|
Uhh why don't these morons have ivory inlay and gold finishing on their weapons? Saddam would be ashamed to see how far the adherent of his school of interior decor have fallen
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2020 22:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:15 |
|
|
Details of how they bullied their way into getting their many million dollar estate for 600k are really remarkable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2020 22:35
|
|
|
Gobbeldygook posted:https://twitter.com/annamerlan/status/1281977296224571395?s=19 The Australian terminology for what they're doing is "carrying on like pork chops".
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2020 10:25
|
|
|
Which one of you motherfuckers
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2020 14:20
|
|
|
LMAO
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2020 14:28
|
|
|
This could be resized 
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2020 16:48
|
|
|
For those that bill hourly, how do your firms issue guidance on what work/hours is billable versus non-billable? What docs do they cite for that guidance? The state bar guidance that shows up for me in google is mostly as set of non-binding opinions stating you can't bill for overhead, can't have assistants double bill, etc. Obvious, flagrant ethical stuff. We're in the process of moving mostly to the UTBMS codes and I'm trying to figure out if there are certain codes that are red flags, certain codes that should be billed as a legal secretary, etc. (We don't do any insurance work, mostly corporate and employment litigation.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2020 15:53
|
|
|
I think it's basically whatever you can get away with convincing the client to pay, nothing super formal. So there are codes we know the insurance companies won't pay, and there are codes that some of our larger clients are unwilling to pay. Otherwise you sort of have to get a feel for each client and guesstimate stuff. For instance, some of the firms I've been at refuse to bill for filing, because that's an assistant's job. But other firms see no problem with that if it's in fact the attorney doing the filing (after hours, complicated filing, etc.).
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2020 16:02
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:For those that bill hourly, how do your firms issue guidance on what work/hours is billable versus non-billable? What docs do they cite for that guidance? What is billable/not billable is generally a matter for your agreements with the client, not general guidance. The only real ethical issues are (a) you have to have actually done the work you list; (b) no double-billing; and (c) an appropriate effort to delegate items to the most cost-effective person (i.e. a partner should not be making binders when there's a paralegal sitting right there, but you know sometimes you're the only one in another city and you need to do what you need to do). Beyond that, clients will have their own views on what should or shouldn't be billed. Some clients will not pay for non-working travel (i.e. you're flying somewhere for work, but you are not doing work on the flight itself); some clients will pay half rates (this is relatively standard); some will pay full price. Some clients won't pay for first-years. Some clients (insurance companies) have strict rules about what kinds of things they'll pay for (no more than two people may bill for a call! no person under fourth-year may bill for "strategizing" anything!) where you need to just pay close attention to their guidelines and get the work done in compliance with their rules (and if you can't, then well you're going to need to eat the cost). Informally people figure out what triggers the insurance company pretty quickly and just learn how to phrase things in ways that will not make insurance companies cranky. Basically everything I've ever learned about how to bill was from being told i did it wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2020 18:25
|
|
|
“Analyze” gets past the audit software where “review” does not
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2020 19:03
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:“Analyze” gets past the audit software where “review” does not there's also the insurance companies where magically their demanded writeoffs amount to almost exactly ten percent of the bill, each and every time
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2020 19:16
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:“Analyze” gets past the audit software where “review” does not Which is funny because the former sounds like bullshit and the latter sounds like actual work being done. Yes, just let me analyze this quickly. *rubs fingers on temples* 0.5 hours
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2020 21:40
|
|
|
Also if you’re a junior associate just loving bill it (as long as you actually did the work and aren’t double billing) and let the partners fight with the clients about whether they’ll pay or not.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2020 22:05
|
|
|
Kalman posted:Also if you’re a junior associate just loving bill it (as long as you actually did the work and aren’t double billing) and let the partners fight with the clients about whether they’ll pay or not. yeah, this is a really key thing to remember. if you're asked to do the work, bill for it. if its a task the client will pay four hours for and it takes you eight hours, generally bill all eight hours. i might make an exception if you, like, came to work hungover and everything took you double time, perhaps you want to cut your hours then, but you're rated on your hours, and that partners told you to work on something a client won't pay for is their problem.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2020 23:46
