The Empowered Paralegal

Lynne DeVenny at Practical Paralegalism notes that the Tulsa County Bar Association now allows paralegals who meet the Oklahoma Bar Association’s Minimum Qualification Standards for Legal Assistant/Paralegal to become associate members of the association. Lynne correctly notes, “This is a great opportunity for Tulsa paralegals and legal assistants to expand their professional network and educational opportunities.” More important, she states, this is an important recognition, “of the importance of its area paralegals and legal assistants.”

The latter is of the most significance to me, although I do not mean to minimize the networking and educational opportunities. The bar as all to often neglected to recognize not only the importance of paralegals, but the fact that paralegals are, like the lawyers themselves, part of the legal profession. Opening the bar association to paralegals allows the attorneys and paralegals who must work together as a legal team in the law office to associate together as the professionals they are.

One question that arises is whether this step would have been possible without the establishment in 2000 of the minimal qualification standards by the Oklahoma Bar Association. While such standards do not amount to licensing they do, at least, help establish the identity of paralegals as a profession.

Share on Facebook

One of the coincidences abounding in the blogosphere is that just as first Melissa H. at Paralegalese and Lynne DeVenny at Pratical Paralegalism posted regarding the case of “independent” paralegal Jerry O’Neil in Montana who successfully defended a Montana AG’s Motion for Summary Judgment on the issues of violating that state’s Unfair Trade and Consumer Protection Act, Efrem Martin, about whom we have posted before, was informing me that he has informed the Colorado the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel he was no longer a practicing paralegal.

Melissa and Lynne did fine jobs of covering the Montana matter, so I won’t be going into it. (Not everything on the internet about that story has been well done. Some commentators have, it seems to me, clearly misinterpreted both the meaning and the import of the case.)

I am a bit surprised at Efrem’s move. I have not yet had the time to read all of the documents he sent me regarding his case, so I am reserving comment and posting of excepts of his email for a few more days.  However, some of the communication he received from the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel is interesting at least to the extent that it informs those considering or implementing “independent” paralegal practices. In the initial letter is here: EFREM MARTIN INITIAL REQUEST FOR UPL INVESTIGATION[1]
Efrem challenged the Colorado proceeding in Federal Court. The Federal Court remanded it back to Colorado. I’ll have more on the basis for the challenge and the court’s ruling later. A quick read does no seem to indicate the Federal Court’s decision was a ruling on the merits, but rather on the ability to challenge in Federal Court, at least at this stage. Regardless, Mr. Martin is now teaching high school and writing a book.

Share on Facebook

Coincidences abound in the blogosphere. (What a word!) As I posted regarding unhappy paralegals and the prospect of improving their plight through proper utilization, a discussion entitled “Paralegal Utilization” began on the Paralegal Today discussion board. One post particularly caught my attention and I asked the auther, Sharon Lunsford, to provide a Guest Blog Post on her experiences for The Empowered Paralegal. She agreed and this is it. You may find it helpful to share some of it with your attorney:

Sharon Lunsford has spent her in-house paralegal career working for international retail corporations with a mix of corporate and franchise locations. Having also dealt with corporate maintenance, trademarks, real estate and other corporate matters, she currently specializes in franchising. Sharon holds a B.A. in psychology and an M.A. in comparative politics.

 ____________________________________________

In my 21-year paralegal career, I have always worked in-house. This is my fourth corporation so far. They have all been national retail businesses; at least two of them were Fortune 500 companies. I hope the following gives you a good idea of the typical corporate law department environment as I have experienced it.

Working Environment:

In every position I have spent most of my time on substantive legal work, except that in one job the paralegal part was half the job and running certain aspects of the department’s operation was the other half. Although I have sometimes had to do all my own copying, filing etc., I have not been asked to split my time between secretarial and paralegal assignments for an attorney.

