he first lawyer I ever met was
a law school professor. Before that, I thought lawyers were
like Owen Marshall, Perry Mason, and other fictional characters
I had seen on television. You know,
 | ||
The second time, I hired someone with
expertise in an area where I had little. In both cases, I got
good advice and favorable results. I hated, however, the
process of dealing with those lawyers, and I think I learned
some valuable insights.
First, in both cases, neither lawyer
seemed to appreciate how I needed to know what was going on in
my cases. I had to call them on a regular basis, sometimes two
or three times, just to find out what was going on. They would
promise me an answer by a particular date, and that date would
pass without so much as a fax, phone call, or e-mail message
(OK, there was no e-mail in those days. Sue me.)
Second, the lawyer in the toilet-bowl will
matter wanted to rewrite the deal once it became more
complicated for him. I felt like firing him, but the case was
too far advanced to change lawyers.
In addition to these experiences, I have
seen lawyers on the other side of legal matters try their best
to scotch a deal just so they can justify their fees. It’s
like they never consider the client’s interests, or that
they have so little common sense, they have no idea what the
client needs from a lawyer.
In my primary concentration, labor and
employment law, common sense is an essential requirement of the
job. If I just told my clients what was legal, and ignored the
consequences of doing what was legal (but not fair), I would be
guilty of being a bad lawyer. I am being hired to make my
clients’s businesses better, not just keep them out of
legal trouble.
Not too long ago, a client wanted me to
decide whether it should keep another lawyer involved in a
matter that occurred before I became the client’s primary
attorney. I knew the other lawyer, and I gave my client an
honest assessment. The client asked: “Frank, is he my
kind of lawyer?” When I asked what he meant by that, he
said: “You know, a lawyer who gets results.” The
client didn’t care about where the guy went to law
school; he wanted to know if the lawyer could get something
accomplished.
OK. So what does this article have to do
with picking a lawyer? I’m getting to it.
There are plenty of smart lawyers out
there willing to take your money. There are plenty of lawyers
who believe that they are doing you a favor by representing
you. You do not need those lawyers. You need this lawyer:
1. He returns your phone calls
promptly, even if he is out of the office for days. If he is on
vacation, his partner returns his calls.
2. He gets results. He understands your
business, and he understands that you do not want to deal with
lawyers.
3. He exercises common sense. He
tries to let you do what you want to do, and he talks you out
of decisions, reluctantly, that will generate more difficulty
and legal fees for your business, but more work for him.
4. He is honest with you. If he does
not know the answer, he gets it, and he gets it quickly.
5. He may not have the experience of
others, but he has good judgment. That judgment trumps
experience in most instances.
6. He works for Kollman &
Saucier.
It’s my column, so item 6 stays in.
In any event, don’t be intimidated by lawyers. They work
for you, and you should expect good service.
Frank Kollman is a partner in the law firm
of Kollman & Saucier, PA, in Baltimore, MD. He can be
reached by phone at (410) 727-4300 or fax (410) 727-4391. His
firm’s web site at www.kollmanlaw.com has articles, sample policies, news and
other information on employee/employer relations.