June 23, 2009

Lawyer Defends Speeding Ticket with Expert and PowerPoint

This is a funny story (via Overlawyered, via the AP). A Portland, Oregon lawyer blamed his BMW 535xi for a speeding ticket, claiming that he couldn't know that he was speeding.

C. Akin Blitz said he was just trying to get ahead of a line of cars following a motorhome over a mountain pass on U.S. Highway 26 -- that he had no idea his BMW 535xi was going 76 mph in a 55 mph zone because of its handling characteristics.

Funny right? But the funnier part is that he made a PowerPoint presentation and offered expert testimony from a mechanic. Now that is funny. Just the same, the judge found him guilty and ordered him to pay a fine.

While this is funny, what is not so funny is this: I'll bet you jurors would award less in a personal injury case if they read this article before giving their verdict. Americans are getting these kind of stories by the barrel. And it just does not help personal injury victims.

June 23, 2009

Keeping Busy

Bethany Kolenic writes a blog post for the Young Lawyers Blog on how to stay busy and productive when you have "nothing to do." I think it is good to try to apply these lessons during down time in an otherwise busy day. If you show up early for a hearing, the dentist, or whatever else.

One time I can't really "stay busy" is during breaks in a trial or while the jury is out. I'm either getting ready for what I have to do or I'm killing time. One day, I would like to have a Bill Clinton-like (he's second nod on this blog today before 8:45 a.m.!) ability to just compartmentalize and focus on making the most of my time in every moment. But I'm pretty sure I'll be twiddling my thumbs next time I have a jury out.

June 23, 2009

Lawyer Avoids Disbarrment by One Vote

The Maryland Daily Record reports that a Rockville lawyer was suspended by the Maryland Court of Appeals. The slim minority of the court - 4-3 decision - voted for disbarment.

I don't know how I would vote on this. He failed to keep an IOLTA account which is a huge problem. The second "error" he made was loaning money to his client's relatives. Both are incredibly obvious no-nos.

These are bad offenses but not crimes of intent to cause anyone harm at the lawyer's own expense. But adding salt to the wound in the dissent's view was what brings down most people: the cover-up. Ask Nixon or Clinton. Judge Harrell's dissent makes clear that he did not find he was honest with bar counsel during its investigation.

The absence of “selfish or dishonest motives” generally, as found there by the hearing judge, may influence the sanction, but have no bearing on whether the violative conduct was unintentional or negligent in the first instance... Considered together, we are
confronted with intentional misappropriation, negligent misappropriation, obvious conflict
of interest, and intentional misrepresentations to Bar Counsel in the course of an
investigation. This array, I think, cuts to the core of what we should expect minimally from
a Maryland lawyer. “Candor and truthfulness are two of the most important moral character
traits of a lawyer.”

A footnote to Judge Harrell's dissent indicates that it "is probably of no great moment" to the lawyer whether the court disbars him or not because he intends to retire. I would may have had some impact on the Maryland Court of Appeals decision. I would think that you would hate to send a guy into retirement with a disbarment after what the majority opinion indicated was 40 years in practice. (Of course, this begs the question: why are you operating without an IOLTA account after 40 years of practicing law?)

You can find the full opinion here.

June 19, 2009

Frederick County Settles Wrongful Death Lawsuit

The Baltimore Sun reports that Frederick County reached a $300,000 settlement in the death of a fireman who died of heatstroke in 2002 while training for a full-time position with Frederick County. His family filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the county after the 23-year old died, contending that Frederick County was responsible for the death because identifying the man heat stroke symptoms.

June 17, 2009

Jury Selection: The Problem Maryland Lawyers Have in Picking a Jury

Tricia Bishop has an article in the Baltimore Sun on how lawyers stereotype jurors in Maryland. The title of the article is "Stereotypes Confound Jury Selection" and the subtitle is "Bias assumptions seldom right; juror's experiences called best indicator."

I disagree with the subtitle. I don't think assumption are "seldom right" but "usually right." But usually is not 99%, it is more like 60%.

The bigger point that the article misses is that while juror experiences are the best indicator, Maryland has what is probably the least probative voir dire in country, according to retired Howard County Judge Dennis M. Sweeney. So Maryland personal injury lawyers picking a jury have very limited means to determine juror experiences which leaves most Maryland lawyers making assumptions based on stereotypes that have varying degrees of accuracy depending on the stereotype. Of course, lawyers on both sides of the v are equally handicapped by this minimalist voir dire approach.

May 27, 2009

Can Lawyers Be Judged by Their Clients?