|
|
|
Jackass opposing counsel is the number one reason I’m leaving the practice of law.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 02:26
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Jackass opposing counsel is the number one reason I’m leaving the practice of law. Depends. Jackass counsel in the courtroom: Game on! Jackass counsel outside the courtroom: A living nightmare to deal with.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 02:49
|
|
|
Thanks for your feedback guys. It aligns with what I researched today. In the spirit of sharing, I found these most helpful in order of importance when trying to figure out what work was billable versus non-billable: ABA Rule 1.5 ABA Comm. on Ethics and Professional Responsibility, Formal Op. 93-379 Missouri v. Jenkins, 491 U.S. 274 (1989) and then a few ethics opinions from the State Bar. I never got beyond a few examples of clerical/secretarial work but... evilweasel posted:a partner should not be making binders when there's a paralegal sitting right there ...it sure seems that this would be non-billable work regardless of who does it given the above linked guidance. Which is the issue I was having to begin with. Some lawyers would bill this and some wouldn't, but what do we need to do to bill ethically? It seems the answer to me, a non attorney needing to research this, is that we would not be able to bill for that within the ethical guidelines of Op. 93-379 or my State Bar's ethics opinions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 02:51
|
|
|
Lol at the idea of researching law on what I can or can’t bill
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 04:23
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:I never got beyond a few examples of clerical/secretarial work but... what part, specifically?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 04:30
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:a non attorney needing to research this, quote:
Lol
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 06:45
|
|
|
Alab episode on Deutsche bank is a fuckin banger, listen to it now
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 07:34
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:what part, specifically? The task of physically assembling binders would fall under clerical/secretarial work which is considered to be an overhead expense if you'd like to follow the ethics opinions of my state or the other sources I linked. Naturally, assembling binders while they do some other substantive legal task may be a different story, but the thing I needed to research was ethics opinions on non-billable tasks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 19:20
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:The task of physically assembling binders would fall under clerical/secretarial work which is considered to be an overhead expense if you'd like to follow the ethics opinions of my state or the other sources I linked. Naturally, assembling binders while they do some other substantive legal task may be a different story, but the thing I needed to research was ethics opinions on non-billable tasks. not one of those sources discusses clerical/secretarial work, doing a ctrl-f. what specific section do you think applies? like, quote it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 19:27
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:not one of those sources discusses clerical/secretarial work, doing a ctrl-f. what specific section do you think applies? like, quote it. Missouri v. Jenkins, 491 U.S. 274 (1989) Footnote 10 posted:It has frequently been recognized in the lower courts that paralegals are capable of carrying out many tasks, under the supervision of an attorney, that might otherwise be performed by a lawyer and billed at a higher rate. Such work might include, for example, factual investigation, including locating and interviewing witnesses; assistance with depositions, interrogatories, and document production; compilation of statistical and financial data; checking legal citations; and drafting correspondence. Much such work lies in a gray area of tasks that might appropriately be performed either by an attorney or a paralegal. To the extent that fee applicants under 1988 are not permitted to bill for the work of paralegals at market rates, it would not be surprising to see a greater amount of such work performed by attorneys themselves, thus increasing the overall cost of litigation. ABA Formal Op. 93-379 posted:A lawyer may not charge a client for overhead expenses generally associated with properly maintaining, Additionally my states bar has ethics opinions that it currently links to on the topic that state: Ethics Opinion 75-29 posted:It is unprofessional and undignified for an attorney to separately charge a client for costs of secretarial work unless such work is extraordinary or unusual.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 19:48
|
|
|
Unprofessional and undignified
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 23:18
|
|
|
what about secretariat work
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 23:45
|
|
|
I just paid 3700 in tax (last year and this year's estimated tax to date) on 28k in income 
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 00:15
|
|
|
e bitching removed
