Education

When I first began screening cases for my firm the (seemingly) hardest part was telling people “No”. I beat around the bush, hemming and hawing my way to my conclusion. I stumbled through my explanation as to why I was rejecting their case. I was so worried about disappointing them that I missed the opportunity to educate as I felt like I was walking on eggshells.

Truthfully, too many attorneys say “No, I can't help you” and hang up. That’s how we earn our (well-deserved) reputations for being arrogant jerks that care only about money.

There’s something liberating and refreshing about anyone regardless of their profession who is willing to say “No, but let me tell you why…”. It takes extra time but the end result is worth it. 

I have found that placing a person in their opponent’s shoes sheds a lot of light to them and to myself. When someone is confronted with the weakness(es) of their case, it shows you how they will react in a deposition or in court when being grilled by the opposing attorney.

Which leads me to my main point:

I have had people argue to the end degree with me even when confronted with gaping holes in their case. They just don’t get it. If I can’t convince them early on that their case isn’t perfect, how hard will it be when I’m sitting down with them in mediation trying to settle their case or in court explaining why I can’t get them the amount of money they want?

Rewinding back: As much as someone is interviewing me as an attorney analyzing their case, I am analyzing their ability as a client to present themself. Too many times you can focus on the strength of the claim rather than the strength of the person. Both are vital. I have seen strong claims become harshly de-valued because of a client’s insistence to “see justice done” regardless of the cost. By taking time to explain to a client the weaknesses in their case early on, you educate the potential client while educating yourself on the type of client they will be.