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand is getting heat because before she was elected to Congress in 2006, she spend much of her career as a lawyer working at a mega New York law firm representing the world’s largest cigarette company, Philip Morris. She apparently spend a good bit of time between 1995 to 1999 helping Philip Morris fight the Justice Department's efforts to get the tobacco company to produce damaging research and other internal documents regarding its knowledge about the health risks of tobacco products.

My first reaction is that you shouldn't judge people for the clients the represent. I defended drug companies during that same period of time and while I'm not proud of this, I'm not ashamed either. I'm sure Martin O'Malley is not ashamed of defending criminals. But Dorothy Samuels has a different take on it in the New York Times that I think deserves airing:

Professor Stephen Gillers of New York University Law School, one of the country’s leading legal ethics experts, draws a distinction between publicly criticizing lawyers because of the people they represent, which he says he would not do, and how they carry out the representation.

He finds the basic strategy that the tobacco companies pursued — pushing the limits of attorney-client privilege to hide inconvenient truths known to top company insiders about smoking and health — morally offensive, even if it violated no law or official legal ethics rules.

Ms. Gillibrand’s work for Philip Morris came during a pivotal period of mounting criticism and intensified legal scrutiny of the tobacco industry.

She tries to play down her role and suggests that she had no choice. In truth, she had plenty of choice.

Her law firm allowed lawyers to decline work on tobacco cases if they had a moral or ethical objection. It wasn’t simply a matter of working “for the clients that were assigned to her,” as an aide explained. Tobacco duty was optional. She opted in. Others did not.

Although not long out of law school, Ms. Gillibrand was given substantial responsibility. She worked closely with company executives. She became steeped in the workings of a lab the cigarette company had located outside the United States in Germany with the express purpose of keeping negative research findings that showed a connection between smoking and cancer out of public view and beyond the reach of American subpoenas.

She was privy to unsuccessful efforts to dissuade a smaller tobacco company, the Liggett Group, from breaking ranks and cooperating with prosecutors — a move, it was feared, that could result in the release of incriminating internal documents and a strengthening of Food and Drug Administration efforts to regulate the marketing and sale of cigarettes, including to children.

Ms. Gillibrand sat with some of the nation’s most prominent tobacco attorneys from different law firms on a special committee whose work included preventing plaintiffs and the government from seeing documents that Philip Morris wanted to remain secret.

Unlike lawyers who represent the indigent in criminal cases or the attorneys who endured mindless charges of disloyalty from the Bush administration for representing detainees at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, Ms. Gillibrand’s work for Philip Morris served no larger principle of due process. Had she turned down the tobacco assignment, other lawyers were readily available to take her place.

Her law firm allowed lawyers to decline work on tobacco cases if they had a moral or ethical objection. It wasn’t simply a matter of working “for the clients that were assigned to her,” as an aide explained. Tobacco duty was optional. She opted in. Others did not.


I don't know the correct answer. But I'm always interested in any argument that can really make me question my position on an issue.

May 26, 2009

Quote of the Day

Again, from the Maryland Daily Record, this quote from a plaintiffs' lawyer whose client received a $1 verdict at trial after being shot in the back by a police officer.

Plaintiff's lawyer "did not conduct any pretrial depositions. 'That’s part of my trial strategy,' Butler said. 'The first time [Windsor] got to see me was at trial.'

I don't know whether taking depositions was warranted in the case, and I hate second guessing anyone's trial strategy, because you do not know what should be done unless you are there. But I have never had a personal injury case where it was good strategy to not conduct discovery because you want the first time the Defendant to see you is at trial. Humbly, that just makes no sense to me.

May 26, 2009

Inverse Correlation Between Questions for the Bench and Success

Interesting New York Times article on the correlation between how many questions a lawyer receives from the Supreme Court and the lawyer's client's chance of success. I think this general rule is true in any legal argument to a judge: the fewer questions a lawyer is asked, the more likely that lawyer is to prevail. The hardest thing for a lawyer to do - particularly a lawyer who prepared well for the hearing or motion - is to just shut-up and let the judge work for you.


April 21, 2009

Supreme Court Oral Arguments

I like this Supreme Court oral argument transcript. Kenneth Starr gets out exactly 41 words before he is interrupted. This is good reading for any law student looking for what to expect in an oral argument in moot court. Unfortunately, Al Gore had not gotten the whole Internet thing up and running when I was in law school.

February 23, 2009

Padding Hours: If I Did It

I'm linking to this post just for the hysterical title: Padding Hours: If I Did It.