I have been treated as a professional at three of the four positions, including the job with one of the smaller companies where I was actually a member of the “company management team” and attended periodic meetings of that group. My job at the other company (one of the smaller departments) was an odd situation as far as secretarial support, and the less said about that the better. At the same job, although the only relevant qualification for the job was that I had to be familiar with a computer keyboard and have reasonable word processing skills, they insisted on giving me a typing test the day I got there, after I was hired and had already left the other job. (I don’t even deal with agencies that require typing tests of paralegals, so you can imagine how I felt about that little surprise. Come to find out, their idea of treating a paralegal as a professional was not to complain if we took time off for a medical appointment.) I had some good people around, including the other paralegal and some of the businesspeople I worked with, but the company as a whole was not a pleasant work environment at that time in its history. I did, however, gain considerable experience in franchisee default issues and unusual state examiner issues, and the timing of my bankruptcy-related layoff put me in the right place for my next job.

 Office Space:

 At one job I went from a desk in the “bullpen” (room with 5 desks) to a cubicle to a glass office along the outside of the building. (Some years after I left, that office or the one next to it was shattered by a tornado after normal working hours.) In one I had a cube first in line from the corporate floor elevators. People kept thinking I was the receptionist. In another I had an office (no windows) the whole time, with lots of cabinet, shelf and worktable space. At the other I started with half of a large double cube area with extra shelving and then moved to an inner office.

 Secretarial Support:

 In each of the four positions I have had some level of secretarial support. This has included, in order of support level, not chronological order:

 1.   someone to bring my mail to me unopened and do nothing else for me (and act as hybrid secretary/paralegal and support the general counsel);

 2.   someone to open my mail, date-stamp it and hand it to me; type up documents that involved filling in very simple forms; make copies (large batches only); answer my phone if needed and send out mail and express items (and support the general counsel and one other paralegal);

 3.   someone to open my mail, date-stamp it and bring it to me; make copies; send faxes & bring me faxes; use a signature machine to apply management signatures to contracts as authorized; copy or scan contracts and contract amendments and send copies of the signed documents to franchisees; file correspondence and contract documents and index contract files; occasionally pull files; occasionally set up meetings and send out invitations on the email system; scan large batches of documents (e.g. contract files) for me to send to outside counsel as needed; take default/termination notices and other non-routine documents to executives for signature; occasionally assist in generating contract documents and inventory files for storage (and support one to three attorneys and one or two other paralegals); and

 4.   someone to check the tickler list every morning, pull the files diaried for that day and bring them to me; open my mail, date-stamp it and bring it to me; answer my phone when needed; make copies; send faxes & bring me faxes; send mail and express items; file; occasionally set up meetings or appointments; inventory files for storage and occasionally draft letters (and support the lead deputy general counsel). I could have asked her to bring coffee and it would have been considered part of the job. (Yes, our secretary was well paid.)

 Title and Pay Grade:

 In-house paralegals may be hourly non-exempt or salaried exempt employees. At one of the smaller corporations we had two levels – Corporate Paralegal (me) and (if I remember correctly) Senior Paralegal; at the other, there were also two levels – the hybrid secretary/paralegal (I don’t remember her exact title) and me, a Senior Paralegal. At one of the larger corporations we had two levels; one for paralegals trained on the job, titled Administrative Assistant–Legal Department and one for paralegals holding paralegal certificates from accredited colleges (not necessarily ABA-approved, because they weren’t aware of that process), titled Paralegal. Both were referred to verbally, and introduced to outside counsel, as paralegals. At the other there are three levels – Paralegal, Senior Paralegal and Senior Corporate Paralegal or Manager depending on the standard titles in place when the paralegal moved into that position.

 Examples of Substantive Legal Responsibilities:

 During part of my time working with franchise matters I have managed an annual interdepartmental franchise disclosure update process similar to the manner in which an in-house securities paralegal might manage a 10-K update process. Franchise contracts I have worked with have ranged from short fill-in-the-blank documents prepared by the franchise department to fairly complex documents prepared (usually by me) in the law department. At one company I have managed a franchise contract database and have been the “go-to” person for what’s in a franchisee’s contract (business and legal provisions) for a certain location. Franchise documents I have drafted at the different companies include franchise agreement amendments, release documents, default and termination notices, franchise inventory buyout agreements and international master franchise agreements. Another part of the job has been negotiating disclosure document issues with state franchise examiners. In addition, I have drafted transfer documents and managed franchise transfer closings either in person or by phone, email and fax.

