I think Steven hit the nail on the head. The clients
are signing engagement letters that detail how they
will be fleeced. Where is the fraud?
Keith
> Oh, c'mon! The questions are disclosure of the rate
> at which it will
> be billed and the types of things that will be
> billed. I have never
> seen a firm disclose to a client the costs of the
> associate for which
> it charges $500,000 per year when it pays the
> $80,000 and the
> associate "costs" the firm $120,000 additional per
> associate (room,
> support staff, etc.). Nor the costs for partners,
> etc.
>
> If a firm wishes to bill $150 per hour for research
> plus $70 per hour
> of westlaw research, and the client will pay for it,
> then how is that
> different from billing $185 for the hour of the
> associate's time half
> of which was spent on westlaw?
>
> Some firms, given the free legal information online
> now are going back
> to just charging for the attorney's time and not
> using the expensive
> resources as often or as thoughtlessly.
>
> West needs to have sufficient value-added when
> compared to free sources
> or people will not pay for it. When clients
> complain, attorneys
> respond.
>
> Also, who are the clients? Many may be relatively
> unsophisticated, but
> many know the game fully, having come from practice
> to work in house.
> And many trade organizations do sessions on attorney
> billing practices
> for those who want to learn it.
>
> The attorneys will get paid and will charge
> according to the same way
> pretty much every other service gets billed -- what
> the market deems
> the service to be worth.
>
> To say "I'm charging you $70 per hour for Westlaw
> research in addition
> to the attorney's or paralegal's or law clerk's
> time," is to do nothing
> wrong even if the direct cost of Westlaw is only
> $35.00 per hour. The
> phone lines, internet connection, intranet network,
> hardware and
> software all cost money too, and if some of that
> overhead is put into
> online research, then so be it.
>
> If the attorney represents the Westlaw research as a
> straight
> pass-through, and then does a mark up of any sort,
> that would be wrong.
> But absent an expressly misleading statement, then
> there is nothing
> wrong with it -- except that some of us may (and I
> do) object to the
> business model of lawyering, still having a romantic
> concept of it
> being a profession. And if it is a profession, then
> the charges should
> be just for the lawyer's time and services.
>
> How about doctors? The time the doctor is with you
> -- $400 for a 12
> minute consult. Plus fees for lab work, plus fees
> for meds, plus,
> plus, plus. And then the hospital visit -- all the
> separate fees there.
>
> BTW, colleges do this now too -- fees for library,
> activities,
> networking, phones, etc., etc., in addition to the
> room, board, and
> tuition. Some still do a "comprehensive fee,"
> perhaps, but most have
> found they get more by fee per service.
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
> >
> --
> Prof. Steven D. Jamar
> vox:
> 202-806-8017
> Howard University School of Law
> fax:
> 202-806-8428
> 2900 Van Ness Street NW
> mailto:sjamar[_at_]law.howard.edu
> Washington, DC 20008
> http://www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar
>
> "I have nothing new to teach the world. Truth and
> nonviolence are as
> old as the hills."
>
> Gandhi
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:54 GMT