This is another over billing article (I found both on Overlawyered), that I found particularly interesting. I cannot tell you how often I experience #5 on this, particularly with bigger firms.

I'll tell you, from a lifestyle standpoint, one of the best things about being a personal injury lawyer is not having to bill people by the hour.

February 19, 2009

Abusive Judges

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals found that a judge’s condescending ramblings about a black criminal defendant’s “baby mama” could lead to a reasonable perception that the sentence was based on his race. Specifically, the judge said:

THE COURT: What do you do all day?

THE DEFENDANT: I just stay at home with my daughter and that's it.

THE COURT: Where is her mother?

THE DEFENDANT: At work.

THE COURT: So the mother works and you sit at home, right?

THE DEFENDANT: Yeah.

THE COURT: And watch the child?

THE DEFENDANT: I got all types of things goin'. My personal family.

THE COURT: Where does the baby's mama work?

THE DEFENDANT: Metro Market.

THE COURT: Did she finish school?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

THE COURT: Is she going to college, too?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

THE COURT: Where do you guys find these women, really, seriously. I'd say about every fourth man who comes in here unemployed, no education, is with a woman who is working full-time, going to school. Where do you find these women? Is there a club?

THE DEFENDANT: No.

Continue reading "Abusive Judges" »

January 15, 2009

Law Firms on the Internet

Above the Law reports on Muzeview’s rankings of law firm visibility on the Internet. Here are the rankings:
1 Jones Day
2 Mayer Brown
3 Miller & Zois
4 Baker & McKenzie
5 McDermott, Will & Emery
6 Greenberg Traurig, P.A.
7 Morrison & Foerster
8 Morgan, Lewis & Bockius
9 Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom
10 WilmerHale
11 Kirkland & Ellis
12 Latham & Watkins
13 White & Case
14 Sidley Austin
15 Hogan & Hartson
16 Dechert
17 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher
18 Weil, Gotshal & Manges
19 O'Melveny Myers
20 Shearman & Sterling
21 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld
22 Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker
23 Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton
24 Sullivan & Cromwell
25. Simpson Thacher & Bartlett

Isn’t that crazy? We are number #3! Who knew? Oh, wait, maybe I replaced Piper DLA with Miller & Zois. That would be a little less crazy.

Nothing is surprising here. The Internet is dominated by big law firms and this “study” confirms what we already knew.

January 8, 2009

Law School and Laptops

Apparently laptops help law students, according to this study. At this point, almost everybody seems to have one. The study's conclusion might be a bit flawed: perhaps there is a relationship between going through the trouble of getting a laptop and bringing it to class and how seriously you take law school. Still, this is an interesting study.

If you are a student of mine and you think I don't know that many of you are texting your friends and surfing the Internet while pretending to type away, you would be wrong. Sometimes, I roam around when I'm teaching and there are always a few students shuffling around with the "you walked in on me while I was looking at porn" expression on their faces when I get an angle on their computers.

December 18, 2008

Hey Facebook Friend: You Have Been Served

This Week’s Sign of the Apocalypse: a court has approved the service of legal documents by Facebook in a foreclosure case. Alas, the Facebook account was closed before the lawyer could effectuate the service, thereby missing an opportunity to make legal history.

I hestitate to mention this point because it takes a little bit of the fun out of the story but this is a case in Australia.

If you are not scared off Facebook at this point, you can add me as a Facebook friend here or on Twitter here.

December 16, 2008

Lawyers Fighting

Is there anyone who does not enjoy a good "two lawyers are having a fist fight" story? I didn't think so. But is is also pretty depressing, too.

December 16, 2008

Motion for Sanctions

The National Law Journal reports that 25% of the reported electronic discovery opinions issued in the first 10 months of the year involved sanctions issues. Thirteen percent of the cases reviewed addressed preservation of evidence and spoliation issues. More statistics: 12% involved computer forensics protocols and experts, 11% addressed admissibility of evidence and 7% of cases involved privilege considerations and waivers.

If lawyers are taking up a quarter of our motions practice seeking sanctions, we are wasting way too much of the court's time with bad or obstructionist lawyers making everyone's jobs more difficult.

December 15, 2008

Maryland Assocation for Justice Auto Negligence Meeting

The Maryland Assocation for Justice's Auto Negligence Section has its next dinner meeting on January 7, 2009. The speaker will be Miller & Zois' own Rod Gaston on the topic of defense medical examinations.

