- Quickdraw McLaw
- Job Tips
- 39 Comments
- 216 Views
For those of you enamored with lists, Super Lawyers released their list of the top 100 lawyers in the Mountain States–including two recently (re)elected to the Board of Governors. For those of you not so in love with the lists, one of our readers wants to know how you market yourself. Not your firm, but yourself. Do you work on your Avvo profile? Do you post frequently to your Linked In, Facebook, and Twitter pages? Is your face on the side of a Zamboni? Any tips that would help a young lawyer get ahead in the game?
"Discipline does not make an ill lawyer well. We recommend that regulators adopt alternatives to formal disciplinary proceedings that rehabilitate lawyers with impairments. Diversion programs are one such alternative, and they have a direct and positive impact on lawyer well-being. Diversion programs address minor lawyer misconduct that often features an underlying mental health or substance use disorder."
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/images/abanews/ThePathToLawyerWellBeingReportRevFINAL.pdf
That opens an entirely different can of worms. Is the misconduct the result of a medical condition or is the medical condition a convenient excuse for the misconduct. Are intentional, voluntary or involuntary acts the cause or contributing factor in the misconduct?
The majority of middle age individuals suffer from medical conditions of some type or another (lets face it the majority of the bar membership fit within the definition of middle age). Of those members, the vast majority successfully treat their respective medical conditions such that the conditions do not cause the member to commit misconduct.
I am sympathetic to the member that commits involuntarily commits an act of misconduct because they suffer from an unknown medical condition or have an unforeseen reaction to a treatment plan for their condition. I am not sympathetic to the member that denies they suffer from the condition, fails to obtain and follow the treatment plan for the condition or otherwise simply uses the medical condition as an excuse for their choices.
"Discipline isn't everything, it's the only thing." NSB
"We used to care about our members. Then we hired Kim Farmer." — BOG
Adam Laxalt is filing amicus briefs in Right to Life cases in California and Texas despite the fact that Nevada passed Question 7 and abortion access cannot be changed without a vote.
File that under upholding the "rule of law."
Why is the Nevada AG fiddling with the rule of law in other states when it has nothing to do with the rule of law in Nevada?
Blame the left. They're the ones who took the issue out of the legislatures and gave it to the courts. Can't blame the right for playing the game the left forced them to play.
Or you could say that republican-led legislatures improperly infringed on civil rights requiring "the left" to go to the courts to have unconstitutional state laws deemed as such. I won't expect things to change with the recent dismantling of the Voting Rights Act and the amount of partisan gerrymandering taking place across the country.
@11:18: What issue was given to the courts? Still not seeing why a state AG need to get involved in another state's jurisprudence. Why can't the conservatives in California or Texas deal with it?
11:35: pre-1973, all legislatures, R and D alike, had refused for decades to legalize abortion. Historically, no one, R or D, ever imagined that restrictions on abortion implicated the constitution.
12:44: the legality of restrictions on abortions. It happened in 1973. It's a thing, that people know about.
Just goes to demonstrate why Attorney General Trump should not become Governor Trump.
I'm not sure he knows about Question 7.
I looked at that list. Unlike most of the lists of that type, this one seems legitimate. I personally know 17 of the listed attorneys and would agree that they are at the top of the game. Also don't see anyone listed I would ask what the heck were the publishers smoking to list that individual. Congrats to the listed individuals!
Generally agree, this list seems more legit than others – in spite of the fact that I'm not on it. While I don't personally "like" some of the attorney's named, they have legit reputations for being serious game players.
Agreed. It would be interesting to see if there is any overlap b/t "legal elite" and this list. The names that are missing from legal elite completely undermine any credibility that exists by way of the title
Howard Ecker? I do not think so. What about Dennis Prince, who is one of the best trial attorneys in the state?
What is your beef with Howard? I would not exactly state Howard and Dennis are in the same field.
Howard? Well in addition to the fact that he is rude, inappropriate with women, and disheveled, he is basically retired.
Dennis is on the downside, porch puppy for Bob and Tracy
Recognition from your peers will not come from facebook. do good work, be prepared, keep your word, don't be a dick. Seems simple.
I blow your magic flute, you blow mine, and the rubes…er… the potential clients will dance to the tune.
I don't think marketing yourself is just getting recognition from you peers. It's important to make sure your social contacts know what you do and how to reach you because they are all potential clients.
One surefire way to market yourself is walk around calling yourself The Best Trial Lawyer in Las Vegas (TM) and continuously walk around the office and tell your staff how great of an attorney you are, but then don't actually try any cases or do any real work. Just walk around talking about it and demanding others complete the work before they go home "or else". And bail out of cases right before they go to trial so you can "observe" another attorney trying it instead. You will be King of the Hill in no time.