 When I handled trademarks for one company I drafted all documents to be filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (applications, notices of opposition etc.) and worked directly with international outside counsel on international filings. When I handled trademarks for another company I just told our U.S. or Canadian law firm what we needed and they handled everything; the U.S. firm dealt with international matters through their international law firm connections. I much preferred being able to draft documents myself but different companies handle things different ways. At both companies I reviewed the U.S. Trademark Gazette for possibly infringing marks. When I handled real estate matters I drafted subleases, prepared or corrected Estoppel certificates and negotiated legal points with landlord’s counsel. At one company I tracked the details of several levels of subsidiaries, drafted written consents in lieu of board meetings and handled state corporate maintenance filings and state merger and acquisition filings.

 Examples (just the highlights) of the utilization of in-house paralegals in various areas of law include trademark paralegals who write the company brand use guidelines, transactional paralegals who assist in negotiating mergers and acquisitions and draft some or all of the needed documents; labor and employment paralegals who represent companies at mediation proceedings and draft responses to agency inquiries and litigation paralegals who gather information and respond to subpoenas, draft answers to interrogatories and draft responses to requests for production. (Sometimes this responsibility is shared; at one company I drafted the answers and responses for franchise litigation.)

 Specialization:

 An in-house paralegal position can be as specialized or as varied as you want. In one position I handled all general corporate, franchise, and (for a while) trademark matters – basically anything that was not litigation (except some franchise litigation) or agency claims. At another I handled franchise and trademarks. At another I handled domestic and international franchise, real estate and odd state filings formerly handled by the tax department. Currently I handle franchise matters only.

 Other Opportunities:

 An in-house paralegal may be in a position to learn certain aspects of law department management. There is a small chance of jumping over to the business side, for those interested in that route. Among my four paralegal jobs, for instance, I have handled most facets of running a law department (network administration and documentation, budget process management, clerical staff training and/or supervision etc.). Law department administration is one of the alternative careers possible to someone with that type of experience. Another, in my case, would be contract administration. A real estate paralegal could move to a lease administrator position in a company real estate department, and I know one who did exactly that. Much larger companies of course may have paralegal managers; I have not worked with that additional management layer but it offers another type of opportunity for an experienced in-house paralegal

Continuing Legal Education:

I believe each of my employers has paid for at least one paralegal association membership. One even paid for ABA associate membership for several years. And one employer has paid the travel and registration costs for me to go to national legal conferences in my area of law.

Supervision:

I can’t discuss in-house positions in detail without adding this warning. I have interviewed for two different jobs where the paralegal was the only person in the law department and the decisionmaker/gateway for documents to be reviewed by outside counsel. I was very leery of those positions; in one case the company was just coming out of Chapter 11 and in the other the people conducting the interview were consultants with an accounting firm (???!!) and not lawyers. Fortunately I was not called back for a second interview for either position. I know someone who is constantly being put into an awkward spot because she is asked to handle certain contract and compliance matters without appropriate experience or training or the assistance of outside counsel. I would avoid that environment like the plague unless you are a highly experienced paralegal who knows where the line is and has the clout to require the use of outside counsel as needed.

If you’re not asleep yet (!), I hope this has been helpful.

Sharon Lunsford

http://www.linkedin.com/in/sharonlunsford

Thank you, Sharon!

Share on Facebook

That isn’t even close to true and I’m surprised you bought into it. However, it will, I hope, draw some attention to this follow-up to my post on an attorney’s advice for using emoticons, or email in general, for communication. This time the advice is from a judge. As reported by ABAJournal

Judge Gerald Lebovits has some opinions about the propriety of exclamation points and emoticons in e-mails.

Basically you should “Lose the emoticons. They don’t convey meaning in a professional setting.” It is always nice to see a judge, even if he is not on the Supreme Court, agree with me. He expresses those opinions in 60 foot notes in an article first published in the New York State Bar Association Journal! The footnotes also discuss the use of exclamation points!!

