The WSJ’s Vanessa O’Connell reports: An increasingly contentious lawsuit by a former client against law firm McDermott Will & Emery LLP is putting a spotlight on the legal industry’s widespread use of itinerant “contract” attorneys who review documents for lower…
Posts Tagged ‘lawyers’
Could Jailhouse Lawyers Teach Legal Skills to Law School Students?
26
Jul
What the hell, why not? Could save some employment costs at state-run law schools. But I don’t think Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is thinking outside-the box. Not yet, anyway. See Adjunct Law Prof Blog’s Gov. Walker To Now Use Prison…
Alabama Child Support Lawyers
20
Jul
Alabama child support lawyers with free online quotes to locate the
best Alabama family lawyer at the best price for your particular concern. Get the best outcome possible for you and your family. Get free quotes online
Is LegalZoom Just a Self-Help Legal Software Company?
04
Jul
In a Fortune Magazine blog post by Roger Parloff just last week, entitled Can Software Practice Law?, writing about the class action suit against LegalZoom in Missouri for violating Missouri’s UPL statute, Parloff argues that LegalZoom is no more than a self-help legal software company, and therefore entitled to the same protections as a self-help legal software publisher. The question of whether legal software constitutes the practice of law is a controversial one. When the Texas Bar won a suit against Nolo Press on the grounds that its WillMaker program constituted the practice of law, the Texas Legislature amended the UPL statute and further defined the practice of law as follows:
Texas Code, 81.101 (c) the "practice of law" does not include the design, creation, publication, distribution, display, or sale, including publication, distribution, display, or sale by means of an Internet Web site, of written materials, books, forms, computer software, or similar products if the products clearly and conspicuously state that the products are not a substitute for the advice of an attorney. This subsection does not authorize the use of the products or similar media in violation of Chapter 83 and does not affect the applicability or enforceability of that chapter.
No other state has passed such an exemption, but there is a well-established line of cases that supports the position that the publication of information about the law, as well as self-help legal books, divorce forms with instructions, and do-it-yourself kits is not the practice of law and protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and may be protected by state constitutions as well. See, e.g., New York County Lawyers’ Ass’n v. Dacey, 21 N.Y.2d 694, 234 N.E.2d 459 (N.Y. 1967), aff’ing on grounds in dissenting opinion, 283 N.Y.S.2d 984 (N.Y. App. 1967); Oregon State Bar v. Gilchrist, 538 P.2d 913 (Or. 1975); State Bar of Michigan v. Cramer, 249 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 1976); The Florida Bar v. Brumbaugh, 355 So.2d 1186 (Fla. 1978); People v. Landlords Professional Services, 215 Cal. App.3d 1599, 264 Cal. Rptr. 548 (Cal. 1989).
LegalZoom takes the position that it is no more than a self-help legal publisher and seeks to fall within this classification, as Roger Parloff argues in his blog post. This is also the position that Legal Zoom takes on its Web site and in its answer to the Missouri Complaint:
From the LegalZoom Web site:
"Is LegalZoom engaged in the practice of law?"
"No. LegalZoom is the latest and natural evolution of the centuries-old legal self-help industry."
"No jurisdiction prohibits the sale of software that generates a legal document based on a customer’s unique input. LegalZoom has never been prohibited from operating in any state."
"Should consumers be concerned about LegalZoom losing this case?"
"No. If LegalZoom is found to be engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in Missouri, then every guide and legal formbook in libraries and bookstores in the state would also be engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. These days, nearly all such books are packaged with computer software that works in a similar manner to LegalZoom. Just like with a Nolo Press® book or a preprinted form, LegalZoom customers have the ability to review and consider their legal form before committing to their purchase."
It is not possible to know how LegalZoom’s document technology actually works without further evidence. However, one can state with certainty that it doesn’t work like a true Web-enabled document automation technology which generates a document instantly from data entered into an on-line questionnaire that is presented through the Web browser.