The dinner is at:

That’s Amore Restaurant
10400 Little Patuxent Pkwy.
Columbia, MD 21044

If you are a MAJ member (formerly Maryland Trial Lawyers Association) handling car accident cases in Maryland, it is worthwhile to join the Auto Negligence Section.

Continue reading "Maryland Assocation for Justice Auto Negligence Meeting" »

December 3, 2008

DLA Piper Has a New Partnership Structure

The Maryland Daily Record reports DLA Piper is eliminating its two-tiered partnership structure in favor of a new arrangement where all partners are equity owners of the law firm with as many as 18 tiers on the equity partner ladder. DLA Piper says it made the unusual decision in order to reduce Piper’s outside borrowing and give income partners an ownership interest in the firm, according to joint CEO Frank Burch. “From now on, you’re a partner or you’re not a partner,” Burch said.

Burch said DLA Piper did not make the change because it is has financial problems or having trouble obtaining credit. “The firm has excellent, excellent relationships with our banks and very, very favorable credit facility, almost too favorable,” Burch said. No explanation was given as to what “almost too favorable” means. Burch also expressed a concern that he was too good looking and too charming. (Okay, I made that part up.)

The first chapter of Malcolm Gladwell’s amazing new book Outliers talks about the town of Roseto, Pennsylvania and what an incredible impact the town’s strong sense of community had in dramatically decreasing the rate of heart disease in Roseto. Eighteen partner tiers sounds like the ultimate, never ending rat race. There has always been a de facto demarcation among partners because they are paid differently. But formalizing that with a 18 tier ladder just has to add stress to many lawyers who are already feeling plenty of stress. This may lead to an anti Roseto effect: my detailed statistical analysis predicts that this system will take 1.8 years off the life of the average DLA Piper partner. (Of course, I made that up too. But you get the point.)

Related Posts

November 24, 2008

Keep Associate Bonuses Low to Impress Clients?

Above the Law has an interesting blog post on why some firm keep associate bonuses down: to impress clients.

I personally don't think clients see the world this way. But if you are looking to rationalize being a cheapskate, this is as good of place as any to start.

August 20, 2008

Local Maryland Legal News Links

Local legal stories I have read over the last few days that I thought you might find of interest:

The Washington Post has a good article on former white collar prosecutor Dale P. Kelberman transformation into the go to defense lawyer for the accused politician.

A Baltimore defense attorney who took the stand to defend himself against allegations of witness tampering has filed assault and witness retaliation charges against a former client, according to the Baltimore Sun (patting myself on the back for staying away from criminal law in our practice).

The Baltimore Injury Lawyer Blog writes about how the Baltimore Sun breaks a major legal story by having a reporter sitting in her doctor's office.

The Washington Post reports on the teenage who caused the recent truck accident on the Bay Bridge. I know everyone does it, but do we need to provide the name of the nineteen year old girl that allegedly caused the accident? I vote no.

The Baltimore Sun has an editorial about how we need to make our bridges safer for travel. I'm all for safe travel but it would be nice if the article just provided a modicum of evidence to suggest that bridges are more dangerous other than just "gee, we are lucky this did not happen sooner." Sounds like a classic overreaction to the "story of the month" to me. Lower the BAC to .07 and you will save scores more lives than making a bridge 100% safe.

Maryland Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler has told the United States Army that Maryland plans to sue the Army to force it to finish cleaning up groundwater and soil contamination at Fort Meade. Like him, hate him, you choose. But let's state the obvious: the dude is fearless.

The Maryland Daily Record has a story on a Glenelg pharmacist facing criminal charges for mislabeling prescription drugs. I don't find the story of particular interest. But I went to Glenelg High School. Boy, that area has changed. I don't think Glenelg had a drug store in the 80s.

July 30, 2008

Maryland Bar Exam 2008

I got scores of hits for Maryland Bar exam related searches last night. If you just finished the bar exam and you are Googling this, you really need to relax. It's all good. The exam is over. Statistically speaking, the chances are that you passed and you are going to be a lawyer in December. Most people that think they failed are wrong. You worked hard (well, most of you) so relax and enjoy yourself for a while before you start worrying about your job (or the job market).

July 29, 2008

Maryland Lawyer Defends 9/11 Victims’ Fees

The Maryland Daily Record also reports today that a Maryland lawyer defended
himself yesterday in New York against charges by a federal judge that the fees in the settlements the lawyer negotiated on behalf of the families of four Pentagon workers killed were "unfair” and "unreasonable."