• Exclamation points have their place. They can show enthusiasm and human warmth. Writing “Congratulations!” is expressive, while “Congratulations” may sound apathetic or sarcastic. But don’t use exclamation points after expressing a negative emotion—it’s the same as throwing a tantrum.

You can find the full NYBA Journal article here.

Share on Facebook

Normally I let comments be comments, but the post, “Paralegals in Film – One Point of View,” drew a comment from Chere Estrin of KNOW: A Magazine for Paralegals,  Sue Magazine for Women in Litigation, The Estrin Report, and a bunch of other organizations, that merits a full post not only because of its length, but because of its content. Also it helps prove my original point which is that a course on the depiction of paralegals on the big and small screen would provide a good forum for discussion and education regarding paralegal practice, history, ethics, and professionalism. So here is her comment in full:

It’s very interesting the hot debate that the Erin Brockovich role has played over the years. I have heard more paralegals than not state how much they “hate” the role portrayed in the movie. Whether or not you choose to designate Ms. Brockovich as a “real” paralegal, it is very important that you understand the history and development of the position.

In the 70’s and ’80’s and far reaching into the 90’s, anyone who wanted to could call themselves a paralegal. As the risk of revealing that I am definitely a member of the Boomer generation, I personally came up through the ranks starting in 1981. There were few paralegal schools at that time. Becoming a paralegal meant, for most, that you would receive training on the job. It is true that some paralegals came through the ranks of legal secretary but those were in the minority. During those times, let’s also understand that certain states, such as California, did not require someone to go to law school in order to take the bar. You were eligible if you worked under a mentor but law school was not required. That may still stand today, I’m not certain.

Paralegal schools were also rare in rural areas. This is one reason NALA was formed – to provide education. There was no Internet or online courses. Even in Los Angeles, a major metro city, there were two primary paralegal schools for a very long time – UCLA and UWLA. Some “match-book” cover type schools popped up, however, what was worse? Learning on the job or plunking good money down for a school that also taught you how to be a bartender?

In 1980, I started out as a paralegal in Seattle for $1500 a month. I did have some legal secretary training. I got my first job at a prestigious small firm. I was trained on the job like anyone else. The administrator hired me because, at that time, I was in the theatre. He happened to have seen one of my shows, so he hired me. True story. I moved to Los Angeles and got a job in a large, prestigious entertainment firm that handled the A list. Working with movie stars was common.

In that role, I was very active becoming the firm’s first paralegal administrator. I recall that some of my assignments included meeting a cargo plane at LAX and working with customs to board the plane in search of fake ET dolls. (Really!) I was sent to the bottom of a famous L.A. hotel in search of evidence for a case. I waded through muck, spiders and ankle deep water in search of the “hot” documents. I went to Georgia to a carpet mill in search of evidence. In Seattle, paralegals were allowed to go before the judge on non-contested matters. The first judge I went before put our case over when it was apparent the other side was not showing up. Apparently, the defendant’s counsel had decided to go moose hunting. The judge thought that was a perfectly good excuse. Meanwhile, I was always taught by the best attorneys, took seminars, read books, and learned my job as it pertained to the firms in which I was working. And that’s the key element here – as it pertained to the firms in which the paralegal worked.

To put down those paralegals who literally blazed the trail for other paralegals while the education system for paralegals was in its infancy is a travesty. Passing a paralegal course does not ensure that the paralegal will be a good paralegal. Passing the bar does not mean the lawyer will be a good lawyer. It only means that they have studied should possess the core competencies.

It is interesting that years and years later, I make my living in continuing legal eduation. I am a very strong advocate and a firm believer that paralegals should not be paralegals without an education in paralegal studies. However, to discredit those who came up the hard way – with no schools available, training was on the job, they took it among themselves to develop good assignments, they trained the attorney how paralegals could be used, they started paralegal associations, they worked hard getting the word out about this new position, is to discredit your history. Remember, it took California 10 long hard years to get AB 6450 passed that now requires mandatory education for paralegals but still grandfathered in those without it.