Vendors of true Web-enabled document automation solutions, such as HotDocs, Exari, DealBuilder, WhichDraft and Rapidocs (our company) have document automation technologies that generate a document instantly after the user clicks on the submit button. Because LegalZoom’s technology seems to require a separate step that is executed off-line, it does not in my opinion, fit into the category of a Web-enabled document automation technology. [ For a more extensive discussion of Web-Enabled Document Automation as a Disruptive Technology, click here to download our white paper on the subject. ]
Instead, in the LegalZoom business model, as described by LegalZoom, a data file is created, reviewed by a legal technician, and then imported into their – document assembly application utilizing some form of import mechanism. It is not clear whether the document is fully-assembled until this second step takes place, and it’s a distinction that makes a difference.
If LegalZoom were just a legal software company, it is hard to understand why it needs over 400 employees to provide services to its customers, other than the fact that these employees are conducting professional reviews and providing real service support. For these services, LegalZoom receives a substantially higher price than if they were just selling a self-help legal form. See for example on the LegalZoom Web site, the 30-point review of wills conducted by LegalZoom’s "professional legal document assistants."
These more labor intensive, personal services makes LegalZoom a "service business" and not just a "legal software publisher" entitled to the First Amendment protections that are afforded to publishers.
Andrea Riccio, a Canadian lawyer who has commented about this subject, responds to some of the arguments that LegalZoom makes in its defense:
LegalZoom’s argument: "Typically, there is no interaction between the customer and the person reviewing the file."
Riccio’s response:
“The mere fact that the employee is granted access to the customer’s response is an interaction between the employee and customer.”
LegalZoom’s argument: "If there is an inconsistency, it is NOT corrected by the employee – instead, it is brought to the attention of the customer."
Riccio’s response:
“Whether it is the customer or the LegalZooM employee that physically changes the document is irrelevant. What is important is that it is the LegalZoom employee that has identified the inconsistency. That, in my opinion, goes beyond "self-help" and is an act of legal draftsmanship.”
LegalZoom’s argument: "no employee revises or corrects any portion of the customer’s self-created document."
Riccio’s response:
“Identifying inconsistencies or errors in another person’s document is in my opinion an act of revision and correction. Who physically makes the changes is irrelevant.”
It is for these reasons that LegalZoom was required to be licensed under California law as a registered and bonded legal document assistant (see footer LegalZoom Web site).
What is a Legal Document Assistant?
A "Legal Document Assistant", as defined by the California Business & Professions Code (Section 6400 (c)) is:
"Any person who is otherwise not exempted and who provides, or assists in providing, or offers to provide, or offers to assist in providing, for compensation, any self-help service to a member of the public who is representing himself or herself in a legal matter, or who holds himself or herself out as someone who offers that service or has that authority, or a corporation, partnership, association, or other entity that employs or contracts with any person who is not otherwise exempted who, as part of his or her responsibilities, provides, or assists in providing, or offers to provide, or offers to assist in providing, for compensation, any self-help service to a member of the public who is representing himself or herself in a legal matter or holds himself or herself out as someone who offers that service or has that authority."
This California statutory scheme is based on the idea that a non-lawyer can perform clerical support functions without violating the unauthorized practice of law statute in California. Only a few states have carved out this exception by statute (e.g., California, Florida, Arizona). Missouri is not one of them.
Could LegalZoom operate in California, where it is headquartered, without being registered with the state as a Legal Document Assistant? I think not.
This is the category that LegalZoom fits into, not “self-help” software.
Otherwise, I suppose Nolo, a California-based self-help legal software publisher, and other California-based legal software publishers that sell directly to the public, would have to be licensed in California as Legal Document Assistants!!! (See generally – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_document_assistant, for a more extensive discussion of what a Legal Document Assistant is, and is not.)
Just to be clear, I am personally in favor of both self-help legal software and paralegal-assisted document preparation services as a way of providing access to the legal system, and personally think there should be more choices for consumers. But my personal opinions are not the issue. The issue is:
“What does the law in the different states now require, and what can we do to change it if we don’t like it?”
