Sentences with phrase «nonlawyer investors»

To date, the greatest advances in legal operations have occurred in legal departments, yet the same inventive methods and mindsets are cropping up in traditional law firms and sophisticated «New Law» companies funded by nonlawyer investors.

[3] However, D.C.'s rule is narrowly tailored to allow equity ownership only by those nonlawyer partners who actively assist the firm's lawyers in providing legal services, and does not allow for the sale of ownership shares to mere passive nonlawyer investors.

We also have to be exceedingly careful not to harm the true public interest by attacking the many areas of legal advice and services that are affordable by thoughtlessly sacrificing them to profit - seeking, anti-competitive nonlawyer investors on a trumped up altar of access to justice simply to avoid dealing with the real A2J problem.

You don't need to «throw the baby out with the bathwater» by precluding nonlawyer investors from becoming shareholders; you simply structure the regulations so that they set the standards of conduct you wish to achieve.

Sometimes the caller is a lawyer who is in contact with potential nonlawyer investors in their firm, and sometimes the caller is a potential nonlawyer investor, excited at the idea that they could own and run a law firm.

And those nonlawyer investors, for the most part, are 20 times larger than even the largest law firms.

However bad you see the profit motive of the personal injury bar, it would only worsen if they had to share those profits with nonlawyer investors.

And Ribstein also writes that lawyers may be able to offer nonlawyer investors noncontrolling interests to experiment with the idea of a publicly held firm, without changing ethics rules.

Not exact matches

During the conversation, Grech described the immediate aftermath of his firm going public, what obligations the firm holds to investors versus clients, the reasons for the IPO, whether the IPO process was more difficult than expected, the post-IPO firm culture and the benefits of nonlawyer regulators.

In essence, the options were either (1) limited lawyer / nonlawyer partnerships with a cap on nonlawyer ownership and the nonlawyers would be subject to a «fit to own» test, (2) lawyer / nonlawyer partnerships with no cap on nonlawyer ownership but the firm could provide legal services only (no multidisciplinary services) and the nonlawyer partner (s) would be required to perform services for the firm (they could not be passive investors; as discussed further below, this option was considered to be the «DC approach»), or (3) the same as Option (2) except the firm could offer multidisciplinary services.