Questions about Starting a Law Practice
My post giving more advice on starting a law practice has generated a lot of interest and comments. I had previously posted on Starting Your Own Practice Out of Law School, and also How to Start a New Law Firm which talked more about the nuts and bolts of computers and software.
Michael has asked two questions:
- Which litigation practice areas work best for startup solo practice?
- What marketing techniques have worked best for you?
These are two common questions. I understand where they’re coming from, but I don’t think they can be answered well as they’re based on false assumptions. And if I’m reading too much into this Michael, I apologize, but I see these questions again and again. Let’s take them one at a time.
Which litigation practice areas work best for startup solo practice? – Good valid question. But the answer depends on the background of the person going into practice. If you read my advice in the various posts, the two areas where people have a lot more problems than money and will seriously price shop are family law and criminal law. They’re the easiest to get work in, but that doesn’t mean they’ll be the best for you. What do you have a background in? What kind of law makes you happy? What typesof cases do you like to handle?
The underlying question I hear when I hear that question is “What area of law will I be happy in, in the long run?” That’s something that I can’t tell you. You have to feel out for yourself. Where do you want to go? What do you want to be?
So much depends on the city you live in, the type of work that is available, your background, your desires and what you want to do with your life. Real estate is a huge market in Myrtle Beach. My father owns one of the ten largest real estate schools in the country. I don’t practice real estate. I started off doing some closings for the first five years.
It was good steady income, but that’s not where I wanted to be. My heart wasn’t in it. Sure, I would work hard, do a good job for the client and talk to them, be nice….But my heart didn’t lie there. I like helping injured people. I like fighting against insurance companies to get people what they deserve. It’s where I belong.
- What marketing techniques have worked best for you? – Another tough one. I’ll tell you a little what I know about marketing. I don’t know what the official definition of marketing is, but this is how I understand it. Marketing is letting people know about who you are and what you do. It can include advertising, but it includes everything you do. From answering the phones, to sending out bills, to talking to clients, to the actual legal work itself.
One of the key things in marketing is ‘branding’. When people think of something, you want them to think of you. You also want to speak to a specific segment, rather than everyone. We see this so often with politicians. They try to talk to everyone, so they broaden the message and broaden the message until it turns into mush and doesn’t captivate anyone. You want to target and focus your message to a specific audience.
So for example, let’s say you do family law. You don’t want to put out the message “We do divorces”. Ummm…..yeah. You and a whole bunch of lawyers. Why should they call you? Here’s two ways you can approach it. A lot of people are intimidated by lawyers and the legal process and expect the divorce to be one of the most painful things they will go through in their life. You can be the ‘Friendly Lawyer’. You can specialize in uncontested divorces or ‘mostly’ uncontested divorces. You can put together pamphlets on how to deal with divorces both emotionally and financially, and how to put your life back together afterwards. If you do this and have an employee that is hostile to your clients, that doesn’t send a consistent message.
Likewise, you can be the ‘bulldog lawyer’, the lawyer that will “fight, fight, fight” for them. Some people want that when they are going to have a hotly contested custody dispute. When you send the bill out, you better follow up quickly and beat them up for the money. It sends an inconsistent message if you don’t.
So I see the underlying question as “What are the best marketing techniques for the solo/small lawyer”? As you can see, the reason it”s tough to answer is I read that as “What is the best way to distinguish myself from other lawyers and let them see the fabulousness that is me?”
The answer to the underlying question depends on the areas of practice, the market you’re in, where you expect your cases to come from and who you are. Wow.
The short answer to your question is the PowerPoint disks and my blog. The disks came about because of PowerPoint class that I put together. I have a background in education and programming so it was a natural for me. Also, when I first started putting together mediations in PowerPoint there was nothing out there. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Goose Egg. NITA had a great book explaining a few techniques, but there was no disk of mediations. So it was a natural for me with the technology and education background.
The blog has also been great. I have a lot of readers, have met a lot of people, had a number of speaking engagements, got clients and it’s been overall nothing but fantabulous for me. But, I also read about trial techniques, the law and business practices about 2–3 hours a day. A lot of the reading is on the internet. I’m on the internet anyways, so the blog is a no-brainer for me.
When I decided to do the blog, my first question was what topics I would cover. I decided on trial techniques, practice management and technology (both to try better cases and run a better office). I know that focused niche blogs are more effective. I know that talking about practice management would take away from the discussion of trial techniques, and vice versa. I’ve seen that when people catalogue the ‘Best of’ lists. Because I carry a number of topics, I frequently get left off the lists.
