Jonathan,  If our encounter is representative of your analysis, intuition, and attitude, I feel very sorry for your clients.
My first week as a weblogger, I wrote the post Got My First Hate Mail (on behalf of trial lawyers, of course) .  It is just as on point as ever.  For your information, “tort reform” is focused on limiting the amount of recovery by a plaintiff.   My goal in discussing the standard contingency fee is to make sure that clients get to keep as much of their awards as they deserve; it in no way limits the amount of recovery. 
Maybe your staff will have better luck than you did finding the many posts on this website that decry the excessive focus on income and high fees throughout the legal profession. They might start here and there.

Jonathan,  If our encounter is representative of your analysis, intuition, and attitude, I feel very sorry for your clients.
My first week as a weblogger, I wrote the post Got My First Hate Mail (on behalf of trial lawyers, of course) .  It is just as on point as ever.  For your information, “tort reform” is focused on limiting the amount of recovery by a plaintiff.   My goal in discussing the standard contingency fee is to make sure that clients get to keep as much of their awards as they deserve; it in no way limits the amount of recovery. 
Maybe your staff will have better luck than you did finding the many posts on this website that decry the excessive focus on income and high fees throughout the legal profession. They might start here and there.

David -

Not sure what I should share with you about me fee arrangements. Quite frankly, its none of your damn business. And since you dont seem to be knocking hourly attorneys who charge $500 or more an hour, it seems to me that your beef is against PI attorneys and you are another shill for the tort reformers of the world.

David -

Not sure what I should share with you about me fee arrangements. Quite frankly, its none of your damn business. And since you dont seem to be knocking hourly attorneys who charge $500 or more an hour, it seems to me that your beef is against PI attorneys and you are another shill for the tort reformers of the world.

I looked up your contingency bill of rights. Let me throw out a few ideas for you.

First, your heading is a bit deceptive since ATLA, the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, did not release it. You, of course, seem to not mind that you are creating confusion, not just for the lowest common denominator, but for a lot of people. I am guessing Harvard would not find it so funny if someone made up something like that where Harvard determined that all of their professors were unqualified. But, we can move beyond that to the actual substance.

Second, I do not charge the “standard fee.” Heck, in some cases, I do not charge any fee. Let me see if I can rephrase that for you: in some cases, I do not charge any fee to my client. And it is not just me. I know plenty of other plaintiff’s attorneys who do the same thing. Why? Because, for most of us, although not all, our reason for practicing in this field is to help people. Sure, there are bad apples, but there are bad professors too. We don’t lump you all in and say all professors are just lazy, no good people who could not hack it as trial lawyers.

Third, since you seem to be on some sort of anti-Jonathan Stein kick, which is fine with me, not only do I adhere to my State Bar’s code of ethics, but I adhere to the code of ethics of ATLA, the CPCU Society and the American Institute for CPCU. What code do you adhere to?

Fourth, I actually have two phsyical locations. Thanks for asking.

Fifth, I do not list my staff because they are entitled to a right of privacy. Unlike me, where my information is public record, the same is not so for anyone who works with me. Since I do represent some criminal defendants, and since some of my personal injury cases may turn into problems, I keep some privacy for people who work for me. Is that an issue with you? After all, you are all about people’s rights, yes?

I looked up your contingency bill of rights. Let me throw out a few ideas for you.

First, your heading is a bit deceptive since ATLA, the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, did not release it. You, of course, seem to not mind that you are creating confusion, not just for the lowest common denominator, but for a lot of people. I am guessing Harvard would not find it so funny if someone made up something like that where Harvard determined that all of their professors were unqualified. But, we can move beyond that to the actual substance.

Second, I do not charge the “standard fee.” Heck, in some cases, I do not charge any fee. Let me see if I can rephrase that for you: in some cases, I do not charge any fee to my client. And it is not just me. I know plenty of other plaintiff’s attorneys who do the same thing. Why? Because, for most of us, although not all, our reason for practicing in this field is to help people. Sure, there are bad apples, but there are bad professors too. We don’t lump you all in and say all professors are just lazy, no good people who could not hack it as trial lawyers.

Third, since you seem to be on some sort of anti-Jonathan Stein kick, which is fine with me, not only do I adhere to my State Bar’s code of ethics, but I adhere to the code of ethics of ATLA, the CPCU Society and the American Institute for CPCU. What code do you adhere to?

