- Quickdraw McLaw
- 43 Comments
- 271 Views
It’s that most wonderful time of the year again where we gather to celebrate the holiday with our coworkers! Only this year has an extra wrinkle sure to make things even more awkward and/or interesting. Some of you already started talking about it briefly in the comments yesterday, but let’s get some more input. What is your firm doing for the annual holiday party this year? Are you going to have a Zoom where everyone gets drunk at home? Are you physically gathering somewhere (outdoors hopefully) and doing something as a group? Are you giving out gift cards with the money you would have spent on the party? Are the Eglets having their annual party? Any ideas on what firms should be doing?
Eglet moved the holiday party to Spring. Invitations have already been sent out.
My firm was going to do a weekend trip, but with COVID and all the restrictions it was cancelled. Not sure whether we will be doing anything now.
FYI employees are more interested in receiving a check than attending a party.
Damn, I did not make the Eglet cut. But Alexis Plunkett did.
Having a party is irresponsible right now. Zoom sucks. Just give the people money. Have a party next year.
I got drunk at home last night. Since I'm a solo, I guess that's my holiday party?
11:36, did you take advantage of yourself afterwards too?
I am completely indifferent to this party Eglet has. I don't practice in P.I. I'm also a mild misanthrope. I enjoy watching people I know put so much energy into whether they get an invite each year. So funny and amusing. So I guess in that way, I really do dig Eglet's party.
The party is Tracy's ego trip and her way of reestablishing the Downton Abbey hierarchy she desires to maintain.
Continuing an extensive discussion that occurred on "billing" yesterday, which included references to disciplinary hearings and lawsuits against certain firms for allegedly egregious billing practices, there is one major protection that has always favored the billing firm, and always will.
That major protection is that as long as a firm itemizes its work(and, if need be, can prove the work billed for, such as "here's a copy of the motion I prepared nd billed for") it tends to be unusual for a judge, mediator or arbitrator, or a disciplinary panel, to rule that a firm charged too much for a project and/or that the project was not necessary.
They very rarely will say that even though you proved the work performed, that that particular motion perhaps need not have been filed in the first place and/or that it should have only taken 6 hours and not 10.
With some exceptions, that simply does not tend to occur.
However, what judges, mediators, arbitrators, or disciplinary panels may tend to do on occasion is to omit some charges where three different people are performing, and billing for, the same function. And this relief is sometimes afforded even if the fee agreement states that the firm can bill, for the same task, senior associates, junior associates, paralegals, law clerks, etc.
Also, sometimes relief is afforded on charges that do not seem to generate anything tangible–such as huge charges for research that generated no research memo or brief, or lengthy discussions about the case with others in the firm, or super vague, yet expensive , references to "further file review", or billing an hour to read a letter, etc.)
So, yes in those instances, sometimes the panel, mediator/arbitrator or judge will omit some of those charges.
Where it gets tricky is when someone figures out that you've been billing more than 24 hours in a day.
At ID firm LGC, a female associate arrived each day after 9:30 am. Upon arrival, she spent the first hour socializing up and down the hallway. Then made personal calls. She left at 3:30 pm like clockwork. Yet everyday she entered 10 to 12.5 hours in LGC's billing software. The Cali partners loved her. Many others honest and truthful in their billing were let go as not profitable to the firm's business model. It was perplexing that their client SPFM and others never caught on to her scheme.
Well there are not that many people at LGC who it could be so I am pretty sure I know of whom you speak.
Dear 10:06 – I wished I lived in your plane of existence. I once got a Letter of Caution from the NSB many years ago for billing 3 hours for a Motion I wrote in Family Law that the Panel said should have taken no more than 2 hours. The kicker was that one of the members was not a lawyer and had no way of knowing what it should have taken. As I am an anonymous poster you are free to believe there was more to it or something I am not telling you. But there is not. I got the distinct feeling it was political payback for a case I had with a spouse of a NSB employee – especially since that person stuck their head in during a break and smiled at me. I won't say anymore that would identify myself. But if you think the NSB is not a political organization that enforces petty vendettas, you are naïve.
11:50 – I take it you're sure this was a case of b.s. billing, but as someone who didn't use to spend a lot of time "in the office" before COVID19 anyway – I still worked countless hours a day. Calls, working from home, hearings, depositions, meetings – etc. Sounds like this is not the case with "female associate"…but I just want to toss out there that having your rear end in the office does not automatically equal billing. I have also worked for many firms where the Partners never lifted a pen but had high billing preparing for hearings, attending hearings, etc…..and were rarely around the office. Again, sounds like you're pretty confident this person was a fraud. Since COVID19 – being "in the office" is even less of a "billing" factor. I work such odd hours. Some weekends the entire weekend, and then I'm burned out and can't do anything but return emails the first part of the week.
I recall working at a firm where you could see other people's billing numbers. I went in on a Sunday morning about 9am and another associate was there. They left about an hour later. I looked at their billing for the day and they had billed over 9 hours. Surely they must have been there from the very early morning.
Another instance at the same firm. We received a document that was about 100 or so pages and was all in Spanish. The partner billed like an hour for "receipt and review." The partner did not speak Spanish.
The billing issue never seems to go away. I have had problems with flat fees, too. At the end of the day, there is no objective standard. Just everyone rubbing their bellies and passing judgement.
As for me, I routinely heavily cut my time because no one seems to grasp that a fantastic winner motion of 10 pages takes a lot more time and thought than a 30 page overworked ID attorney POS motion.
I think the remarks of 10:06 are generally correct, but as 10:15 suggests these billing problems can be far more outrageous than 10:06 seems to anticipate.