It is becoming clear that LegalZoom’s defense strategy in the Missouri case is to associate itself with “self-help software”. I am sure that its well-financed publicity machine is already approaching bloggers and the business press to write stories about whether “legal software” should be prohibited or regulated, when the real issue is whether and under what conditions a legal document preparation service should be regulated, or immune from regulation.
Definitions of what is “legal self-help software”, and what is not, are critical for carving out safe harbors for innovation, particularly as legal software applications that are distributed over the Internet have potential for great impact and for providing access to the legal system for those who cannot afford full service legal representation.
For example, LawHelpInteractive, a non-profit pro bono support organization, with grants from the US Legal Service Corporation, has assisted in the creation of true Web-based document assembly Web sites in many states that provides free legal forms directly to consumers that can be assembled directly on-line.
LawHelpInteractive has generated thousands of legal forms during the past few years that are instantly available and free to consumers throughout the United States. No one is arguing that these Web sites constitute the practice of law.
Because of the wider reach of the Internet, Web-enabled legal software applications are actually more of a threat to the legal profession, than desktop software, and the opportunity for over-regulation remains ever present. I would regret the day that courts prohibit the sale of self-help legal software because it is the unauthorized practice of law.
However, stronger arguments can be made for protecting from regulation the distribution of legal software applications, than there are for exempting from regulation a "service business", so I maintain that confusing one category with another is dangerous and takes us down a slippery slope.
Whether or not LegalZoom provides a valuable service; whether or not consumers have been harmed by LegalZoom; and whether or not the company provides some form of legal advice are questions of fact for the Missouri jury, and beyond the scope of this post.
The question for the U.S. District Court in Missouri is whether, as a matter of Missouri law, LegalZoom’s document preparation service business constitutes the practice of law in Missouri, under the terms of the Missouri UPL statute.
I think it does. What do you think?
Cut the Glut: State-by-State Empirical Labor Market Model for Law School Grads
29
Jun
In The Oversupply of Lawyers in America, ATL’s Elie Mystal asks “if we’re producing twice as many lawyers than we need, is it time to close half of the law schools?” I’m inclined to believe Elie’s answer is “yes.” I’m…
Silencing Lawyers
22
Jun
Just a quick tip today.
Lawyers cannot “testify”.
They do it anyway.
Because people allow it!
The rules forbid it.
You can stop it, if you do what I teach!
You must stop it, if you want to win!
This mid-week Tips & Tactics can only touch on this very important point of lawsuit warfare, but do what I say here (and learn the rest in my leading, affordable, case-winning, official Jurisdictionary step-by-step 24-hour course that everyone is talking about) and you can stop the lawyer on the other side from cheating!
That’s right!
It’s cheating for lawyers to testify.
Why?
They lack “legal competence” to act as witnesses!
Lawyers lack personal, first-hand knowledge of the facts of their client’s cases. In legal terms, we say they lack the requisite “competence” to testify. The only people who can testify to facts are people who have “personal, first-hand knowledge” of the facts. (More about this in my course.)
YOU MUST STOP LAWYERS FROM TESTIFYING!
They will sneak it in whenever they can. They will do all they can to get into the record facts for which they have no witnesses, documents, or things to prove those facts.
Not only that, but they will “testify to facts” for which they have witnesses just to emphasize the facts, and this too is against the rules.
The rules forbid lawyer testimony!
Learn from me and increase your odds of winning!
Lawyers will sneakily talk about facts that they have no witness to talk about, no documents or other things to use to prove the facts they talk about. They will “tell” the court the facts they cannot prove … against the rules!
It is cheating of the highest order!
But, they will do it … if you allow it!
It is against the rules … rules that are your friend!
If you allow it, you weaken your case.
If you allow enough of it, you will lose!
Not enough time today to go into detail about this, but the next time the lawyer on the other side starts leading his own witness or telling the court what the facts are, you jump to your feet and say, “Objection, your Honor. Counsel is testifying. Counsel lacks personal first-hand knowledge of the facts to which he (or she) is testifying. Move to strike.”
If the judge allows the cheating to continue, object again!