As for Ms. Brockovich, not once in the movie was she referred to as a paralegal. Was she rough around the edges? You bet. Was that taking literary license in the movie? For those of us who haven’t met her, we don’t know. Was she then and is she now called a paralegal? No. Did she get a “percentage” of the settlement? Now, we really don’t know, do we? In California in the ’80’s and decadent ’90’s, paralegals at some firms were given large bonuses. (The firm I was with in 1986 was giving out $20,000 – $30,000 bonuses – and that was 1986 dollars.) Truthfully, none of us know except Ms. Brockovich and Mr. Massry what that bonus was based upon or how it was calculated. We only know rumors. If there was any impropriety, I am quite certain the State Bar of California would have stepped in.

Paralegals have made up a story about Brockovich, believed it and made it their truth. It’s not that this message is defending Erin Brockovich. It’s that those paralegals flouting their Masters and B.S.’s in Paralegal Studies claiming they are better than those without have no respect for the trailblazers that came before them. It’s disrespectful and has an arrogant tone to the thousands and thousands of paralegals who came before them. Things have changed but only very recently. Those paralegals without the schooling are the very same paralegals who pushed for better training and education for paralegals nationwide. The least we can do is honor them.

Share on Facebook

I’ve noted that the searches that brought viewers to this blog recently included not only “sexy paralegal,” a search that appears to come up about twice a month, and “paralegal unhappy.” Although it is still without any legitimate basis, this blog still appears to be the first Google hit for “sexy paralegal,” but I did at least get an explanation for the reoccurring the search: there is a website selling “Sexy Paralegal Gifts, T-shirts,” etc. While none would be considered anything near outrageous, not are suitable for professional wear or use. (This is not an endorsement of the website or the products sold there. I have no connection with the website and have not received anything from them in exchange for mentioning the website. I’ve never purchased anything from the website. I could go on about this, but you – and the FTC – have the general idea by now.) However,  I’d happily accept just about anything they offered me including a discount on “Empowered Paralegal” mugs, T-shirts, etc.)

I was pleased to see that this blog is no where near the top of a search for “paralegal unhappy.” In fact, it is so far down that I wondered who had time to go through all the higher hits to get to this one! It’s one of those searches that make one also wonder the story behind it, something I seldom get to know.

The search did bring me, however, to the Legal Support Personnel webpage on “Paralegals as Profit Centers: Are Utilizing Your Paralegals Effectively.” I don’t recall referencing this article on this blog before but I have on other occasions. It is pertinent now because it does proffer some indication of the primary reasons why paralegals are unhappy – a reason that coincides nicely with the premise behind The Empowered Paralegal:

In speaking with paralegals on a regular basis, we hear time and time again why they are unhappy in their current positions and what issues are most important to them. The common theme is that they seek challenging and interesting work, as well as professional respect and acknowledgement [sic] for exemplary job performance. Paralegals, like all career-minded professionals, crave challenge and increasing levels of responsibility. If you tap into these desires, not only will you provide your paralegals with a sense of accomplishment and motivation, you will reap the benefits of exceptional work product, as well as employee allegiance.

It also provides this insight (often not perceived by attorneys, although well-known by all professional paralegals):

Paralegals should play a key role in both private law firm and corporate legal teams. If utilized effectively, paralegals have proven to be invaluable players in the provision of legal services in a number of ways: in supporting attorneys in their daily functions; in acting as liaisons between attorneys and their clients, as well as the courts and governmental bodies; and in offering expertise in a number of practice areas in which they have received specialized training. If used successfully, from a pure economic standpoint, paralegals can offer cost savings to consumers of legal services and be true profit centers for your firm.
We have found that there tends to be misconceptions in the legal marketplace as to what paralegals can do. As a result, the uncertainty often leads to the under utilization of stellar talent.

I advocate a fairly direct approach to establishing the mutual respect and professionalism between attorneys and paralegals necessary for legal team to dance without tripping over each other. However, in some instances it might be helpful for an unhappy paralegal to start things off by printing off a copy of the full article and leaving it where their attorney can’t help but see it.

