Articles Posted in In The News

Published on:

aba_cpd_general_sm.jpgAmerican Bar Association (ABA) incoming President James R. Silkenat has reappointed attorney Micah Buchdahl to a three year term on the Standing Committee of Continuing Legal Education (SCOCLE). The committee is a driving force behind all aspects of lawyer professional development and continuing legal education programming.

Buchdahl is President of Moorestown, New Jersey-based HTMLawyers, a law marketing consultancy, where he works with law firms around the globe on business development initiatives and strategies. He is licensed to practice law in Pennsylvania.

The ABA Center for Professional Development (formerly Center for CLE) is guided by the SCOCLE, working closely with experts from ABA Sections and other entities and from the profession at large in developing programs and products. It serves as the central resource for the ABA and the profession for up-to-the-minute, quality CLE distributed through a variety of convenient formats.

Published on:

nixon-peabody.jpgWhen creating the “Internet Marketing Attorney” moniker in 1997, I would scour the web for the most innovative law firm websites, eventually rating and ranking them in five categories–design, content, usability, interactivity and intangibles. If you were listed among the 250 largest U.S. law firms, you were then ranked accordingly. Many small and midsize firms from around the world submitted themselves for consideration as well, and while I did not review all of them, I also had the annual Nifty Fifty list of innovative legal website components. But times changed and just like technology, I had to adapt.

There were three key factors that led me to stop presenting the IMAs–as they are known throughout the legal industry. First, the large law firm sites become homogenized. There were so few substantive differences to the sites that it made finding those differentiators quite difficult. I would write the same notes and comments over and over again. Second, my “for-profit” business (HTMLawyers, my law marketing consultancy) did not provide enough free time to properly conduct these evaluations. Because I never solicited those law firms I reviewed, it was a great branding tool but not necessarily a revenue generator. My time was always “sold out”, but it was tough to equate new business with the time needed for the IMAs. Finally, any free time or “down time” is now owned by my children–who do not find law firm websites all that fascinating. Luckily, my monthly contributions to Web Marketing Today allow me to continually monitor and teach best practices for law firm internet marketing.

Which is a long-winded way of introducing this month’s WMT column, Law Firm Websites: A Developer’s Review, where in essence I turn the tables slightly by asking the web site developers to tell me what site they like best and why (obviously, their own handiwork). I invited some of the more prominent names in law firm website development to participate–just give me a site and what makes it special. The end result is a handy tutorial for any law firm looking to identify key components for their next website.

Published on:

LinkedIn.jpgFor lawyers, there is so much more to LinkedIn than creating a profile, getting some connections and joining a few groups. The real value of participation is from the other products and services they offer. In this month’s Web Marketing Today column, I try to address some of the components that go “beyond the basics.”

Personally, I probably don’t use LinkedIn the same way as many other marketing professionals or attorneys. I find the tool extremely valuable–but more as a super-powered directory of contacts for lead generation, competitive intelligence and a better source of data about people and companies. I find it very useful when following up with someone, learning more about a business card picked up at a networking function or refining a list of prospective clients. Others, however, spend hours on end building a network and doing a slightly more sophisticated method of cold calling.

As noted in the column, there is no disputing the power of LinkedIn. It is the second search result when looking myself up on Google–behind only my own website. With 200 million-plus users, there is a pretty good chance that the professional I’m looking for is in the network. He or she may have a skeletal profile and three contacts–but they are there nonetheless.

Published on:

blog_icon1.jpgOn February 28th, the Virginia Supreme Court held that a disclaimer was required under the state’s advertising rules when posting results on a website. This is the latest outcome in the seemingly never-ending battle between Horace Hunter and the Virginia State Bar. This has been a widely watched case among ethics attorneys like myself that follow the bouncing ball of state bar advertising restrictions and first amendment scholars looking at the “free speech” argument. Is the next stop the U.S. Supreme Court?

Last April (2012), I was part of an ABA CLE panel that discussed “Is Your Legal Blog Compliant? Ethical considerations in the wake of Hunter v. Virginia State Bar.” The panel included Mr. Hunter, myself, employment law blogger Molly DiBianca and noted Virginia ethics attorney Tom Spahn. We discussed and debated the many issues in the case. It is effectively a case of first impression in the law blogosphere. That was prior to the case heading up the ladder to the state supreme court. Read more about the program in Your ABA’s e-news–Blogs can be legal minefields.