Mr. Nice! fucked around with this message at 03:33 on Jul 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 01:18
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 04:26
|
|
|
The attorney that also starred in Battlefield Earth.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 04:38
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Unprofessional and undignified Sounds ridiculous. Obviously you bill for the cost of secretarial work, otherwise lawyers are uniquely prohibited from including real business costs in their final product. I mean, you don't bill it as attorney time/price but that can't be what they mean cause that's pretty obvious.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 06:40
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:I just paid 3700 in tax (last year and this year's estimated tax to date) on 28k in income You'd make way more running a taco truck in Norway. Just saying. Park it outside of campus you'd have to start hiring people to cope with the onslaught.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 06:42
|
|
|
Dead I am the sky, watching first years cry Files they slowly churn, conquering the worm
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 15:11
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Additionally my states bar has ethics opinions that it currently links to on the topic that state: so of those, only the first one actually applies. secretarial work is different than paralegal work - it is stuff like "take diction" or "process expense reimbursements" or, well, i don't know, i'm not 60 so i don't use my secretary. secretarial work is not billable, unless you ask them to essentially do paralegal work (because all the paralegals are busy). paralegal work is billable, and making deposition binders/hearing binders/etc is basically the definition of paralegal work. the supreme court case is dealing with what is a "reasonable fee" in the context of a fee-shifting statute where the requirement is a "reasonable" fee, not an ethical one. i can charge a client ten thousand dollars an hour if i feel like it, and that's not unethical provided it's conspicuously disclosed. it is unreasonable, however, so i won't get ten thousand dollars an hour if i sue to desegregate a school and win a fee award.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 19:55
|
|
|
I made an OC mad as gently caress today. I got a major angry email reply. I was completely in the right, but I do not get paid enough to be in the middle of this dispute any longer. I just emailed my boss and his two cohorts that one of them can take this poo poo over. I'm done besides drafting. $22.50/hr is not enough for me to feel jumpy and irritable all day because I'm stressed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 23:06
|
|
|
California bar exam news. http://www.calbar.ca.gov/Admissions quote:The California Supreme Court on July 16 announced it will permanently lower the passing score for the California Bar Exam to 1390 and released plans for an October test administered online. The court’s letter to the State Bar directed that: edit: Mr. Nice! posted:I made an OC mad as gently caress today. I got a major angry email reply. I was completely in the right, but I do not get paid enough to be in the middle of this dispute any longer. I just emailed my boss and his two cohorts that one of them can take this poo poo over. I'm done besides drafting. $22.50/hr is not enough for me to feel jumpy and irritable all day because I'm stressed. That sucks, get out of there and let them fight it out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2020 02:41
|
|
|
Sab0921 posted:If you are an auto admit poster, you should probably delete your poo poo. Auto admit...now that’s a name I’ve not heard in a long time. Kalman posted:Also if you’re a junior associate just loving bill it (as long as you actually did the work and aren’t double billing) and let the partners fight with the clients about whether they’ll pay or not. The billable hour is a bit of a fiction. You will undoubtedly work a lot of hours you don’t bill, and the purpose of the exercise is usually to get to a total price for work done that strikes the right balance between opportunity cost, effort, deal size, value to the client, how much leeway the partner has to take a writedown and, often, how much of an rear end in a top hat the client is allowed to be. That’s the billing partner’s job to figure out. If you’re a junior associate, record everything until you can make those judgments for yourself. Beefeater1980 fucked around with this message at 05:28 on Jul 17, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2020 05:22
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:
When do you think that point usually is? I've been at my current firm a month and partners would like me to have that discretion in the next 1-2 months, but I have little direct contact with clients I haven't brought in and my last firm was pure contingency cases, so I feel like I'm not on track to get there at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2020 17:05
|
|
|
How far out are you? Two or three years out? Probably getting to that point in 1-2 months is crazy. If you're 6-10 years out, you should be starting to get a sense of things. A lot also depends on practice area and case type.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2020 17:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:15 |
|
|
Almost 3 years out, one year clerking, almost two personal injury, now just over a month in construction.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2020 17:44
|
|