IntenseDebate - donnaseyle

14 years ago @ Law Practice Strategy - Meet the startups that... · 0 replies · +1 points

Tom: Thanks for your comment. I mostly agree with you. The article focused only on what's happening in the Silicon Valley, and neglected to discuss what's coming out of Chicago-Kent Law School, funded by the Legal Services Corp., such as the A2J authoring tool, LawHelpInteractive and other tech being developed for use by Legal Aid, and extend its use to people who don't qualify. I also think, though, that any automation used by lawyers that reduces costs and thus pricing supports access to justice for many who cannot afford traditional legal costs, but don't think to go to Legal Aid.

14 years ago @ Law Practice Strategy - VLO May Be the Solutio... · 0 replies · +1 points

Hi, Richard:
I appreciate your comments, and don't altogether disagree with you. I wanted to respond to a few points, which might explain why I included this piece in my blog.

First, it IS a press release. But it makes a good point.

Second, there are certainly geographic areas as well as groups of clients who are not well-served by technology, and where the use of VLO technology is not appropriate. However, if mail service is going to be reduced (I'm not advocating this, just recognizing the reality), more lawyers will be prone to interacting with their clients via email. This raises significant security issues which are specifically addressed by the communication platforms (usually client portals) included in VLO and other collaborative technology.

So posting this is an attempt to encourage lawyers to use proper technology if they use, or will use, the internet to communicate with clients. However, it is not a solution for those who rely solely on traditional communication methods, such as mail.

15 years ago @ Law Practice Strategy - 21st Century Legal Wri... · 0 replies · +1 points

Hi: It\'s use is very widespread, and more importantly, much more preferred by judges (anything that makes their lives easier!).

15 years ago @ RealPractice - Realize... - 3 Ways to Get Re-Tweeted · 1 reply · +1 points

Commentary does give it more weight, but my feeling is that you endorse it just by the RT. My 2 cents among friends, of course!

15 years ago @ Law Practice Strategy - TrialPad: Your Path to... · 0 replies · +1 points

I\'m not advocating increasing or decreasing fees. What I do advocate is using pricing strategies other than billing by the hour. Often that involves using fixed pricing, which requires an analysis of many factors, on a case-by-case basis. There is no set fee for a particular kind of matter (unless you decide to adopt that model either by itself or in conjunction with a fact-based pricing process).

Cost containment allows lawyers more freedom in pricing their work, and alleviates fears about the risks they take in agreeing to a fixed price. Clients are seeking certainty in their legal fees, and the attorney/client relationship is enhanced by an up-front agreement on the cost of a legal matter. Whether or not that agreement includes a price that could be greater or less than what the attorney would earn by an hourly billing arrangement really should not be a consideration. An agreed-upon price should be something both the attorney & client believes is fair. That process can be easier when the attorney has control of his/her costs.

15 years ago @ RealPractice - Realize... - Legal Services Still a... · 0 replies · +1 points

Hi, Carey: Thanks for the mention! I think a significant point that wasn't addressed in the survey is: does that 84% or 61% still expect to be able to transact business virtually? I would expect that it would be a very high number. And that's why it's important for lawyers to add a virtual component to their services. Using virtual legal platforms does not need to mean you do so exclusively. If you want to go brick & mortar, you need to add a virtual communicate & document delivery system to meet your client's expectations.

15 years ago @ Law Practice Strategy - ABA's Ethics 2020 Comm... · 0 replies · +1 points

Brian: My post was not really about whether there should or should not be regulations. It was about 2 things: first, to encourage lawyers to participate in this dialogue with the Ethics Committee and second, to make sure everyone understands this is not just about marketing. It's also about using technology to practice law. There are two separate issue papers that people can comment on, and they shouldn't be confused.

15 years ago @ Law Practice Strategy - Mixing it Up with Lega... · 0 replies · +1 points

Thanks for the heads-up on this - I\'m sure they\'ll take note, if they haven\'t already!

15 years ago @ Law Practice Strategy - The Proactive Lawyer · 0 replies · +1 points

Peter: Thanks so much for the Georgetown article link. I feel for the law students/recent grads who are not prepared to deal with the hand that has now been dealt them. But the truth is, they are not the only ones who are suffering. How about mid-level associates who were laid off, and already bought that house, got married, had kids. . .talk about responsibilities!

What I hope to bring to the table for all of them, through my services which will begin very soon, is a viable system to start a solo or 1-5 lawyer practice that is sustainable throughout what seems to be a protracted recession. In the meantime, there are many lawyers devoting volunteer time to creating support systems for the unemployed. The ABA in particular is now on the bandwagon with their new Smart Soloing effort, and they've reduced membership dues significantly. But success in today's profession means you must stop licking your wounds and start looking for ways to make your profession work for you.

15 years ago @ Law Practice Strategy - Google Apps Security F... · 0 replies · +1 points

Hi, Jason: Thanks for your comment. I agree that the premier edition does offer substantial security. There are still, however, the multi-tenancy and jurisdictional issues to consider. While lawyers will most likely need to learn to live with multi-tenancy, it is problematic that Google will not tell you where your data resides, since it actually resides in pieces worldwide, and can get moved around without you knowing. This presents issues related to the security regulations and national security legislation that exists in any particular jurisdiction. Choosing a law-specific vendor is better because you will know where your data resides, and how many other users are sharing your server. That information allows you to make in informed choice about which vendor you want to choose.

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with donnaseyle

People I'm following

donnaseyle