Blogs have been around since the late 1990s, yet this cyberspace battle in Virginia is the first real challenge by a state bar to the often cloudy areas of interpretation. Is a blog advertising, marketing, editorial, personal, or business? Where does the First Amendment end and the Model Rules of Professional Conduct begin? Should a state bar look at a blog as marketing or something else?

Published on:

Thumbnail image for sctv-734261.jpgIt is rare that I make a trip to Chicago or Toronto without spending an evening at Second City. There is nothing more entertaining (to me) than great improvisational comedy. Growing up, I was a Second City TV groupie of sorts, now possessing the entire DVD collection of SCTV. I love the creativity, thinking on your feet and ability to laugh at oneself (and others). So it was easy to talk about Drexel University Law School‘s “Improv for Lawyers” class in an article written this week by Associated Press reporter Kathy Matheson.

Matheson was writing about the uniqueness of such a law school elective, taught by actress/comedian Sharon Geller, who has also provided improv training as a CLE to lawyers in various settings. While this all coincidentally took place in my home base of Philadelphia, it was my role in the American Bar Association–as a past chair of the Law Practice Management Section and a current member of the ABA’s Standing Committee on CLE that led her to ask about my experience and views on the subject. I was asked about the uniqueness of the program and the value to a new or seasoned attorney.

In many law firm retreats where I’ve participated in some manner–either in organization, as a speaker, or in conjunction with a business development project–an improv session taught by one of many skilled troupes in the United States (including Second City traveling casts) is used to develop skills including team building, public speaking, “thinking on your feet” and training for improved client and prospective client interactions. Improv has also been used by a number of law firms I work with for associate and partner professional development training programs in-house. Whether or not they qualify as “substantive legal training” as a CLE is a state-by-state matter–but that is a subject for another post. Whether or not it is CLE accredited, the program provides a useful training ground that incorporates numerous elements of law practice.

Published on:

newyorktimes.jpgRecent rulings and advisories by the National Labor Relations Board regarding social media policies in the workplace impact law firms in a variety of ways. Today’s New York Times article by Steven Greenhouse reviews how the NLRB is basically telling employers to scale back limitations as it relates to many social media policies that might be seen as illegal blanket restrictions.

Can you really stop Facebook and Twitter from happening in today’s workplace? Nope.

The NLRB says workers have a right to discuss work conditions freely and without fear of retribution, whether you are in the employee cafeteria or on Facebook. Although Facebook might have better food options (I said that. It is not in the article).

Published on:

In today’s Law360, reporter Bibeka Shrestha writes on Insurance agents taking Jacoby & Meyers LLP to task over advertising relating to Hurricane Sandy. In her article, she interviews me about my take on the complaint filed with the state court disciplinary committee by the Professional Insurance Agents of New York.

The PIA’s complaint stems from an ad that says, “If your business lost business due to the storm your insurance policy should cover it. If it doesn’t, your agent made an error. We’ll work to correct it.” The complaint cites 7.1(a)(2) of the NY RPC…the all-purpose “false, deceptive or misleading”…in regard to the advertisement’s content and message.

While I’m far from an expert on insurance law, I have trouble believing that every policy covers business interruption. I can see where agents might take offense to the suggestion that they are at fault, acting improperly or erroneous in every instance where a claim for such coverage is denied. I suggest in the article that a slight tweak from “your agent made an error” to “your agent might have made an error” would likely rectify the situation and not dilute the ad’s impact. Of course, I’ve had my fair share of fights over the years with insurance agents over what is and is not covered in a policy–so I’m not going to be a staunch defender of the industry. I’m talking to you buddy–the guy that claimed I could continue to sleep on a mattress in which a squirrel died and decomposed. “You don’t need a new one. We can just get it steam cleaned.” Yes, I got a new mattress. And, yes, I utilized my law degree in doing so. I totally get retaining counsel if you feel provisions of a policy are not being carried out.

