Alternative Business Structure

  • Law

  • Nevada to pursue separate opioid litigation against major drug companies. [TNI]
  • Case involving UFC’s Dana White and a felon is headed to the Nevada Supreme Court. [RJ
  • Nevada Gaming Control Board targets Carson City tavern over mask mandate violation. [RJ]
  • Nevada inmates eligible for release are stuck in prison. [Nevada Current]
  • Legal Zoom is pursuing an alternative business structure license in Arizona. [ABA Journal]
33 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 6:05 pm

Question about hourly rates for an associate or senior associate in white collar and civil litigation – $350-$500 seem with in range for Vegas market?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 6:13 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

*cries in insurance defense billing rates*

anonymous
Guest
anonymous
August 24, 2021 6:23 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

As a solo with a mix of hourly and contingency cases, I charge hourly clients between $300 and $350. When I first started doing ID, I think the going rate was around $95, and it had maybe gotten up to about $140-150 by the time I quit.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 7:35 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

$250 is pretty common for an associate. But it would depend on the case. As an associate I charged as little as $150 for a kind of friends and family rate, to as much as 350 depending on the case. The norm was $250.00.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 25, 2021 3:56 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

For an Associate? No. Sorry but no.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 6:24 pm

Spot on.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 6:29 pm

Republic services verdict is in, but jury forgot to fill out a couple of questions so they had to exit to fill those out.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 6:30 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Guesses at the verdict amount? No way it's defense, right? Is $100m + possible?

anonymous
Guest
anonymous
August 24, 2021 6:33 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Nothing like the jury screwing up the verdict form. If they had to answer more than one question then I'm assuming a plaintiff verdict.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 6:38 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

$38.8M awarded per the review journal

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 7:02 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Appeal, where is Lieutenat Dan? It does matter what the record is, Mike Cherry, I mean Nevada Supreme Court always rules for Dan

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 7:04 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Lieutenant

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 8:26 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Lt Dan was on bluejeans complimenting the judge on how well she did and how his friends all say she is good looking.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 8:27 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Is the Judge the elusive BK Hottie?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 6:38 pm

$38.8 Million awarded to the mother. but RJ reporting is spotty so far.

anonymous
Guest
anonymous
August 24, 2021 7:20 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Anything re punitives/second phase? It doesn't look like the verdict has been filed yet.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 8:04 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

And Dave Barron's big talk goes up in smoke…

anonymous
Guest
anonymous
August 24, 2021 8:13 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

The verdict hasn't been filed yet. So is there a second phase happening?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 7:08 pm

LegalZoom
In my opinion Legal Zoom flagrantly violates UPL, but state bars haven't mustered the backbone or legal skills to successfully challenge. What a consumer doesn't know can seriously hurt the consumer, but for LegalZoom to remain a document preparer, it cannot provide tailored explanations (but violates this principal anyway).

If we now add paid employee attorneys to the mix, a non-lawyer board of directors, and non-lawyer mid-level management will control the "when" and "how" of the legal services provided. Presumably this is all online, so that out of state attorneys will be practicing in Arizona as employees of an Arizona corporation. Traditional law favors an employees duty of loyalty to his/her employer. When the non-lawyer employer's interest are different from that of the client, where does that leave the lawyer-employee? Its Nuts!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 7:23 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I actually don't think this is going to eat into much of the existing legal market. It's going to expand it. But the duties and pressures these staff attorneys have are ugly.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 7:32 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Agreed 12:23. It might cut into lower-level transactional work, but these form contracts are pure money makers for litigators a few years after the fact.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 8:47 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

@12:32
"…are pure money makers for litigators"
Agree, but Why? Because the employee attorney wasn't able to get all the facts or the corporate structure wouldn't allow additional time beyond that required to complete their forms. So, in your accurate scenario, the attorney becomes individually a defendant in a professional negligence COA AND there is risk of bar discipline. (The corp decisions cannot relieve the atty of his/her professional standards).
Note: Staff attorneys for insurance companies are in a different position. Their client is their employer. Not the case in the LegalZoom proposal.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 8:58 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

12:32 here. No, because people are entering into agreements using pre-baked agreements that don't address their actual meeting of the minds. Litigation is bound to ensue down the road. Bad contracts are a litigator's best friend.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 9:40 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I had to go to probate court following a client's use of LZ for a will when it was the decedent's intent to place everything into a trust. Not too big of a cluster, but the intention was to avoid probate, which didn't happen.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 25, 2021 2:43 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

See kids, if you have enough money, the RPCs do not apply to you or your company. The initial comment was spot on. The state bars are spineless low lives that will go after the solo or small firm for looking at client the wrong way, but sit on their hands and close their eyes when there are companies and corporations that will screw people because they know that these large multinationals will bury them in discovery and break them. State Bars are spineless POS.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 7:40 pm

Looking for an attorney to refer clients to for simple estate planning in Idaho. Basically, a company that sends me lots of work here in NV is expanding and will be generating a lot there and I need someone to do it. Must be someone who speaks spanish as the clients generated primarily speak spanish. Any recommendations? The money paid would be good for a solo or small firm, but the rates they pay would probably not be attractive to someone who only does estate planning and an established estate planning firm. But someone trying to get going would probably love it. Any recommendations?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 8:36 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I might be. How do I contact you?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 24, 2021 11:05 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

1:36, are you actually in Idaho? And do you speak Spanish?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 30, 2021 3:45 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Yes and Yes. Shoot me an email IdahoAttorney@ProtonMail.com

Thanks

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 25, 2021 4:44 am

Kid on cover of Nirvana’s Nevermind sues band for child porn https://www.scribd.com/document/521576572/Elden-v-Nirvana-L-L-C-et-al

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 25, 2021 6:24 am
Reply to  Anonymous

The "kid" is 30 years old this year. I would've figured he'd have to sue them from when he turned 18 until he hit the statute of limitation for child porn (if there is one?) "Like a sex worker" when describing the photo of the baby chasing the dollar on a hook.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 25, 2021 4:41 pm

Interesting read in a case against Marshal Willick that he basically slandered the title and abused process of a business entity trying to get attorneys fees. Steve Peek on this one. A-19-792105-B

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 25, 2021 9:10 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

No access right now, can u summarize