These matters are not limited to billing too much for a project, or billing for multiple employees performing the same task, or billing for vague references to "research" and "inter office conferences", etc.
Sometimes the problems are as outrageous as 10:15 indicates, wherein the billings make no logical sense unless the attorney is always in court or at his/her desk, and never goes home, eats, sleeps, etc.
This billing issue may be a waste of air until firms go to flat fee or value billing. Once nearly a decade ago I was aware of a colleague billing for tasks not performed – a all. I found out because the client complained about the massive bill and I was asked to review it. I reviewed the bills and could not believe what I saw – hours and hours for work not performed, meetings not conducted, pleadings not drafted (because I drafted them.) I took the side of the client with management but quickly learned that was the wrong decision in that firm because I was "disloyal" to the firm and exposed the firm by acknowledging the fraud (and it was fraud). For a while I had a massive "billing fraud" chip on my shoulder, but I have since basically let it go. The state bar will do nothing. Billing firms (CD firms as an example) will do nothing. "Overbilling" just gets reduced before the bill goes out, or written down if a client complains. High billing is rewarded and anyone who complains of billing irregularities might find themselves terminated from their job.
I am in favor of high billing. I just can't bring myself to bill 2 hours research for the research I did in another case on the same issue. I guess there is a "value added" justification for those that do bill that way.
The value added justification is a higher rate. I bill $400 an hour. When I do work on a file, I am generally faster than a more junior associate who bills $300 an hour. I am generally slower than the partner billing $600. We are all faster than the solo who does not have a bank a motions and pleadings and memoranda drafted by other lawyers in the firm. That's covered by a higher rate. People would not hire me at my rate if I was a generalist who had to research every issue anew, and my clients expect me not to have to spend a lot of time on routine issues.
I have proof that a Plaintiff lied under oath numerous times at his deposition. Is there a Motion I can file? It is a civil personal injury matter.
All kinds of things you can do. It's impeachment. Try and use it in an MSJ? FYI- people lie all the time.
Knock me over with a fly's fart
12:39. Fantastic analysis. I lol'd in enjoyment
I agree with 10:06 and 10:59.
With some exceptions, it's generally a case of consumer beware, and that judges, disciplinary panels, or mediators/arbitrators usually do no provide significant relief for the complaining client providing there is an itemized bill.
Agree with y'all. Outrageous and excessive attorney billing has been a major bitching point for years, but the law of averages indicates that very few clients ever succeed in successful redressing such matter.
Clients, in general,are well better served, during the time they are receiving these very significant bills, to aggressively and conscientiously monitor their situation, seeking reliable outside opinions and input, etc.
Whatever it takes till take the bull by the horns–second opinions, third opinions, etc.
That sometimes leads clients to make wise decisions, such as complaining earlier, changing attorneys, or whatever. And in some instances clients are served by those more pro-active decisions.
But what seldom works is to let yourself get used and exploited to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars over the course of years, and then expect someone else in the legal system to miraculously unwind all of those alleged inequities years later.
But that's like a lot of things in life, I guess–act before the train leaves the station. Addressing a problem by applying average competence at the time a problem is occurring, tends to be a gazillion times more effective than applying a far greater degree of skill and competence once the problem has caused maximum damage.
Can anyone recommend a decent or better than decent family law attorney? Not my area at all and a client needs a referral. Thanks!
Rachel Tygret at MAC.
Samantha Mentzel at Sin City Divorce
Ghandi Deeter Blackham does good work. Also consider reaching out to Patty Warnock at John Buchmiller & Associates.
I second the recommendation for Ghandi Deeter Blackham.
Thirded for Ghandi Deeter Blackham. The clients I've referred there, some in very difficult or unique situations, have always been satisfied.
I fourth GDB. JK, it's 1:53 PM again.
Patricia Warnock, (702) 278-9268. Hard worker, reasonable billing centered on flat fee arrangements.
Many moons ago, when I was a naive young attorney, I worked on the dark side (insurance defense). A partner explained to me, since insurance companies pay us half as much as we are worth, it takes us twice as long to do something. He was winking at me and it was not for my youthful figure. (I'm a guy by the way, not that it matters)
Don't insurance companies know how long things take?
I love this man. God bless you, Mr. Trump. Crossing my fingers this massive fraud fails.
Excellent speech.
They've filed dozens of lawsuits and had the opportunity to present evidence of widespread fraud, and they've presented none.
Says who? Every case I looked at had fraud. Unlike the utterly fake Russia collusion hoax that was sold to the public daily for years, this one has real evidence in the form of testimony, affidavits, documents, statistical analysis, and it gets complete media silence with foolish quotes like the one you present. None dare call it a coup.
"In a recent Pennsylvania federal case, Giuliani alleged “widespread, nationwide voter fraud” in his opening remarks. But under questioning from the judge, he retreated. “This is not a fraud case,” Giuliani later admitted."
"On Nov. 12, the same day that the President himself was tweeting about hundreds of thousands of votes being stolen from him, a Trump campaign attorney Kory Langhofer told a judge, “We are not alleging fraud in this lawsuit. We are not alleging anyone stealing the election.”"
https://time.com/5914377/donald-trump-no-evidence-fraud/
Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yGnMEv-g4Y&feature=youtu.be
Does anyone know what's happening with this evidentiary hearing that is supposedly being held today in Law v Whitmer, the GOP presidential electors v Democratic presidential electors case in Carson City? Curse one-stoplight towns and their tiny tiny court staff.
Democracydocket.com has 2 orders denying the GOP motions to compel production of the signed ballot envelopes and "thumbdrives." I can usually rely on Riley Snyder's twitter for info, but I don't even know when the shitshow is supposed to start, let alone call-in information.
It's currently livestreaming on youtube