doing? 10.  What kind of training will we need to plan for?
  • May 1, 2011 | ISBA News | Practice News
    Illinois Law programs review Business Law issues (May 2011)
    Choice of Business Entities Covenant not to Compete
  • April 29, 2011 | Practice News
    Illinois lawyers provide 2.3 million pro bono hours, contribute over $15 million in 2010
    More Illinois lawyers provided free legal services during the economic downturn according to the ARDC Annual Report. The report indicates that 29,276 Illinois attorneys provided a total of 2,328,770 pro bono legal service hours last year - a 6% increase over 2009.  The number of lawyers making monetary contributions increased 6% as well, with a total contribution of $15,266,660. Grievances against Illinois attorneys continue to decline. The Commission docketed 5,617 investigations, a 3.7% decrease from 2009 and the fewest number of docketed investigations in 18 years. The top three areas of a grievance involve problems with the client-attorney relationship including allegations of neglect (38% of all investigations), failing to communicate (21%) and conduct involving fraud or deceit (15%). Consistent with prior years, the top areas of practice most likely to lead to a grievance include criminal law, domestic relations, tort and real estate. The report shows that the Master Roll of Attorneys continues to increase. The lawyer population in Illinois rose to 86,657 as of Oct. 31, 2010. That does not include the 2,117 attorneys sworn-in in November. That total is a 2.2% increase over 2009. The counties with the greatest increase in attorney population include McHenry (3.2%), Will (2.5%), Lake (2.4%) and Cook (2.4%).
  • April 28, 2011 | Practice News
    Save the date for conference on Legal Challenges in Israeli Policy and Advocacy
    The Israeli Consulate in New York and the Office of the Legal Advisor at the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, together with the American Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists (AAJLJ), will hold an international Conference on Legal Challenges in Israeli Policy and Advocacy, on June 27-28, in New York. Discussions will focus on:
    • Law and Security: the legal framework in the fight against terrorism; operational dilemmas; methods of investigation
    • International institutions: challenges facing Israel within the United Nations system; the international legal sphere and the US Legal system
    • Law and advocacy: responding to campaigns of delegitimization and "Iawfare"; taking the legal initiative; presenting Israel's case and advancing informed discussion
    • Key issues in Israel-Palestinian negotiations: updates and insights from Israel's negotiations with its neighbors
  • April 28, 2011 | Practice News
    Legal Tech: Google's new algorithm and why you should care
    By Peter LaSorsa There is a constant battle between search engines and business people who provide search engine optimization (“SEO”) services.  Mega search engines like Google are always trying to return the most relevant content to users for a given search term string. In order to accomplish this task search engines utilize algorithms. An algorithm is just a sophisticated formula that is secret but allows search engines to read millions of websites and deliver links to those sites in a numerical ranking. So if you type in Chicago personal injury lawyer, Google wants to return the most relevant Chicago personal injury lawyers. The key word here is “relevant”. So Google would want to have the top ten listings on the first page of the search results be the top 10 Chicago personal injury lawyers. In design, that would be the top ten websites that the search engine believes belong to the top ten Chicago personal injury lawyers. The most recent problem for Google is that search engine optimizers learned how to manipulate Google’s algorithm to make low-quality writing more visible than quality content.
  • April 27, 2011 | Practice News
    Best Practice: Can you make money from contingency fee work?
    Asked and Answered By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC Q. Our firm is a 12 attorney general practice firm located in the Phoenix metropolitan area. In additional to general practice, we do a fair amount of insurance defense work as well. In an effort to improve firm profitability we have been considering alternative fee arrangements - particularlly contingency fees - with some of our existing clients as well as venturing into personal injury plaintiff work. Can we improve profitability by doing more contingency fee work? A. The CEO of the Howrey LLP, when interviewed about the law firm's recent dissolution, advised that deferred profits from contingency fee work led to the firm's demise.  Howrey is a good illustration of what can happen when the risks of contingency fee work is not considered or managed. Contingency-fee work can pose major risks for law firms, as they earn no fees if they lose those cases and sometimes have profits deferred in protracted litigation. In addition, cases can be lost with no fee whatsoever received. Whether your firm is considering "big deal" litigation or bread and butter run of the mill personal injury litigation you may want to consider the following: 1. Don't dabble in contingency fee work. Take it seriously and insure that your case portfolio is adequately diversified. 2. Reduce case portfolio risk and improve case profitability by implementing a sound case intake system to insure that you are selecting quality cases. 3. Realize that you have to spend money to make money and that you simply may not have the financial resources to take on certain cases. Learn how to say no and when to refer these cases out to others. 4.
  • April 27, 2011 | Practice News
    Illinois Supreme Court Rules Committee seeking comment on proposal to allow juror questioning of witnesses in civil trials
    The Illinois Supreme Court Rules Committee is seeking comment on a proposal to explicitly allow jurors to question witnesses in civil trials. That proposal, and others, will be aired at a public hearing of the Rules Committee on Friday, May 20 in Chicago. Anyone wishing to testify at the public hearing should advise the Committee in writing no later than Friday, May 13. Those wishing to offer written comments should submit them by Friday, May 6. The proposal which would allow jurors to question witnesses would represent a significant change in current Illinois civil trial practice. Currently, there is no Illinois Supreme Court rule that explicitly authorizes jurors to ask questions in civil trials. Neither is there a rule that explicitly prohibits Illinois judges from permitting the practice. In fact, it rarely occurs in Illinois trials. Proponents of the proposal say that Illinois judges are reluctant to allow juror questioning without guidance from the Illinois Supreme Court. Hence, the discussion whether a new Supreme Court rule is needed. Those who favor the proposal have stated that more than half of all states and all of the federal circuits permit jurors to submit written questions for witnesses at the discretion of the trial judge. The proposal before the Rules Committee would also provide Illinois judges with discretion. This is how the proposed procedure would work:
  • April 27, 2011 | Practice News
    Experience by appointment
    There isn't much money in it. Often there isn't any. But serving as appointed counsel is a way to gain invaluable courtroom experience and remind yourself why you went to law school in the first place. Find out more in the May IBJ.
  • April 21, 2011 | Practice News
    Quick takes from today's Illinois Supreme Court opinions
    Our panel of leading appellate attorneys review today’s Supreme Court opinions from Civil case Phoenix Insurance Company v. Rosen and Criminal cases People v. Mullins, People v. Martin and People v. Ziobro.