Many lawyers are afraid of the judges, so if you hire a lawyer and pay the lawyer good money, don’t be surprised when your lawyer (who is taking your good money) fails to object when his friend the lawyer on the other side begins to testify! If you have a lawyer, insist that your lawyer objects to any introduction of facts by lawyers on the other side!
People pay lawyers to fight for them, but many lawyers refuse to fight the judge!
But, fighting judges is part of what it takes to win!
And, objecting forcibly is part of the tactic of winners!
If you don’t have a lawyer, YOU MUST OBJECT!
Now is the time to order my affordable, case-winning Jurisdictionary step-by-step 24-hour course and study it carefully so you don’t find yourself behind the 8-ball when it comes time to argue in court … at hearings or at trial.
Winning is easy if you learn what I teach in my course!
I know what it takes to win. I practiced law nearly 25 years. I can help you, if you’re willing to learn from me!
Pro se people often do not get justice.
Why?
Let’s examine a few facts:
- Most pro se people don’t know the rules.
- Most pro se people don’t know how to prevent the lawyer on the other side from playing tricks with the rules.
- Most pro se people make assumptions about what is “admissible evidence” and stuff that isn’t.
- Most pro se people don’t know how to draft their pleadings or motions properly.
- Most pro se people don’t know why it’s important to write proposed orders for the judge to sign.
- Most pro se people don’t know why, when, or how to make effective objections in court.
- Most pro se people don’t understand what facts are critical to winning a case and what facts are of no consequence but only muddy the waters with court-confusing insignificance.
- Most pro se people don’t know why it’s so vitally important to cite controlling appellate cases in support of their pre-trial and trial motions.
- Most pro se people don’t know how to arrange for a written transcript to be made of all proceedings before the court, so they can control the judge.
- Most pro se people waste valuable court time with non-essentials, fail to appreciate the needs of others who have their own problems to bring before the court and, as a consequence, tend to make judges dread pro se cases.
Pro se people who know what I explain so simply in the official Jurisdictionary step-by-step 24-hour course are winning and even getting compliments from judges and even opposing lawyers … because they do it right!
Read the testimonials at right! ⇒
Not all judges are “against” pro se people “just because they are pro se”. Most of the judges I knew in my 25 years were good people who cared about other people and did their best to guarantee justiceaccording to the rules.
But! You must know how to protect yourself!
Pro se parties who know the rules and how to use them to protect themselves from courroom corruption the way my Jurisdictionary step-by-step 24-hour course makes so easy-to-understand don’t let crooked lawyers get away with their smoke-and-mirrors tricks!
It does no good to complain after losing.
The difference between winners and losers is the fact that winners learn how to win!
If you want to make it complicated and muddy the pond with all kinds of nutty arguments, you can do so, make the judge angry, and lose when your “evidence” isn’t admitted because it isn’t “admissible evidence”, etcetera.
You can demand your Constitutional Rights, instead of learning about causes of action and their elements that win lawsuits, and you will lose.
You can refuse to learn the rules of evidence, the rules of procedure, and the tactics and strategies my course is so popular for making easy to learn, and you will lose!
But!
If you want to win, get my affordable Jurisdictionary step-by-step 24-hour course now and master the case-winning strategies and tactics I used for 25 years as a case-winning lawyer in state and federal courts.
There is only ONE “Official Jurisdictionary” course!
If you’re paying a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing to earn his fee and win your case.
If you don’t have a lawyer, know what you must do to force the judge do what’s right and prevent the lawyer on the other side from cheating.
It’s that simple.
My affordable, popular, official Jurisdictionary 24-hour step-by-step lawsuit course will show you how to prepare orders, write powerful pleadings, draft and argue motions, object in court, get admissible evidence into the record, prevent the other side from getting lies into the record, do legal research, compose your legal arguments, and much, much more.
You’ll learn how to avoid filing an answer by moving the court to dismiss or strike the complaint or require a confusing or poorly-worded complaint to be re-written.
You’ll learn how to use effective discovery tools to force the other side to produce facts that may lead to admissible evidence.
You’ll discover how to move the court and demand that the judge enforce your legal rights.
In short, you’ll learn how to save money, maximize your winning power, and resolve conflicts peacefully and profitably … according to the rules!
