ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page

Advanced search

Immigration Daily


Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW


Chinese Immig. Daily


Connect to us

Make us Homepage


Immigration Daily

The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of free

Immigration LLC.

< Back to current issue of Immigration Daily

There's more than one way to add a lawyer

by Ed Poll

A coaching client recently asked me for help with a dilemma. He had the opportunity to enhance the profitability of his practice by adding the services of a lawyer who focused in a very specialized field of health law.

The question was how best to add those services: by direct hiring or through a contract arrangement? My reply was that the simplest arrangement, a direct hire, is often the best option; however, that is feasible only if the overall business health of the firm supports it.

There will be expenses incurred over and beyond the salary and benefits of the new lawyer, from additional liability insurance costs to overhead for staff and equipment. There is also the practical issue of whether the firms office space can accommodate a new body.

A second option would be to add the additional lawyer full time, but located off-site in a virtual office. Such an arrangement would involve minimal expenditures on physical space, as contact with clients or the supervising lawyer is largely through e-mail, Internet portal or telephone.

There is no ethical prohibition of such an arrangement. The eLawyering Task Force of the American Bar Associations Law Practice Management Section has prepared draft guidelines that primarily emphasize the need for a secure, encrypted website for maintaining client confidentiality in all aspects of any representation. If the arrangement is acceptable to both lawyers and to clients, it should work provided, as always, that the firms finances support another member.

The third option, a contract arrangement, is the trickiest to manage. At its heart is the issue of how to bill the client for the contracted services. Litigation concerning this issue has generally concluded that the contract attorney is not an out-of-pocket expense for billing purposes.

Firms are not required to bill the client at the cost to them for the contract attorneys time. They may bill at an attorneys rate, a standard flat rate, or any rate that is established in the engagement agreement and is acceptable to the client. The rate can be high enough to cover overhead expenses of the firms own staff, such as secretarial help, paralegals, word processors, etc.

Such an arrangement can carry the perils and pitfalls of fee splitting and thus be covered under the Code of Professional Conduct. Model Rule 1.5 declares that fee-splitting is acceptable if both lawyers involved contribute something of value, the client agrees in writing, and the total fee is reasonable.

That is distinctly different from outsourcing a service like photocopying. In the contract lawyer arrangement, the outsourcing attorney contributes (presumably) oversight of the outsourced legal work and interface with the client on how that legal work is applied.

A second, equally obvious concern can be surprisingly overlooked: The attorneys involved should have their own arrangement in writing. Many courts have ruled that referral or split fees cannot be collected in full if there is not full documentation from either the client or the attorney.

Attorneys who dont get written confirmation of an outsourcing agreement often have little recourse but to sue. And courts may take a dim view of such lack of self-protection.

Copyright 2011. Edward Poll. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission from Edward Poll.

About The Author

Ed Poll principal of LawBiz Management Company, is a nationally recognized coach, law firm management consultant, and author who has coached and consulted with lawyers and law firms in strategic planning, profitability analysis, and practice development. Mr. Poll has practiced law on all sides of the table for 25 years-- as a corporate general counsel, government prosecutor, sole practitioner, partner, and law firm chief operating officer and been a consultant to small and large law firms for 20 years.

The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of ILW.COM.