    CIVIL

    Phoenix Insurance Company v. Rosen

    By Alyssa M. Reiter, Williams Montgomery & John Ltd. A provision in an underinsured-motorist policy allowing either party to reject an award over the statutory minimum for liability coverage does not violate public policy and is not unconscionable. Ms. Rosen was injured by an underinsured vehicle and made a claim under the underinsured-motorist provision of her Pheonix policy. The policy contained an arbitration agreement. However, the arbitration was binding only if the amount awarded did not exceed the minimum limit for bodily injury liability specified by the Illinois Safety Responsibility Law. If the amount exceeded that limit, either party could demand the right to a trial. Following arbitration, Rosen was awarded over $300,000 and Phoenix filed a complaint rejecting the award and demanding a jury trial. Rosen asserted in an affirmative defense that the “trial de novo” provision was invalid and unenforceable as against public policy. She also filed a counterclaim seeking to enforce the arbitration award. The trial court struck the affirmative defense and dismissed the counterclaim. On review, the appellate court reversed, holding that the trial de novo provision unfairly favored the insurer and violated public policy considerations favoring arbitration. The Supreme Court disagreed. It recognized the long tradition of upholding parties’ rights to freely contract.
  • April 21, 2011 | Practice News
    Website: Terms and conditions vs. disclaimer
    By Peter LaSorsa Most lawyers have a presence on the Internet in the form of a website. Of course a website is a form of advertising and therefore the rules regarding advertising must be followed. I did a recent random survey of websites in the Chicago area (checking out the competition) and found an interesting trend. On the front page of many websites there is a form that the user can fill out and send to the law firm. Most have a place for name, address, phone number, email and a brief synopsis of what the issue is. At the bottom of the form by the submit button there is a box that the user checks agreeing to the terms and conditions as defined by the law firm. There is usually a hyperlink on the words terms and conditions, which allows the user to view the actual terms and conditions prior to checking the box. On my website instead of terms and conditions I utilize the word disclaimer. The same action takes place, as the word disclaimer is a hyperlink that takes the user to a page or two of information regarding the disclaimer. I actually chose the word disclaimer instead of terms and conditions for the following reason. The language of most legal websites starts with something to the affect that by visiting the website or sending in a form with your name and address the action does not imply or infer a legal agreement or contract of any kind with the firm. In my opinion the problem with utilizing words like “terms and conditions” are that those words are inherent with agreements and contracts. I mean terms and conditions to what? To an agreement or contract that you are then denying has been formed?