Cutting

The Morris Law Firm

Cutting-Edge Legal Representation

Firm Profile · Firm News · Legal Advice · Recent Results · Articles for Businesses · Articles for Lawyers · Research Links · How to Contact Us · Self-Help Books

Work In Progress:
"Why Big Law Firms Don't Work"

Business Survival Tip:
"Six Tips For Dealing With Public Counsel"

Talk to an Attorney Right Now:

The Third Time Isn't Always the Charm
We had already persuaded two attorneys to dismiss the plaintiff's frivolous action just by explaining the facts. Would attorney number three follow suit?

"I Could Have Sworn I Didn't Have to Answer that Discovery!"
Opposing counsel instructed his staff not to answer any discovery we propounded on the basis that the contract in question contained an arbitration clause. He was wrong, and the mistake resulted in him personally paying $75,000 to our client.

Public Counsel Continues its Losing Streak Five times The Morris Law Firm has brought motions to control the conduct of Public Counsel, five times Public Counsel has fought the motions and five times Public Counsel has been defeated.

The $2,000 Hissy-Fit: Read how a large Los Angeles Firm spent almost $2,000 of its client's money to recovery $23

Everyone is Entitled to Our Opinion: Having learned nothing from the above $2000 hissy-fit, the same firm spends $10,000 on a motion that was DOA.

"We won't! We won't, we won't, we won't!" When Public Counsel failed to properly serve a defendant, the firm refused to admit its mistake. The mistake could have easily been corrected, but Public Counsel brought repeated motions over the next six months unsuccessfully arguing that service was proper.

"Why take 30 minutes to do the easy thing when you can bill the client 12 hours for the same result?" When opposing counsel served unintelligible interrogatories, we offered to answer them within the week if he would just put the questions in proper form. Silly us. Why would he spend 30 minutes rewording the questions so that he could have the answers in a week when he could instead bill the client some $5,000 for a motion to compel and get the answers in two months?

For immediate answers to your legal questions, call us at:

(714) 954-0700

All telephone consultations are free.

Beware the attorney that requires you to come to his or her office for an initial consultation. Many attorneys don't "consult" at all. Rather, they listen to you explain the situation, and then tell you what they will charge you to provide an answer. The "free consultation" they promised was that they didn't charge you to listen to your problem.

Attorneys are taught at business seminars that if they meet with the client face-to-face, it is easier to "close the sale." For example, say you are owed money under a contract and want to consult with an attorney on how best to pursue the matter. You call an attorney, and he asks you to bring the contract in so that he can review it. At the meeting, he explains that he cannot render an opinion without reviewing the contract, and he can't review the contract until he has been retained. After all, you can't expect him to work for free. So, he hands you a fee agreement to sign and requires an up-front payment for the legal services he is about to perform. A week later he calls you and states that after his review of the contract, he has come to the opinion that the contract was breached and that you should sue to collect the amount owed to you. He then explains your options to you.

Isn't that why you went to him in the first place? You already knew you were owed money -- why did you just pay him to confirm what you already knew?

Here is how a consultation should work. A client will be in one of two situations. The first situation is the one just discussed. There, the client knows they have been wronged, and is just trying to find out whether the attorney can help and whether it makes economic sense to pursue the matter. There should be no charge for this consultation and at most a very cursory review of the documents. After listening to you explain the facts, the attorney should accept the facts as you have stated them and answer as follows: "Based on what you have said, and assuming there are not other facts that would impact the case, you have a valid breach of contract action. Here are the options that are open to you, and here is what I will charge . . . ." Yes, it is absolutely essential that the attorney you retain takes the time to review all of the relevant documents, but that should be the attorney you ultimately hire. If every attorney you consult with insists on charging you to review the documents, you could end up spending a fortune just to find an attorney you want to hire.

The second situation is where the client is not sure whether they have a case. Say, for example, you were fired at work, and feel it may be a case of wrongful termination. To make that determination the attorney will need to review a number of documents, including your personnel file, employee handbook, evaluations, etc. In such a case it is of course appropriate that the attorney be paid for the time he takes to determine whether the case is worth pursuing. But even in this situation the attorney should consult with you, not just expect a retainer. Before you ever hire him, he can explain the law, explore how it might impact your situation, and state what he can do for you. In this situation, he would say something like: "Based on what you have told me, it sounds as though the termination may have been because of your attempts to form a union, and that is impermissible. However, I cannot make a complete determination until I have reviewed all of the relevant documents. I will charge you $225 per hour to review those documents, and I expect that will take less than two hours. If the documents confirm my initial analysis, or if I find some other basis to pursue the action, I will offer to represent you on a contingency basis. Under that arrangement, you will pay the following amount . . . ." In this manner, you get an overview of the law as it may apply to your case, and you can decide if you want this attorney to handle the case, without having to pay a lot of money up front.

Be very wary of attorneys that charge a flat fee "to review your case." The truth is, especially in the wrongful termination area, 90% of the people that call attorneys do not have a case. Attorneys that charge, say, $500 to review cases can make a very good living just telling people they don't have a case. The worst of the worst we have heard is an attorney that charges a $100 application fee. Clients pay $100 for the privilege of filling out an extensive form for the chance of then paying another $500 if the attorney decides the case is worth reviewing.

If an attorney wants to charge you just to listen to the facts of your case, find another attorney. In their defense, the problem attorneys face is that if they listen to you summarize the facts, and then tell you that you have no case, it may come back to haunt them if it turns out you omitted some crucial fact. For this reason, the attorney should only state whether or not he or she is willing to take the case, without making an ultimate determination about whether you have a case. But if no attorney wants to take your case, that is a pretty strong indication of what the attorneys think of the merits.

For immediate answers to your legal questions, call us at: