I usually think that my business model for providing legal research and writing services is fairly unusual and innovative because I rely heavily on the internet not only for research resources, but also to communicate with clients around the country.  But, based on a recent post at Concurring Opinions, I may not be as innovative as I thought.  Scott Moss posts about Law Research Services, a legal research company that started in 1960!  The company apparently had a rocky start because a comment to the post says that Westlaw lists 26 cases in which Law Research Services is a party.  I don’t know if Law Research Services is still around, but its idea was sure ahead of its time! 

Michelle Golden at Golden Practices shares a CPA’s guidelines for contact with his or her clients.  According to Golden, the (unnamed) CPA’s website includes rules like this: 



Pretty amusing, but I guess some professionals feel that way about client contact – even though most would not post those rules on their website. 

A comment to Golden’s post is even more interesting. The commenter says:  “This guy just sent a very powerful message about how much he values his own services and that he's competent enough, and in demand enough not to care about losing your business.  That kind of aura of success, and competence can attract people to your firm even more that ‘service with a smile.’”

I am just glad that I do not feel the need to impose any such rules on my clients.  I am fortunate enough to like all my clients and I am always flattered when they ask me to do work for them.  My clients do call me early and late (it is not quite 7:00 a.m. and I have already talked to two clients this morning), but I don’t feel victimized or undervalued by the odd calls.   My work often has very short deadlines, so a late night or early morning call about a project actually makes my life easier. 

So apart from any issues of good client services, I think that any professional who feels the need to treat her clients like children either has the wrong clients or is in the wrong business.  Life is too short for that. 

Reference Question of the Week considered a request for suggestions for a book to give a second year law student for Christmas. 

The post listed nine books, none of which I have ever heard.  Guess I should check them out. 

If I were answering that question, I would include The Art of Cross Examination by Francis L. Wellman (mentioned in an earlier post), and any book by Bryan Garner.

The Wall Street Journal Law Blog reports that Merriam-Webster Online listed “Pettifogger” as its word of the day.  What is a pettifogger?   “pettifogger PET-ee-fog-ur noun  1 : a lawyer whose methods are petty, underhanded, or disreputable : shyster.” 

I did a LEXIS search for the word and got 48 hits.  I learned that “pettifogger” can be used as a verb, as in he “had been pettifogging for two hours and a half.”  United States v. 16,000 Acres of Land, 49 F. Supp. 645, 654 (D. Kan. 1942).  “Pettifogger” is primarily used in older opinions where the judges wrote  lovely sentences. For example:  "He is a pettifogger who was mischievously bent on impeding a great reform demanded by the people, without regard to his chances of success in achieving his ostensible purpose, or else.”  Kennedy v. Item Co., 213 La. 347, 354 (La. 1948).  Or this sentence:  “In these representations they were backed by old tories and worthless pettifoggers, with such matchless effrontery that the men finally yielded to the solicitations of their officers, and concluded to set the laws at defiance.”  SUMNER v. BUEL, 12 Johns. 475 (N.Y. 1815).  Not sure what those sentences mean, but I enjoy the way they sound. 

Also, while advice of counsel is generally a valid defense, be wary of relying on pettifoggers:  "While an honest reliance on the advice of counsel, who has been fully informed of the facts, may be a complete justification in an action for malicious prosecution, the advice of a lawyer who is a pettifogger will be no justification. * * * And a reliance upon the advice of a person who is not a counselor or attorney at law is incompetent to disprove malice."  EIHLERT v. GOMMOLL, 1902 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 191 (Ohio Misc. 1902). 

Unfortunately, “pettifogger” is probably a word that only judges can use.  I think that if one lawyer calls another lawyer a “pettifogger” in court, that is reversible error and perhaps an ethics problem. 

The IRS website includes its Audit Techniques Guides (ATGs).  The Guides "focus on developing highly trained examiners for a particular market segment" and "contain examination techniques, common and unique industry issues, business practices, industry terminology and other information to assist examiners in performing examinations."  Not surprisingly, lawsuit proceeds are a "market segment" covered by the Guides. 