Kevin O’Keefe said he was skeptical about the scope of the blog when I started off, but now he thinks that it was really smart. Nope. Not really. I knew when I got started that marketing wise, the blog was not focused enough. My tagline is ‘Using technology to be a better trial lawyer’. I’m interested in being a better trial lawyer. I’m interested in running a better trial practice. Even though I knew that a more focused blog (trial techniques only) would be better. I chose to go with what interests me, rather than what was technically correct. I think the blog talks to a lot of trial lawyers. So what lesson do you take from this? Be yourself, regardless of what the professional opinions are.
Should you have a blog if you don’t spend a lot of time on the internet? Hmmm….. Maybe. Maybe not. It’s a lot harder call though. I’m currently working on putting together a group blog that would feature a lot of top trial lawyers that are tremendous trial lawyers and are active in the education field, but that don’t have the time to set up a blog or blog on a regular basis.
The group blog will allow them to maximize their participation in the on-line discussion, but minimize the amount of time and effort that they put into blogging. A number of the lawyers will even dictate the posts to their secretaries and have their secretaries post to the blog. It will be real neat when it starts and we have a tremendous lineup of lawyers. A number of top lawyers in the country, especially ones that like to teach and give back to the trial lawyer community.
So the question becomes “What is the best way to put my best foot forward? What is the best way to differentiate myself from other lawyers?” I don’t have the answer for that.
Hopefully, this will give you something to think about and I didn’t read too much into your question.
One thing I haven't seen mentioned in your posts about starting a law practice (unless I missed it) is the topic of malpracitce insurance. I have to admit to being totally ignorant on this subject. I don't even have any idea what malpractice coverage costs. Is this a "must have" for someone starting out solo as a new lawyer?
Gary,
Errors and Omissions (or malpractice) insurance is incredibly cheap for someone first starting off. You don't have a large caseload, you don't have a backlog of potential problems and right off the bat, you probably won't be handling high dollar cases.
I think a million dollars worth of coverage cost me less than $350 the first year out of law school. Needless to say, I pay considerably more than that now.
The two primary sources for E&O insurance are ALPS out of Missoula, MT and the General Agency who's broker is in Charleston.
I seem to also remember getting mail from Minnesota Mutual Agency or some name such as that. I have never considered them, so I don't remember their name.
I would definitely get the E&O insurance. There is no reason not to.
Insurance is also affected by what areas of law you practice. I use ALPS and am very pleased with the coverage, service, and pricepoint. I pay more than $350 for less coverage than that listed in the post above, but it will depend in large part on what you do and what options you select (deductible, front or back-end, etc.) Ask other local solo attorneys and call around for some quotes. It's sort of one of those things you should consider as part of the cost of doing business. You hope you'll never have to use it but it's just not worth taking the risk. Good luck.
When you are considering malpractice insurance, make sure you buy enough but not too much. If you handle $1,000,000 cases, by all means, get a high limit. But if the extent of your practice is traffic tickets and custody disputes, you need to think about it more. Think like a lawyer too.
Like: "If I hired a lawyer to get a ticket reduced, and he screwed it up, would I sue him, and if so, for how much?" What are the potential damages?
If you do real estate closings, you need good coverage. If none of your personal injury cases is worth more than 50K, how much coverage do you need? You can always up your limits if your cases get bigger (but not after a claim).
Also, consider this (controversial statement ahead): Do you need coverage? Think about this, what if someone comes to your office with a small persoanl injury claim. It is worth maybe $30,000 and liability is tricky because it is a slip and fall at a private home. You consider taking it. Then you find out that the home owner has NO insurance. Do you take the case? Probably not. Lawyers that sue lawyers are looking for DEEP pockets, not collection actions. Some states require you to carry insurance, NC does not. It's probably not the right decision to have NO coverage for most lawyers, but for some it may be. Think about it, big companies that are "self-insured", that's just a way of saying "uninsured." Chris
I'm actually a first year law student in Ohio. Talked to some classmates today (I know, planning early) about maybe moving to Florida after graduation and starting a private practice there. What do you think about the number of lawyers in a private practice? Will it likely affect how easy/hard it is?
Also, if there were multiple lawyers (say, 5), all fresh out of law school, would it be a good idea for them to each have different "specialties" or for there to be some common theme? We suggested all having different specialties, but perhaps acting as checks & balances for each other on cases, since we'll all have at the least a general understanding of all the fields in question.
Thanks.
