Paying too much for a lawyer: high-priced legal fees for small businesses, start-ups, and individuals.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703615104575329193640764492.html

Wall Street Journal readers can appreciate this article on high-priced legal fees and the infamous billable hour. Substantively, it’s covered terrain. However, every time headlines like this surface, businesses and individuals take another step closer to stabilizing legal costs – something large companies have yet to prioritize. Billable hour models grab hold of big companies, siphoning their budgets for survival. Still, large corporations have lots of money; they’ll continue to spend it on attorneys like its 1999.

For those not in the business of acquiring Endicott Steel, high priced attorney fees are a serious hurdle to freeing up assets and retaining profits. Nothing hurts a small business more than the uncertainty of the billable hour and its potential drain on profits. Young attorneys hate it; I know I did. Fortunately, the rants and raves appear to have gained traction and alternatives to the billable hour are making headlines.

I founded my office with the fixed fee model in mind. It allows us to stay competitive, and evolve alongside small businesses who incorporate cost-cutting measures aimed at reducing legal expenditures. Apparently, other firms have the same idea. Good.

Here is how it works:

Hourly increments of time add up, and consequently, so do the bills. More disturbing, without knowing the time in which it will take an attorney to complete a project, individuals and companies have no way of predicting the total cost of legal expenditures. Imagine going to a grocery store with no price tags. You get to the register and the clerk, after burying the eggs somewhere beneath the 2 gallon jug of milk, tells you, “We’ll send you a bill.” One problem, you still don’t have a bottom line total cost. Another problem, they’re not going to send you one bill, they’re going to send you one every month for an undetermined period of time that will frequently fluctuate.

Fixed fees, however, force attorneys to listen to their client’s problem, asses the amount of work involved, and assemble a strategic plan in which to effectuate results. The fee is paid in lump sum, and the process fosters efficiency, instead of rewarding long, drawn out litigation. It also removes some of the guesswork, allowing small businesses to work legal fees into their budget. The alternative involves hoping the bill is not devastating, as it likely was the month before.

For attorneys, the fixed fee model is great marketing. Most lawyers are still addicted to the old billable hour method. Offering steady fees is competitive. Contingency fees help individuals who have no money up front, but they’re not always available. With a fixed fee model, attorneys can calculate how much work is involved, quote their services, and spend more time focused on problem-solving and less on justifying the next bill. For small businesses and individuals, this is the start of a relationship built on reasonableness. Instead of exploiting vulnerable clients with open-ended litigation or suppressing the excitement of a start-up with high incorporation costs, attorneys can provide a reasonably priced foundation on which to develop a strong client relationship. In short, do right by your client once, and they’ll come back.

Large companies have grown accustomed to the volatile liability known as legal. Smaller companies and individuals, however, now have a choice. Imagine paying your attorney once, and never again having to worry about bills from High Priced Lawyer, LLP, for the third month in a row. Cost-cutting measures finally have a chance to succeed in the legal department. It starts with a novel idea: finding out how much something costs before you buy it.

Governor’s Council to review nomination of Roderick L. Ireland to lead Supreme Judicial Court.

http://blogs.masslawyersweekly.com/news/2010/11/10/ireland-to-go-before-gov%E2%80%99s-council-next-month/

On December 1, 2010, the Governor’s Council will interview Roderick L. Ireland for the position of chief justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Court – the highest state judicial authority. This nomination affects not only tort litigation, but potentially every field of law in Massachusetts.

Succeeding Margaret Marshall, who recently retired, Ireland will undergo a process in which a group of eight elected members, known as the Governor’s Council, interview, and importantly, ratify the Governor’s appointment. With every nomination the Governor makes, it’s the council that ultimately decides who receives a judgeship. Should members of the Governor’s Council side against the nominee, they have the authority to vote down his/her appointment. Although the small group of eight garnishes less notoriety than other elected positions, make no mistake, it carries with it enormous responsibility impacting the lives of every citizen here in the Commonwealth.

The panel typically meets on Wednesdays at noon. In addition to judicial appointments, the council acts on such issues as payments from the state treasury, criminal pardons and commutations, and approval of gubernatorial appointments; such as notaries and justices of the peace.

The current list of members is as follows:

Carol A. Fiola – District 1

Kelley A. Timilty – District 2

Marilyn M. Petitto Devaney - District 3

Christopher A. Iannella - District 4

Mary-Ellen Manning - District 5

Michael J. Callahan - District 6

Thomas J. Foley - District 7

Thomas T. Merrigan - District 8

A result of the recent November election, three councilor-elects are waiting to take office in early January: Charles O. Cipollini, Jennie Caissie and Terrence Kennedy.

Roderick L. Ireland is the Senior Associate Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court. He was appointed in 1997, and is the first African-American to sit on this bench in its over three hundred year history. Previously, he served at the Massachusetts Appeals Court for seven years, and the Boston Juvenile Court for almost thirteen years.

The Governor’s Council is expected to vent this nominee in a manner befitting the position’s responsibilities. Given the Senior Associate’s credentials, I expect they will have a difficult time finding fault in his education, background or experience.

Massachusetts ban on texting while driving

The Massachusetts ban on texting while driving will likely curb many motor vehicle incidents in the future. Still, according to the Boston Globe, and Vlingo Corporation, the ban will fall short of preventing all text messaging while driving. The product Vlingo puts out, and other Smartphone apps of like kind, may very well catch on and prove a far more efficacious deterrent than legislation alone.

http://www.boston.com/business/ticker/2010/09/bans_alone_dont.html