_______________________________
Once you master the simple concepts I teach, you’ll be more powerful than most lawyers I met in 25 years as a licensed lawyer in state and federal courts as a licensed bar attorney!
Of course you cannot learn all you need to know about what it takes to win by waiting for my Tips & Tactics each week. You need to learn the case-winning tactics in my affordable Jurisdictionary course that will show you what it takes to win, step-by-step in just 24-hours.
Whether plaintiff or defendant, you cannot hope to win if you don’t know what my course teaches.
These tips should convince you to order my complete course … whether you’re a plaintiff or defendant.
If you don’t know what opportunities you have in court, you don’t have much of a chance of winning!
Let me urge you to order my course today (if you don’t already have it) so you won’t make the common mistake of assuming you already know everything you need to win!
Remember: Winners are people who know how the game is played to win — whether plaintiff or defendant.
– – – – – – –
The essential tools and elements are explained in the video you can watch right now by clicking the judge.
Click the Judge to learn more.
You won’t believe me, but most lawyers (and nearly all law school professors) don’t have a clue what it takes to win. Many law schools don’t teach “causes of action” or the elements necessary to prevail. It’s true!
Many law schools don’t teach how to use your five (5) discovery tools or why you must be courageous and fight the judge and demand your right to get evidence in the record using your discovery tools.
Many lawyers are afraid to upset judges, so they let things slide. They don’t object. They don’t “instruct” the judge on the law. They just lay back, take their hourly fee, and let their clients lose … and those who pay lawyers yet don’t know what Jurisdictionary teaches about winning are led to the slaughter by their own lawyer.
Sad, but true!
I know what it takes to win. I did this 25 years!
My Jurisdictionary will show you how in just 24-hours, step-by-step!
The Jurisdictionary Method wins lawsuits!
Watch my video and see for yourself how easy it is to use knowledge, stealth, and wisdom to win in court!
See what’s important, what’s not, and how to focus all your energy where it belongs: getting court orders!
If you gain from watching my video, please forward this newsletter to ALL YOUR FRIENDS by hitting “Forward” on your email program now.
Or use this link to send an email to all your friends. You probably know people who need to knock down judges and overcome crooked lawyers and their dishonest tricks. They will thank you for turning them on to this!
Or, do both! Forward this newsletter AND send emails to friends fighting in court who desperately need to know how to win!
Most lawyers never learn what Jurisdictionary makes so easy-to-learn. People have been telling me since I started Jurisdictionary in 1997 that, “Your course should be required in first year law school.” But, of course, that’s not likely to happen, because what Jurisdictionary shows you isn’t politically correct! I teach you how to control judges, instead of bowing to them, I I teach you how to overcome crooked lawyers and their all-too-common sneaky tricks!
Political correctness prevents justice too often!
Winning lawsuits is a brutal axe fight!
Read the testimonials in the right column ⇒
Thousands of people just like you are winning with my easy-to-learn 24-hour step-by-step course. Ask anyone who has my course.Everyone loves it!
If you don’t know what my course teaches, you lose!
End of story!
Winners do what Jurisdictionary makes easy-to-learn and don’t wait until trial to get justice!
Those who learn my affordable 24-hour step-by-step Jurisdictionary self-help course win … no matter how high the odds are stacked against them!
Winners know how to fight to win!
Losers believe internet fables. Losers get their legal education at the barbershop or on websites or expensive weekend seminars run by people who never practiced law, never went to law school, and don’t know mud from sand about rules or how to use them to control judges.
Too many good folks believe mythological silver-bullet easy solutions to their legal problems and, as a result, are losing when they would be winning if they knew what I make so easy-to-learn in my Jurisdictionary course!
The internet is infested with hare-brained schemes that sound too good to be true … and, like the old adage says, “If it sounds to good to be true, it probably isn’t.”
Remember: The most dangerous falsehoods are ones we most want to believe!
Why not learn from a real lawyer with nearly 25 years of case-winning experience?
My course is not expensive!
People who finish my course say an average 8th grader can learn it all in a single weekend.