Specifically, the judge alleged something that will have every mass tort lawyer involved in cases with multiple defendants nodding their heads: that the lawyers’ strategy "seems to have been to coast on the work of others, and to wait for last position" before settling. This is familiar to mass tort products liability lawyers because if you have ten defendants, there are usually about three law firms working like crazy with the other seven firms riding on their coattails. (When I defended drug companies, I played both roles at different times.)

I remember about a zillion lawyers volunteering to handle these cases pro bono, so I’m not sure what happened there or how these clients found these lawyers. I’m also not in a position to judge what these lawyers did. But a lot of Maryland lawyers were looking quite good with their volunteer efforts. Regardless of the true facts, this debacle gives every Maryland lawyer – including defense lawyers, by the way – a black eye.

June 27, 2008

Cell Phones in Maryland Courthouses: A List for Maryland Lawyers


The Winter 2008 edition of the Maryland Trial Lawyers Associations’ journal the Trial Reporter was dedicated to “Family Law & the Child.” I never read it because the universe of my family law knowledge comes from Arnie Becker on L.A. Law and I would largely like to keep in that way. But stumbling on it last night, I found a quick article on courthouse technology from our friend John Cord at Janet, Jenner & Suggs who makes a list of all of the courthouses in Maryland where camera capable cell phones are prohibited: Cecil County, Harford County, Howard County, Prince George’s County, Queen Anne’s County, Somerset County, Washington County, Wicomico County (Salisbury), and Worchester County. Carroll County and Kent prohibit any type of cell phone. The inhumanity!

I think I walked in the Prince George’s County Courthouse in Upper Marlboro about five times when I got my first camera phone before I got the idea. Never a fun walk back to the car. Now, they have changed the rule back to allowing cell phones.

April 28, 2008

Impact of Economic Downturn on Maryland Lawyers

“The Maryland Lawyer” section of the Maryland Daily Record today has an interesting article on the impact of the economic slowdown on Maryland lawyers and the fears of law students looking for a job. The article reports that a number of law firms nationally are “axing” lawyers, including Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP, Dechert LLP, Clifford Chance LLP, and Thelen, Reid, Brown, Raysman & Steiner LLP. (I had originally included McKee Nelson LLP on the list because they were included in the Daily Record article. I have since been corrected by email by them that "McKee Nelson conducted a voluntary program last October through which a number of capital markets lawyers volunteered to take partially paid sabbaticals to work for not-for-profits, transfer to other areas of practice, take buyouts, or seek jobs with our clients.") Other firms such as Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP are limiting their summer associates and Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal LLP has taken back job offers, presumably to incoming lawyers.

To really scare big firm lawyers, the article mentions the 1992 dissolution of the Baltimore mega law firm of Frank, Bernstein, Conaway & Goldman.You can always gauge the legal market in Maryland by the reaction to the mention of the Frank, Bernstein, Conaway & Goldman breakup. In the best of times, the mention of that ghost brings on “That could never happen to us” chuckles. During a bad legal market in Baltimore, any mention of that dissolved firm evokes some response in a self-conscious “That could not happen to us. Right? Right?” tone.

The prospect of the collapse of one of Baltimore’s major law firms would be very unlikely because today big law firms are run more like a real business than they were in 1992. As this article points out, Frank Bernstein probably could have been saved if they had terminated partners, an unseemly practice in 1992 but de jour today. The old days of making partner and becoming a “made man” are long gone, which makes a lot more economic sense for a law firm facing a downturn in the market.

This article makes clear that Venable, Miles & Stockbridge, and Piper DLA are in public denial about the impact an economic slowdown/recession has on their firm, pretending that the Baltimore-Washington market is somehow significantly more immune from an economic downturn than other markets. I think these lawyers are smart enough to be preparing for the impact of a downturn in the legal market and are taking steps to mitigate their risk.

Accident and medical malpractice lawyers tend to think they are immune from an economic slowdown because litigation generally remains constant in good and bad economic times. But there is some impact because many lawyers handling real estate and other economically sensitive areas of the law migrate to litigation – specifically personal injury – during economic downturns, which does have some impact on personal injury lawyers.

April 21, 2008

Law Firm Associate Expectations

The Maryland Daily Record has an article in its Maryland Lawyer section this morning on associate retention in Baltimore law firms. I was amazed to read that one lawyer, who is on his third job, expressed dismay that his two previous law firms never asked him the kind of work he wanted to do. He says he was told, “Here are the cases we have, here are the clients we have and we’ll give you the work.” He complained that no one ever asked him, “What do you want to do?’” he said.