Fourth, I actually have two phsyical locations. Thanks for asking.

Fifth, I do not list my staff because they are entitled to a right of privacy. Unlike me, where my information is public record, the same is not so for anyone who works with me. Since I do represent some criminal defendants, and since some of my personal injury cases may turn into problems, I keep some privacy for people who work for me. Is that an issue with you? After all, you are all about people’s rights, yes?

David -

Lets go back to my original point, which you can’t seem to argue with: lawyer advertising like this affects juries. And if you think this is just a PI attorney arguing, than go read Dr. Ball’s book. And try arguing a case.

Jonathan

David -

Lets go back to my original point, which you can’t seem to argue with: lawyer advertising like this affects juries. And if you think this is just a PI attorney arguing, than go read Dr. Ball’s book. And try arguing a case.

Jonathan

David -

Wow, someone woke up cranky today. Taking a few shots? That’s fine. I will see if I can address them in order, since your writing is a bit rambling.

First, as for my tagline on the Practice, I am helping law students learn. However, you should know that learning is an ongoing process. Even if I wrote a book today about EVERYTHING a law student needs to know, it could not possibly be delivered instantaneously. It is an ongoing process. If someone continues to read my blog over time, they will learn what they need to know. Just like when someone comes for legal services, you can’t solve every problem at once, this is a process that takes steps.

Second, about us means I have a staff. I am sure you are familiar with the concept of a staff, right?

Third, is the concept of neighborhood foreign to you? I provide services to people in my neighborhood. It does not mean I provide them exclusively in my neighborhood, but, for instance, on Friday night I helped someone who is in the neighborhood and was in the hospital. Maybe you boys on the East Coast just don’t care about your neighbors as much.

As far as touting my educational background, don’t we all? If education did not matter, why would your blog be at harvard.edu? Are you telling me that education is not important? After all, you tell everyone that you graduated from Harvard Law Schol. Why?

Finally, as to my problems with the use of heavy hitter, the public will hire someone like him based on what he calls himself. Not only does this give those of us who actually practice law a black eye, it deceives people who think they are getting someone who is a heavy hitter. How would they actually know?

You will notice that I do not advertise my results. Why? Because results are irrelevant. Yes, I said it and I stick by it. If I settle a case for $1,000,000 is that a good settlement? Is that a bad settlement? And how would anyone know? I have no problem with advertising services, but I do have a problem when people do it in a way that negatively impacts a profession and the jury system.

If you would like to openly debate the merits of advertising, just let me know.

Jonathan

David -

Wow, someone woke up cranky today. Taking a few shots? That’s fine. I will see if I can address them in order, since your writing is a bit rambling.

First, as for my tagline on the Practice, I am helping law students learn. However, you should know that learning is an ongoing process. Even if I wrote a book today about EVERYTHING a law student needs to know, it could not possibly be delivered instantaneously. It is an ongoing process. If someone continues to read my blog over time, they will learn what they need to know. Just like when someone comes for legal services, you can’t solve every problem at once, this is a process that takes steps.

Second, about us means I have a staff. I am sure you are familiar with the concept of a staff, right?

Third, is the concept of neighborhood foreign to you? I provide services to people in my neighborhood. It does not mean I provide them exclusively in my neighborhood, but, for instance, on Friday night I helped someone who is in the neighborhood and was in the hospital. Maybe you boys on the East Coast just don’t care about your neighbors as much.

As far as touting my educational background, don’t we all? If education did not matter, why would your blog be at harvard.edu? Are you telling me that education is not important? After all, you tell everyone that you graduated from Harvard Law Schol. Why?

Finally, as to my problems with the use of heavy hitter, the public will hire someone like him based on what he calls himself. Not only does this give those of us who actually practice law a black eye, it deceives people who think they are getting someone who is a heavy hitter. How would they actually know?

You will notice that I do not advertise my results. Why? Because results are irrelevant. Yes, I said it and I stick by it. If I settle a case for $1,000,000 is that a good settlement? Is that a bad settlement? And how would anyone know? I have no problem with advertising services, but I do have a problem when people do it in a way that negatively impacts a profession and the jury system.

If you would like to openly debate the merits of advertising, just let me know.

Jonathan