Best way to market yourself is to get your ass off of this blog and back to work billing. You have to get out of the office for stuff. Focusing on online won't get you much in the way of real world results.
"… and back to work billing."
That is some of the worst advice I have ever seen on this blog. Honestly. Billing more hours won't generate work. If you don't know the difference between a GRINDER and a FINDER, you are already losing, 3:41 PM. I know Finders who are lazy, undisciplined and downright shitty billers. But they are prolific finders, so they provide their firm with value, and based upon that value, they are paid well. If you can only be one, be a Finder. There is a new batch of grinders coming out of law school every year.
Also, if you think online activity, even social media, doesn't generate work, you're just plain wrong and don't understand how to use the medium.
Attorneys continue to be, understandably at times, astonished with these "best of" lists–whether it be "best of" in a certain are of Law, or simply "best of" in the Law in general.
The complaints tend to center around the fact that some of the lawyers on theses lists are quite new and/or relatively unknown, or, more disturbingly, simply not very good lawyers.
I think the explanation for all this is disarmingly simply. These lists don't tend to be generated by law organizations that seek input from lawyers who practice in the rated lawyer's area of practice, nor do they seek input from the judges the lawyer appears before.
Instead, when certain publications rate lawyers, they tend to provide high ratings to lawyers who provide financial support to the publication. In other words, they may essentially "buy" the rating.
And as to websites that rate lawyers, in addition to this financial issue being in operation in some of these circumstances, there is the added dynamic that a lawyer can be rated high if his/he staff and supporters regularly weigh in with positive reviews, and regularly monitor the site so they can explain away or defend against any negative reviews that happen to slip through
I sat in on a meeting with a sales exec from one of the "list" magazines (I can't remember which one) who straight out said if you pay you'll be on the list – I was a newbie and thankfully my boss (a good and honest person) said no way and that was the end of that.
It’s easy to tell with Super Lawyers. Only the seven people with photographs, in front of the long alphabetical list paid.
LOL – nobody pays to be in Super Lawyers, although you can pay for a highlighted profile after you are selected. Nobody pays to get into Chambers. Nobody pays to get AV rated by Martindale-Hubble. Nobody pays to get on the US News list. If it makes folks sleep better at night to believe that, great. I've been at a big firm and a small firm and it's the same at either place. Pay for play at these more legitimate publications just isn't correct.
Now, it may come down to how many people you know that will vote/vouch for you.
Having said that, there are a million other publications, "Top 1% of Trial Lawyers under 40!" etc. that are absolutely pay for play.
Agree with 10:02 as am also on most of these lists and have never paid and still don't. Having said that, no $ does not mean it's not a popularity contest. It is. But you have to figure also that a "popular" attorney is likely to be someone with many if not most of the characteristics a client would want in an attorney–decently competent with some basic social skills. There's real value in that, IMO.
This
I just got asked to be listed in the Most Distinguished Lawyers list in the National Law Journal. Martindale-Hubble has something to do with it. Anybody know about that list?
If I pay someone to be on their "best of list" do have to disclose that the recommendation is an advertisement? Any ethical issues here? Inquiring minds want to know!
Martindale- Hubble means nothing. Before they were sold to the current owners, they actually made an effort to vet attorneys before issuing a rating. After the sale, they fired everyone except the sales force. Now you can just ask them for an A-V rating, give them a list of five of your buddies to review you, and bang you are A-V. Its a joke. I threw away my plaque years ago when I saw 2nd year attorneys getting an A-V rating.
I find it hilarious–and tragic–that the attorneys who buy these "honors" do not have to disclose the fact that they are paid for. It's even more bizarre that some of the legitimately good attorneys in town still pay for this bullshit. The sad fact is that there are probably some idiot clients who think this shit means anything. But we all know it doesn't. You know what I do when I see all those awards at the bottom of opposing counsel's email? I substantially reduce my offer of judgment and look forward to trial.
" I substantially reduce my offer of judgment and look forward to trial." that is where you err–the point is to make the offer of judgment as big as possible so that when you beat them at trial, no judge in their right mind could find that their refusal was anything other than grossly unreasonable.
I make my offers as reasonable as possible. Most of my carriers hate me.
Again, nobody pays to get onto the legitimate lists (Super Lawyers, AV rated, Chambers, US News etc). Now, they are more of a popularity context than some objective measure of legal skill, but not pay for play. There are, however, some less legitimate lists that are pay for play.