Tragically, these law firms only gave him the work that it had, not the work he wanted. Our law firm handles only personal injury cases. But if we had a lawyer who said, “Hey, I don’t want to handle personal injury work, I want to do mergers and acquisitions,” we would obviously run out and immediately pick up JPMorgan or Bear Stearns as clients. Are you telling me every law firm does not operate this way?

These cold sweat shop law firms that do not allow you to pick the work and the clients you want to do are the same kind of law firms that actually expect you to come to work on rainy days like today. The inhumanity!

March 18, 2008

Bar Application Blues

In my Insurance Law class at the University of Baltimore last week, somehow the topic of the bar application came up. One student complained about how detailed and arduous the application process is to complete. I mused that I didn’t know why they make you jump though all of these hoops when they let just about every non-felon in anyway.

I was dead wrong. The Maryland Court of Appeals ruled last week in a 23 page opinion that a bar applicant, never accused of any crime, was unfit to practice law for two reasons: (1) bad credit history that the applicant lied about, and (2) an inappropriate relationship with a 15 year-old girl.

You can guess as to the bad credit history problem. He had bad credit, tried to fix it right before he made the bar application, and then lied about it. The situation with the girl sounds like something out of a TV movie. The girl – now a 22 year-old woman - apparently went to the Character Committee – via a letter from her mother - and told them about the relationship. When she testified, the woman recanted much of what she told the investigators. It was also revealed that she had committed acts of vandalism and violence against the bar applicant, and apparently had threatened suicide when he threatened to break up with her.

So you might think those allegations wouldn’t hold up, but enough stuck to make it meaningful to the Maryland Court of Appeals. The bar applicant claimed he was a father figure to the girl, but admits that he (1) lied about his age when he met her, (2) found her very attractive and (3) had a sexual relationship with her (there was debate as to whether the relationship started when she was 15 or 16).

The Character Committee found he showed poor judgment in having a relationship with someone who was not “emotionally mature.” I don’t necessarily disagree with the result, if only because I find it creepy for a man to say he was a “father figure” to a 15 year-old girl he met and slept with. But I wish the semantics were a little more specific. I’m not sure how many of us were “emotionally mature” when we took the bar exam. The problem, it seems, is not that she was emotionally immature but that that she was only 15 or 16. I don’t see why we can’t say that is a bad thing, and I really don’t know why Maryland law does not reflect that this is a bad thing.

For better or worse – largely for the better – we live in a culture of forgiveness. I think if this applicant gets his act together, he will be admitted to the bar. You can find a copy of the Court of Appeals’ opinion here.

March 12, 2008

Disbarment of Elliot Spitzer?

Like many of us, I have followed closely the Elliot Spitzer saga with sadness, fascination, and amazement. My quick two cents: I think what Elliot Spitzer did was awful and I think he no longer has the moral authority to lead New York. The hypocrisy is just stunning. The irony is I don't think most Americans believe what Elliot Spitzer did should send him to jail but he does (oh, unless, Elliot Spitzer is the defendant.)

But I think it is also insane to suggest, as the Associated Press reported some are, that Spitzer should be disbarred or his license to practice law should be suspended. The standard to be governor of the state of New York is different from the ability to participate in the livelihood of practicing law.

Lawyers who commit (relatively) victimless crimes should be prosecuted because, as Elliot Spitzer knows full well, you cannot pick the laws that you choose to follow (at least the ones that are not unconscionable, which pretty much includes every enforced law in this country). But they ought to be allowed to keep their jobs. It is also worth noting that no one would suggest that a doctor should no longer practice medicine for sleeping with prostitute.

What an incredible irony it would be if Elliot Spitzer was suspended or disbarred for sleeping with a prostitute when we do not suspend or disbar lawyers who drink and drive and put innocent children at risk.

February 1, 2008

Baltimore Mega Law Firm Lawyer Salaries

The Maryland Daily Record's Blog reports that DLA Piper and Venable, the two Baltimore mega firms, have raised their associate starting salaries in Baltimore to $160,000.

I remember in 1995 when I was making $57,500 coming out of law school at a litigation defense firm in Baltimore that, at that time, was only a half notch below Piper and Venable in starting salary. Because other than being a law clerk, my next best paying job in life had been as a camp counselor making minimum wage, I thought I was a millionaire. (In a related story, I was still living at home.)

The Daily Record Blog asks if these young associates are worth 160K a year. The answer is clearly no. But three years from now, when they have quality experience and are billing out at $450 an hour while working approximately 28.7 hours a day, the answer becomes a resounding yes. It is not dissimilar to the Oakland Raiders signing JaMarcus Russell to a six-year, $68 million contract even when they did not think he would be an asset to them in the first year of his contract (they were right).