The Guide for "Lawsuit Awards and Settlements" was "developed during a project in Alabama, which began with media coverage of relevant tax issues. Analyses of newspaper articles revealed that numerous lawsuits were being resolved in the state either by verdict or settlement for substantial amounts. As a result, a separate project relating only to lawsuit verdicts and settlements was initiated and approved." 

These are the issues for lawsuit proceeds received after August 20, 1996: 



Keep these things in mind when you settle your next suit! 

thanks to Bizblawg. 

The office of Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald is posting each day's exhibits in the Libby trial. The website also includes the indictiment and subsequent motion filings.  I would like to know how many people look at those exhibits and why.  The website is handy for the media and for bloggers who want to comment on the trial.  But who else is going to read them?  I looked at a few of the documents but, without a detailed chronology and information about the factual context of the documents, they did not tell me much.  Having read some of the documents, however, I may have a more informed perspective when I watch news reports of the trial. 

Boley Blogs also lists blogs that are following the Libby trial. 

Press release:  "Fiscal year 2006 statistics for each of the 12 regional U.S. courts of appeals and 94 U.S. district courts – plus national totals for the appellate and district courts – are now available."    You can read the stats here.

I have used these statistics a few times in support or opposition to motions to transfer to compare how long it takes to get to trial in various districts. 

Pam Nelson at Triangle Grammar Guide answers a question I never even thought about.  What is the difference between concrete and cement: 


She got this information from Wisegeek, which is a great resource for anyone who is curious. 

  WisBlawg reports that the Judiciary is considering a one year pilot project to assess the effect of offering free public access to PACER through the Federal Depository Library Program.  

The Government Printing Office conducted a survey of federal depository libraries last year and the results are here.  Of the 263 libraries that responded (123 were academic libraries), only 52 currently use PACER.  Of those 52, 30 had PACER expenditures less than $100.  One library had PACER fees excess of $14,000.  I think that PACER is a great resources for my legal practice, but also for all kinds of research.  So I am surprised that there is such limited usage in depository libraries. 

What?  Legal writing dull? 

I like to read tips for any kind of writing, not just legal writing, but sometimes the tips need some adjustment.   Here’s an article on “better beginnings.”  It has some good ideas, but remember your audience.    For example, the list suggests that you “Do something surprising... VERY surprising,” and “Start with something funny.”   Maybe not a great idea for a brief. 

Thanks to the nonbillable hour. 

I have just discovered “Grammar Girl” podcasts. The first two I heard  were great. 

First, she explains lay and lie, words that I long ago decided to ignore because I was so uncertain about their usage.   This is how she explains the present tense: 


Her best (and most painful) tip for remembering has to do with Bob Dylan and Eric Clapton.  She says they were both wrong.  (If you are young, you may not understand that, and will just have to listen to the podcast.) 

All this sounds easy, but then, ”everything goes all haywire, because lay is the past tense of lie.”  She gives a chart and more tips, but admits that even she has to look them up. 

Her second podcast was even better – how to correct other people's grammar without losing friends or sounding like a snob

Thanks, Grammar Girl! 

Appellate Law and Practice has “a list of books that will be helpful to modern lawyers that are now in the public domain, and Google has scanned in, in full.” 

On a slightly related topic, I was looking for a gift for a young lawyer and remembered that someone gave me “The Art of Cross Examination” by Francis L. Wellman.  when I was starting to practice.  I stil have the book and pull it out every now and then to re-read. 

Even though it was first published in 1903, it is remarkably fresh and useful.  Wellman’s introductory section includes this discussion – and remember this is 1903:


Except for the reference to 10,000 cases a year, you would think this was written just recently!

The book has about 250 pages of discussion and analysis of cross-examination techniques and then concludes with cross-examinations from 26 cases.  Great stuff.  I highly recommend it.