By the way, I know nothing at all about Legal Support Services, so this is in no way an endorsement of the company. You can draw your own conclusions after reading the article.

Share on Facebook

My post regarding suggestions for movies or TV shows including paralegals for a possible course has drawn several interesting responses. The point of the course is to use the films as a starting point for discussion on issues ranging from ethics and professionalism to dealing with attorneys and clients. The idea was given a boost by this post by Melissa H. at Paralegalese and then one by Lynne DeVenney at Practical Paralegalism both of which provide insight into both the role of the paralegal in real life and the discrepancies between that role and the reality of paralegal practice.

Here’s one of the comments which I found particularly interesting. While the opinion is that the films do a horrendous job of depicting paralegals, it does prove the point that they films may be a good starting point for discussion of issues affecting paralegals. This comment has been edited somewhat to protect the identity of the paralegal who sent it to me:

I read your post today about developing a class on the role of paralegals in film.  Unfortunately, I don’t have a lot to offer for suggestions about which films/shows to utilize because I don’t think that paralegals are accurately represented in these mediums.  In fact, I am writing because I think that Hollywood portrays people as paralegals when they are not really fulfilling these roles. 

By way of background, I have been working as a paralegal for a little for many years.  I am very well educationed including Master of Legal Studies.  Currently I am the Senior Paralegal in the office where I work.   We are in the process of replacing our legal assistant who has been doing paralegal work over the past year.    My supervisor was willing to accept simply a high school diploma with 1-2 years of legal experience.  This does not seem right to me.   As I explained to him, paralegals go through extensive training to learn not only legal concepts but how to complete legal research and legal analysis.  And, most importantly in my opinion, we learn the ethical responsibilities associated with being a paralegal. This is not something that any person off the street can do.  We (paralegals) work hard for this designation and it is insulting to assume that a person with simply a high school diploma can be considered a paralegal. 

The same holds true for how paralegals are portrayed in film.  Not to pick on Erin Brokovich but that film irritates me more than anything.  As portrayed in the film, she had no legal training and education.  She was looking for a job.  I think as an investigator she did a fantastic job but to classify her as a paralegal is an insult to all of us who make the effort to go through school and gain legal experience.  For some, they even go the extra step to become certified.  When I hear people touting Ms. Brokovich’s movie as a prime example of paralegals then I find it incredibly insulting. In fact, it might be best to use the movie to give ethics students examples of things not to do (i.e. accepting a percentage of profits from the settlement)!  It is possible that some of the work that she engages in can be considered within the parameters of a paralegal position.  But please make it clear that, at the time, Ms. Brokovich was not a paralegal.  I am unsure as to her current status.  Again, by no means am I trying to slander Ms. Brokovich.  In fact, I admire her for all of the work that she has done and is doing.  But students should know that parelegals don’t generally climb through water wells, walk around insulting co-counsel, and accepting contingent payments from settlements.

I am sure that what I am saying are things of which you are already aware.  I just felt the need to give you perspective from yet another paralegal on the portrayal of our profession in film and television.  I wish you the best of luck as you develop your class.

I do like the part where the writer says he/she is sure that what he/she is saying are things of which I am already aware! Even if that is true (and of course it is), students and other practicing paralegals can benefit, and often benefit more than when hearing it from a professor, from hearing from a practicing paralegal. So, feel free to express your thoughts here or by email at theempoweredparalegal.com

Share on Facebook

Every now and then I get lazy and do a post that simply siphons off energy from a post on another blog. Since all bloggers do this, one day there will be a fancy Latin name for the phenomenon, but I’m way too tired tonight to coin a term. However, I already have posts written and scheduled for the next two days and several more in the works so this is not one of those times.  Or maybe it is.

I don’t watch TV and have no urge to watch “Deep End.” But since I’m contemplating a course based on paralegals as they are depicted on the big and small screen, I do read blog posts regarding “Deep End.” In theory this could allow me to write posts that seem really intelligent based on other bloggers’ fixation with the show without ever doing the hard work of watching the show.  (This is the basic premise and business plan of a new magazine called “The Week.”)