To collect this 160K a year, there is a catch. You actually have to show up and work there. I can honestly say that I would not take the job of a first year associate at one of these firms if they offered me $1,000,000 a year. If you can walk into some of these big firms - I'm not speaking to Venable and Piper specifically – you will see many of their lawyers are blinking t-o-r-t-u-r-e in Morse Code. These are tough places to work, especially if you have a family and other commitments. For a great fictional account of big firm life that is absolutely hysterical, check out the Anonymous Lawyer Blog.

If you read a lot of blogs, you might be rolling your eyes that another personal injury lawyer blog is bashing big (defense) firms. Well, you are, I guess. But there is a reason while DLA Piper has over three thousand lawyers: all things considered, including I’m guessing the money, it works for them. While the big firm life was certainly not an environment in which I thrived, I have a lot of friends who tolerate it quite well. My brother-in-law is a fantastic lawyer. I’m always running issues by him even though he does not do personal injury work. He is a partner for a mega firm in Arizona. He has tons of his own clients and bills out at roughly $10,000 an hour. Of course, I'm telling him, "Geez, take those clients and go start your own firm, you can retire (and I can retire off you)." But he enjoys that power, resources, support, and camaraderie with so many other lawyers that a big firm provides and would never consider anything else. (In a related story, one of his big hobbies is using vocabulary words I’ve never even seen before in emails.)

It is a Friday and I’m stalling getting back to work so I’ll make one other big firm comment. The jab every small firm trial lawyer loves to make about mega firm lawyers is that a first year lawyer after two weeks on the job as a district attorney usually has a great deal more trial experience than a large firm lawyer that has been practicing for 15 years. This drives big firm lawyers crazy because there is a lot of truth to it. But I started practicing law at a pretty big firm and we were national counsel for pharmaceutical companies, working with a lot of mega law firms around the country. A lot of those lawyers had little or no trial experience. But they were smart people who had given a lot of creative thought to how to prepare a case for trial. Sure, some of these lawyers would fare about as well as your cousin Elmo in front of a jury. But working with these lawyers – including the Elmos - I think was great experience as a young lawyer that served me well when I began preparing and trying cases. I also saw many the best plaintiffs' lawyers in the country and some that were not so good. I learned a great deal from both.

October 3, 2007

Bruce Bereano and Bill Belichick

Caryn Tamber writes a fascinating article in the Maryland Daily Record today on lobbyist Bruce Bereano’s challenge of the suspension of his Maryland lobbying license.

The State Ethics Commission fined Mr. Bereano $5,000 and suspended him for 10 months as the result of Bereano’s violation of Maryland law, which does not allow lobbyists to work on a contingency fee basis. Mr. Bereano’s lawyer argued that his client cannot be fined and suspended, because he signed the agreement for a contingency fee before the sanctions law went into effect (although it is worth noting that at the time of the agreement, the contingency fee deal was a crime under Maryland law).

Mr. Bereano is no stranger to trouble with the law. He was convicted in 1994 of eight counts of federal mail fraud charges for essentially skimming money from clients to make campaign contributions to political candidates, although I don’t think his clients particularly objected.

None of this is particularly interesting to me. What is fascinating to me is that the Maryland Court of Appeals deciding the case will be composed of only two active judges and five retired judges because Judge Robert M. Bell, Judges Irma S. Raker, Lynne A. Battaglia, Alan M. Wilner and Dale R. Cathell all recused themselves. They were replaced by retired judges James Getty, William W. Wenner, Lawrence F. Rodowsky, Robert L. Karwacki and Raymond G. Thieme Jr.

Five of the judges? This is a guy who knows people, let me tell you. He apparently continues to flout the law. Scandal follows him everywhere. Yet he still counts most political elite in Maryland among his closest friends. I remember reading in 1999, when he got out of jail, about how the many influential Maryland politicians were there to meet him as he walked out of prison. Folks, that’s what I call influence.

The two people I’m most interested in today are New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick and Bruce Bereano. Belichick fascinates me because he has just awful people skills, which is usually a recipe for disaster for almost any profession, much less an NFL coach. Moreover, by every account I have ever heard, he is just a miserable human being without a great deal of integrity. I’m very interested in how people with such glaring weaknesses can still have such great success. Yesterday, I bought the late David Halberstam’s biography of Belichick to try to get some insight into him. With Bereano, obviously he does not need to do this stuff to be successful, so why do it?