Published on:

divorce.jpgThe ABA Section of Family Law has dedicated its entire winter 2013 issue of the Family Advocate to the topic of marketing your practice in the digital age. The feature that the publication asked me to author, Finding the Magical Mix for Your Digital Marketing Plan, presents a wide range of options for the family law practitioner–including websites, blogs, use of video, search engine optimization, mobile sites, social media, directories and ratings. In other words, there are a lot of options and a lot to think about.

Among other features in the issue is an article on Common Ethical Pitfalls of Digital Marketing, authored by my ABA LPM colleagues Sharon Nelson and John Simek. While ethics rules should not discourage or hamper an attorney’s involvement on social media and lawyer referral websites, compliance is critical. As an ethics attorney myself, I’ve worked to get a few attorneys out of digital “jams”, not to mention implementing lots of preventive medicine.

Simply noting that the ABA Family Law Section has dedicated an entire one of its quarterly issues to this subject should be enough to wake up any family lawyer not paying attention to the World Wide Web. The bottom line is that like many consumer-oriented practices, competition is fierce and ever-increasing. Family law is such an interesting animal. Perhaps no other area of practice is likely to impinge on life more than divorce–if not directly on your household, indirectly through a relative or friend. In regard to advertising, you are often targeting a more sophisticated client base than might be the case for a plaintiffs’ practice. Visibility is a necessity. No other area of practice is represented more in many of the lifestyle and regionally-based print publications I peruse from the mailbox. The radio and billboards tout family law practices (not so much on television). Facebook is both a contributing cause and effect of many divorces–meaning that a target audience is right there for the taking. The use of mediation and forms of alternative dispute resolution bring in other competitive marketplace issues. A few years ago, I presented a marketing ethics CLE program at the ABA Annual Meeting for the ADR section, with many of the examples coming from issues relating to family law attorneys competing with huge, non-law firm divorce mediation services.

Published on:

What is it our parents always told us? If your friend jumped off a bridge, does that mean you should do the same? In this case, it is more like “Match Game 2012” than it is about “follow the leader.” So the question becomes, how necessary is it for a law firm to match another’s year-end bonus? And in my business, what are the marketing implications for a law firm that does or does not choose to follow suit?

As reported by Peter Lattman in The New York Times this week, “Cravath sets the tone for law firm bonuses.” Law firms don’t have NFL salary caps or MLB luxury taxes to help keep things competitive. In many ways, Cravath is like the New York Yankees of law firms–old, venerable and wealthy. They generate a lot of revenue that others can’t, and can spend accordingly. But most other teams simply don’t generate the same revenue and can’t pay out the same amounts. Spending more does not mean you always win, but you are usually in the game.

If the process holds true that Cravath sets the scale, then you could argue they could do it to squeeze others as much as it might be to reward the associates that spend the year billing the night away. If you think about it, if they force less profitable firms to profit less, are they not creating an even stronger market advantage for themselves?

Published on:

branding.pngIt is not Henny Youngman, but Stoll Berne managing partner Scott Shorr.

With the tagline — Take your conflicts. Not your clients. — the Portland, Oregon law firm of Stoll Berne got some nice play in the Portland Business Journal for its advertising campaign focused on getting lawyers to send them conflict work. When Journal reporter Andy Giegerich called me to get my take on the uniqueness of the campaign, it highlighted once again some greater lengths law firms are going to these days to find additional revenue streams.

Advertising in legal publications for conflict work is certainly not new. I’ve worked with law firms on such ads in the past–albeit with minimal success. As an attorney with a small niche practice, I end up with referral situations practically every week. It would never occur to me to send the work to anyone that I did not personally know. But, again, not every lawyer has a go-to person for every practice and jurisdiction. But I also know that the nature of conflicts in my business development business takes on much the same take as a legal matter. Because I won’t work with competing firms in a market (sometimes geographic, sometimes practice-driven), I often need to send work elsewhere. I’m looking at the same issues–will this person or company steal my client, and/or am I putting them in a better position to compete against me. And, oh yeah, I almost forgot–they need to be good lawyers who will represent the client well. It comes down to relationships, one hand washing the other, and trust. And the old adage, “burn me once,” certainly fits in the world of conflict work.

Contact Information