So where I am going with all this. Nowhere. Instead I’m providing a link to Lynne DeVenney’s post at Practical Paralegalism where you can read her short, but entertaining and insightful, post regarding “Deep End.“

In answer to her question whether there is a book entitled, ” ‘Everything You Need to Know That Law School Doesn’t Teach You So You Can Seem Really Smart at Your First Law Job’?,” I think the answer is “No,” but the reason I cannot take the time to do a real post on this topic is that I’m busy writing a proposal to my publisher.  Look for it on Amazon.com right after I finish The Empowered Paralegal Approach to the Elder Client and The Empowered Paralegal Professionalism Anthology.

Share on Facebook

Tuesday’s New York Timescontains an article regarding advice from a law firm senior partner to young lawyers regarding the use of email communications. The point of the article is really that there are some things that simply must be done face-to-face. He is advice was in the context of using communication technology to avoid travel costs, but it seems to me it applies not only to lawyers, but paralegals, and applies even when the person with whom you are communicating is just across town or in the office down the hall:

Emoticons may work in personal communications. But Don G. Lents, the chairman of Bryan Cave, the international law firm, said he doesn’t like seeing them in business communications. If you’re depending on a smiley face to communicate a thought to a client or a distant colleague, he tells young lawyers in his firm, you should probably step away from the keyboard, get on a plane and communicate in person. Especially if the communication involves any kind of dispute.

“You should never engage in a disagreement electronically,” Mr. Lents said he advises them. “If you are going to disagree with somebody, you certainly don’t want to do it by e-mail, and if possible you don’t even want to do it by phone. You want to do it face to face.”…

“That’s an important message that does not necessarily come naturally to a lot of younger people today who have grown up with so much of their communications being by texting and e-mail,” he said. “I tell our younger lawyers, if you think you are going to have a difficult interaction with a colleague or a client, if you can do it face to face that’s better, because you can read the body language and other social signals.”

“In texting and e-mails or even videoconferencing, you can’t always gauge the reaction and sometimes things can have a tendency to be misunderstood, or they can ratchet up to a level of seriousness that you didn’t anticipate,” he added. “In person, you see that somebody reacting in a way that you didn’t expect. Then you can stop and figure out what’s going on, and adapt.”

The importance of body language and the ability to communicate as well as exchange information are difficult to overstate, as indicated by the extensive treatment given to them in the chapter on dealing with attorneyr relationships in The Empowered Paralegal.

However, I’d also like to emphasize Mr. Lent’s admonishion not to use emoticons and the like in business communications. It’s fine in personal communications, but just does not cut it professionally. Remember that all communications, even those between you and another paralegal working on a case, may be reviewed at some point by a client (when they take the file to another attorney), by another attorney’s office, by a malpractice insurance carrier, be a malpractice jury, or by the Board of Bar Overseers or other entity regulating attorneys. If a client’s complaint relates to a lack of professionalism (and they all do in a way), a file filled with unprofessional communications is not a good start.

I require my students to communicate with me with the same professionalism they should demonstrate in the office. An email that reads, “CN U MEET @ 4? J” will not get a response, while  

 Prof. Mongue,

  Are you available to meet with us at 4:00 p.m. today? 

 John Student.

will.

Share on Facebook

Professional paralegals should be pros at concise, clear writing. Today’s exercise is to fix this excerpt from a brief spotted by Tom Freeland at NMissCommentor:

The miniscule mention of abuse in the affidavits is insufficient to find the Mississippi Supreme Court’s decision was unreasonable in finding there was no deficient performance and that there is no prejudice.  Nor is the decision of the district court wrong in finding that the state court decision was not unreasonable.

I’m assuming with some confidence (translated: hoping) that this was not drafted for an attorney by a graduate of my classes.

Bonus points if you can fix make this clear and concise while keeping the alliteration!

As far as I know there have been no formal consequences to the author. However, on possible consequence of poor writing is that samples may be posted on blogs, so this goes into the “Consequences of Sloppiness” category.

Share on Facebook