We need to learn more about what makes this guy tick. So I’m not asking for, I’m demanding someone write a biography of Bruce Bereano.

September 28, 2007

Maryland Pro Bono Lawyer Fair

The Prince George’s County Bar Association, the Administrative Offices of the Courts, and the Pro Bono Resource Center of Maryland, are sponsoring a Pro Bono Legal Services Fair for Maryland lawyers on Friday, September 28, 2008 at the UMUC Inn and Conference Center by Marriott, 3501 University Blvd., East, Adelphi, MD 20783. For those of you who want to do good and still get paid, a CLE is being held in Room 1123, at 5:00-6:00 called “Just Because Its Pro Bono Doesn’t Mean You Can’t Get Paid.” (Don't you get the feeling John Edwards might roll in the door for that topic?)

The keynote speaker for the pro bono fair is Robert M. Bell who, of course is the Chief Judge of the Maryland Court of Appeals. Panel members are Jo Benson Fogel, Orlando Barnes, Barbara Jorgenson, Peter Holland, Philip Robinson. The moderator is Judge Cathy Hollenberg-Serrette.

September 20, 2007

Anne Arundel County Bar Association's Crab Feast

The Anne Arundel County Bar Association's annual crab feast is on Friday, September 28, 2007, 1:00 p.m. at Sandy Point State Park.

I probably will not go this year but I have gone in previous years. It really is a nice, very well attended event at an absolutely beautiful site overlooking the water in Annapolis.

September 17, 2007

Jeff Skilling's Appellate Brief: A Piece of Good Legal Writing

The Wall Street Journal blog has published convicted Enron executive Jeff Skilling 237 page appellate brief.

Like most Americans, I did not follow the case closely and have not carefully reviewed the evidence against him but I assume he is guilty because a jury convicted him. (From a documentary I saw, I could certainly convict him of first degree arrogance in about 3.4 seconds.) Anyway, I am linking to this brief because, after reading about 10 pages, it is obvious Jeffery Skilling picked lawyers who are fantastic writers. The best way for lawyers to become better writers is to read good legal writing.

You may wonder how these lawyers got around the requirement in the Federal Rules that a brief may contain no more than 14,000 words. His lawyers filed a motion asking the appeals court to accept a longer brief. One blog, Talk Left, said that: "Jeff Skilling is serving 24 years in prison. The trial lasted several months. If his lawyers say they need 237 pages to present his arguments, I say let them." While I suspect the guy is guilty, I could not agree more.

September 13, 2007

Motions Practice: The Introduction

The Illinois Trial Practice Weblog has a good post on what should be in the introduction when writing a motion. You can find it here. The gist of the post is that lawyers should not use the introduction to just introduce what is to come but should instead provide an clean executive summary of the motion. Most lawyers summarize in the introduction intuitively but this lucid explanation is worth reading even if you do.

August 7, 2007

Maryland Trial Lawyers Association Happy Hour

The new lawyers section of the Maryland Trial Lawyers Association is having a happy hour in Bethesda at Black’s Bar and Kitchen on 7750 Woodmont Avenue. You do not need to be a new lawyer to attend, just a member of the Maryland Trial Lawyers Association (on any lawyer, paralegal or law student interested in joining).

July 2, 2007

Legal Malpractice Insurance

The Los Angeles Times reports yesterday on the debate in California about whether California lawyers should be required to tell their clients whether they carry malpractice insurance. Apparently, 20% of the state's 150,000 lawyers do not have legal malpractice coverage. (Can you believe California has 150,000 lawyers? Exactly where do they hold their annual bar convention? I'm a lawyer and I find this disturbing. Let's just move on....)

The question is not whether California lawyers are required to get legal malpractice insurance; instead it is whether lawyers must disclose whether they have legal malpractice insurance. Opponents of the rule argue that because clients will likely not want a lawyer who discloses that they do not have legal malpractice insurance, this will effectively force all lawyers to buy legal malpractice insurance.

I'm sure this is true. But if virtually every client would prefer a lawyer with legal malpractice insurance, shouldn't all lawyers have legal malpractice insurance?

The American Bar Association has adopted a model insurance disclosure rule and 20 states now have some sort of disclosure rule. I think having to disclose this fact to a client is unbelievably awkward. I think a better rule would be requiring legal malpractice insurance, at least for lawyers handling they types of cases that often lend themselves to legal malpractice claims, such as real estate lawyers and personal injury lawyers.