Sentences with phrase «if lawyers»

However, I firmly believe that there is so much business to be had, that if lawyers can open their minds to the collaboration discussed above, we can both expand services and meet client needs.

But even if those lawyers don't win any awards for morality or ethics, might they have a legitimate legal defense?

And so it sounds like if either lawyers are interested, A: you're working on resources for them, should we just have them email you if they're interested in knowing about that when it comes out?

So if lawyers are highly effective communicators, why are there so many communication - related claims?

If lawyers within firms did not have uniform coverage and share the same limit, it would be open for claimants to formulate their claims based upon the broadest coverage and highest available limit.

The argument is that, if lawyers bill by the hour, they will simply bill endlessly without reason.

Diane Edelman and other innovative LRW scholars have argued that these current and anticipated changes in legal practice support the development of a more global focus in LRW instruction.39 If lawyers must be skilled at incorporating transnational legal matters into their work, they must also be able to engage in research on foreign and international legal issues, to incorporate the results of that research into their legal reasoning, and to communicate effectively in writing about transnational legal questions.

In regards to the issues of constitutionality, even if the lawyers have leg to stand on with their argument, the trial court is not likely to rule in their favor.

If lawyers can opt out of paying the fees, the money funding all this work could start to dry up forcing the bar association to look elsewhere for funding like state legislatures, many of which are already cash starved and face several other priorities.

Robert Andrew Scott, past president of the Law Institute of Victoria, Australia, once observed that if lawyers were forced to find insurance on the open market, commercial insurers would likely insure only those lawyers they considered worth the risk.

If lawyers have been trained to reach premature conclusions when they deal with complicated social evidence, then integrating a more sophisticated sense of standards for evidence and good arguments in social science can provide an important antidote.

Certainly the NAACP, as I understand its position before this Court, denied that it had managed or controlled the litigation which it had urged its members or others to bring, disclaimed any desire to do so, and denied any adverse effects upon its operations if lawyers representing clients in school desegregation or other litigation financed by the NAACP represented only those clients and were under no obligation to follow the dictates of the NAACP in the conduct of that litigation.

It's therefore important for Ontario lawyers to ask if lawyers in foreign jurisdictions have professional liability insurance with sufficient coverage for their client's case.

Therefore, if lawyers in a law firm cumulatively contributed $ 1,000 or more to a judge, the judge would have to recuse himself or herself.

Every day rational clients choose lawyers who are true believers over lawyers who are cynics; every day rational clients with no money sign contracts promising to pay lawyers huge fees if and only if the lawyers can recover money for the clients» injuries.

If lawyers could wrap up their files in less time (meaning lower fees but greater affordability for the clients), then they could take on more files and replace the money lost due to the shortened process.

For that reason, unpopularity is almost inevitable if lawyers are doing their job the right way.

What if lawyers could opt - in to a database, which would provide precedents and legal memos to others?

Now, if the lawyers had disclosed the side deal to their clients and the clients agreed to the arrangement (which seems unlikely), I'd have a different view.

But if lawyers avoided all those things, if every lawyer achieved the highest professional excellence, the public would still not like us.

If lawyers are challenged then laypeople must be overwhelmed.

I agree that if lawyers can afford to pay students, they should.

So if lawyers are disinclined to innovate in client relationships, is there any reason to believe change will happen?

The «SRL problem» wouldn't be as much of a problem if lawyers recognized this and responded accordingly.

If lawyers choose to use systems that do not support that process, they do so at their own risk, and the Law Society may end up having to collect or access personal information that is irrelevant to an investigation.

If the lawyers can develop trust between parties or with opposing counsel despite the conflict, the clients will emerge much more satisfied with a solution than if everyone views it as a zero sum game or a transaction.

Many of the claims reported in this area could be avoided if lawyers took steps to confirm that the information given by the testator is correct when the will is being drafted.

Some jurisdictions in the United States may have a mandatory requirement to be insured if lawyers work in a large corporation.

But at the same time, if lawyers are willing to take the time to mentor students and provide them hands - on experience, why shouldn't the law school offer students credit for that arrangement, whether the lawyer is getting paid for the matters that the extern handles or not?

We are wrapped up in our classist history perhaps — we want to be the well - heeled retainers of well - heeled clients, but if lawyers are going to help with the access to justice crisis we will have to be the middle - class (even lower middle - class) agents of middle - class clients.

If each solo attorney is going to wholly own her own practice, then it requires a lot of thought around what resources to share and which ones to keep separate... Sharing resources isn't easy, but if the lawyers approach it with a belief that more can be done together than apart, that there is an abundance of resources and clients, and have a clear conflict resolution mechanism — then the effort is well worth it.»

If lawyers fail to complete the required hours of mandatory CLE even after having been warned, temporary suspension until completed is a reasonable way to ensure compliance.

Best of all for the client, if lawyers were permitted to pay the broker a commission on the fees generated, the broker's service, like the insurance broker's services, would be free to the client.

If lawyers can build a better web without a bar association, they're gone.

«Can Flextime Create Work - Life Balance if Lawyers Aren't Comfortable Using It?

Kosa believes if lawyers are not relying on certain types of AI software to help with legal research, they're not doing their job as efficiently as possible because of the numerous benefits the technology serves in increasing accuracy, precision and speed of compiling data.

Penn's talk appeared to present the best questions of SoLI where she shared some of the tough questions she posed to her firm's partners, including, «What if lawyers could only deliver their services in just three sentences?»

Why do we need to communicate if some lawyers are mostly focused on their own business?

You can have political / economic setups that disappoint the poor for generations — but if lawyers, teachers and doctors are sitting in their garrets freezing and starving you get revolution.

In addition, a huge difference could be made if lawyers would offer procedural «coaching» services to the primarily self - represented under limited scope retainer agreements.

If lawyers won't put their skin in the game, perhaps it is because they think the bet isn't likely to pay off.

Because two of the three legal aid sources are predominately supported by lawyers, decision makers should consider the potential impact on access to justice if lawyers were to dramatically reduce their time / financial support of pro bono services and legal aid programs, which is likely as competition increases and the social contract under which lawyers and society have operated Vis a Vis the state sponsored monopoly continues to unwind.

And if your lawyers think that, shouldn't you take a much harder look at whether you are accurately assessing your position in the case?

If lawyers are not able or willing to meet 100 % of our country's needs for legal services, then they need to get out of the way — they need to stop blocking others who would like to step up and try meet some of those unmet needs.

But if lawyers keep knocking on the door, there is good reason to believe that boards and management will eventually recognize the great value that can be added to any board by a seasoned, well - rounded lawyer.

If those lawyers are several years apart in age, the continuity will be natural and easier to maintain.

If the lawyers at the firm is not meeting that goal, something is wrong.

Further, if lawyers sink low enough to drop comments similar to the one left on Nick Holmes post, then their business & online reputation will pay a price.

Below that, the body of the ad said, «If your lawyers seem more concerned about enumerating your options than helping you choose among them, you might wonder whose interests are really being served.»

I remembered wondering: «if lawyers are telling me that being a lawyer sucks, then why are they still lawyers?»