Please read the testimonials in the right column ⇒
If you have a lawyer, you will save thousands in legal fees by knowing what your lawyer should be doing, and at the same time you will maximize your chances for success by making certain your lawyer does what should be done, instead of taking you for a ride to the poorhouse – as happens to too many good people these days.
If you don’t have a lawyer, you’ll know how to stop the opponent’s crooked tricks and control the judge!
To learn more, go to: www.Jurisdictionary.com
Click this link to watch VIDEO again.
========================
My affordable 24-hour step-by-step lawsuit self-help course includes:
- 5-hour video CD simplifies process of litigation
- 2 audio CDs present tactics and procedures
- 15 tutorials on a 4th CD go beyond the basics
- Free EasyGuide to the Rules of Court
- Temporary online access while CDs in Mail
Control judges!
Save legal fees!
Defeat crooked lawyers!
Ask anyone who has it: Jurisdictionary Works!
Call Toll Free for details: 866-Law-Easy
Get your competitive edge before the price increase.
Force judges to enforce the rules, instead of allowing the lawyer on the other side twist the law against you!
You cannot win if you don’t know how to control the judge and all the lawyers (including your own lawyer, if you can afford to pay one to go to court for you)!
You’ve heard the horror stories from others.
Don’t let it happen to you!
Order my course now, if you don’t already have it.
Know the rules and how to force everyone to obey!
Know how to draft proper pleadings, how to get your own evidence in the court’s record, how to keep the other side from getting their evidence in, how to move the court to enter orders favorable to your cause, and how to use your Jurisdictionary legal know-how and case-winning strategies to control the judge and win your case!
My self-help course is presented in such an easy format people tell us an 8th grader can learn it in just 24 hours!
Know what you must know to win!
Stop courtroom corruption!
I’ll show you how in just 24-hours … step-by-step!
Control judges and lawyers – or lose!
My “Tips & Tactics” newsletters are only introductions to the complete course you need to win. If you don’t already have my 24-hour step-by-step self-help course, go to my website and order now!
As Woody Guthrie used to sing, “This Land is our Land,” and that includes every courtroom and every courthouse from San Diego to Bangor, Maine. Why let lawyers control our lives with trickery? Why let judges destroy our lives by letting lawyers get away with their trickery?
YOU CAN WIN!
Forward this newsletter to ALL YOUR FRIENDS!
If you aren’t involved in a lawsuit or threatened with one today, learn what my course teaches and help others who will be destroyed by all-too-common courtroom corruption if YOU don’t help them learn what it takes to win!
There are more than 150 lawsuits filed every minute in the United States – nearly 100 million each year. Try to imagine how many thousands of good, honest people will be destroyed in the next 7 days just because they have no idea how to protect themselves and have nobody they can trust (or afford) to help them win!
Urge everyone to get my affordable 24-hour course!
Do it for your nation … and for your children!
Dr. Frederick David Graves, JD
New York Child Support Lawyers
22
Jun
New York child support lawyers – find the best with free online quotes to locate a
NY family lawyer. Get the best outcome possible for you and your family.
Law School Grad Labor Market Oversupply: Not Yet a Trend But Creighton Law Is Willing to Share the Pain
21
Jun
Jim Levy on Legal Skills Prof Blog, by way of ATL’s Trendspotting: Will Law School Start Decreasing The Supply of Unemployable New Lawyers?, reports that two more schools have decided to admit fewer students – Creighton and Western New England….
Legal Project Management Books for Lawyers (and Private Sector Law Librarians and Members of the Legal Academy, Too)
21
Jun
Slaw’s Ted Tjaden writes that there are relatively few substantive books on project management geared specifically to lawyers. In his recent Slaw post, he recommends two recent works because they complement each other. Levy’s Legal Project Management – Control Costs,…
Axiom Law’s Temporary Labor Business Model
16
Jun
Well, it’s not “day labor” but Axiom Law has created a profitable niche by provided lawyers to law firms and corporations for temporary assigments on matters. According to a recent Forbes article, we’re not talking about run of the mill…
