Attorney Journal, Orange County, Volume 153

ORANGE COUNTY

Volume 153, 2018 $6.95

Are You Suffering From Solo/ Small Firm Imposter Syndrome?

Cynthia Morgan-Reed The Lateral Attorney Transition: Two Tips to Make Your Next Hire a Good One

Steve Fretzin

6 Reasons Why Content Is too Important for Lawyers to Write

Jim Bliwas

Amp up Your LinkedIn Profile With These 10 Tips for Lawyers

Bill Tilley

How to Protect Your Private Practice From a California Payroll Tax Audit

Allison Soares

California Case Summaries ADR™

Monty A. McIntyre

Law Firm of the Month

RMD Law

Personal Injury Attorneys, Irvine Personal Injury 2.0: RMD Attorneys’ High Tech Law Practice

Reputation Matters.

2019

When choosing a law firm, reputation matters – and our reputation speaks for itself. Shustak Reynolds & Partners, P.C. is proud to announce that our firm has been recognized for the second year in a row by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” as a Tier 1 firm in San Diego for Financial Services Law. U.S. News is known as the global authority in law firm rankings, and only a small percentage of firms nationwide receive this distinction. Firms included in the prestigious “Best Law Firm” tier rankings undergo an extensive evaluation and achieve top ratings from clients and fellow attorneys for their abilities, professionalism and integrity.

Securities Litigation and Arbitration Financial Services Law Complex Business Disputes SEC, FINRA and State Regulatory Investigations & Enforcement Proceedings Corporate and Securities Transactions

www.shufirm.com

TR

I A L L AW

Y

S

TO

P

ER

Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame

2018

KA

Keller/Anderle LLP BUSINESS TRIAL LAWYERS

2018 EDITION—NO.153

TABLE OF CONTENTS 6 How to Protect Your Private Practice From a California Payroll Tax Audit

by Allison Soares

8 California Case Summaries ADR™ Organized Succinct Summaries of New California Civil Cases

8

by Monty A. McIntyre EXECUTIVE PUBLISHER Brian Topor

12 Community News

EDITOR Wendy Price

ATTORNEY OF THE MONTH

16 RMD Law, Personal Injury Attorneys, Irvine Personal Injury 2.0: RMD Attorneys’ High Tech Law Practice

CREATIVE SERVICES Penn Creative CIRCULATION Angela Watson PHOTOGRAPHY Chris Griffiths STAFF WRITERS Dan Baldwin Jennifer Hadley CONTRIBUTING EDITORIALISTS Jim Bliwas Steve Fretzin Monty A. McIntyre Cynthia Morgan-Reed Allison Soares Bill Tilley WEBMASTER Mariusz Opalka ADVERTISING INQUIRIES Info@AttorneyJournal.us SUBMIT AN ARTICLE Editorial@AttorneyJournal.us OFFICE 30211 Avenida De Las Banderas Suite 200 Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688 www.AttorneyJournal.us ADDRESS CHANGES Address corrections can be made via fax, email or postal mail.

by Jennifer Hadley

16

24 Are You Suffering From Solo/Small Firm Imposter Syndrome?

by Cynthia Morgan-Reed

26 The Lateral Attorney Transition Two Tips to Make Your Next Hire a Good One

by Steve Fretzin

28 Six Reason Why Content Is too Important for Lawyers to Write

by Jim Bliwas

30 Amp up Your LinkedIn Profile With These 10 Tips for Lawyers

by Bill Tilley

26

Editorial material appears in Attorney Journals as an informational service for readers. Article contents are the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of Attorney Journals.

Attorney Journals makes every effort to publish credible, responsible advertisements. Inclusion of product advertisements or announcements does not imply endorsement.

Attorney Journals is a trademark of Sticky Media, LLC. Not affiliated with any other trade publication or association. Copyright 2018 by Sticky Media, LLC. All rights reserved. Contents may not be reproduced without written permission from Sticky Media, LLC. Printed in the USA

t : sa om f u an Fr l o Ry Al lioJi

We appreciate your business and wish you the Happiest of Holidays and a Prosperous New Year!

W W W. J I L I O R YA N . C O M

800.454.1230

How to Protect Your Private Practice From a California Payroll Tax Audit

by Allison Soares

D

id you know you can be held personally liable for payroll taxes if the California Employment Development Department (EDD) reclassifies your independent contractors?

Yes, you read that correctly.

Most taxpayers and business owners—including those that own your own private law practice—are unaware of this fact. But because of a recent case ruling—Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles—the EDD is getting stricter with conducting these investigations, which are essentially worker re-classification audits.

These California state payroll tax audits (commonly referred to as an EDD audit) occur when a business has classified a worker as an independent contractor instead of an employee. Essentially the EDD can personally assess the business owner/attorney for “unpaid” payroll taxes because the EDD has determined that they believe these workers are actually employees. They do this because California generally encourages workers to be classified as employees to protect them. They want the worker to be covered by worker’s compensation and have the right to collect unemployment if they were to lose their job (even as an independent contractor).

I know what you’re thinking. This is very confusing and frustrating to many business owners and taxpayers.

But if you’ve ever hired an independent contractor, you could be facing this tax audit. And if you don’t know how to protect yourself and your practice, you could be facing a huge financial burden. Here’s what you need to know and how to safeguard your practice.

6

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

How do I know I’m facing a California state payroll tax audit?

The EDD conducts different audits to ensure that employers are functioning correctly according to state laws and the tax code. Most EDD audits start when a worker files for unemployment and the business receives a three-page letter that may seem very vague and inconspicuous.

What happens if I don’t respond to the letter?

If an EDD audit notice sits in a pile and no one responds to it, the EDD has been known to make a determination based upon the type of industry, the historical payroll of the company or the number of 1099s issued. The EDD will then send out a proposed assessment. If the company does not respond to that notice, contest it, or provide additional documentation by the deadline, then the balance due will eventually be sent to the collections department.

I’ve seen some very sophisticated business owners and private practitioners react to the EDD notice. They try to go back to the assessment side and have an agent adjust the audit results. However, they don’t realize that the left hand doesn’t talk to the right hand at the EDD. The agent on the assessment side may be working with you, while the collection side is still trying to collect the balance due.

What’s the first step to take after receiving a notice I’m being audited?

Once you’ve contacted a tax attorney, start getting your records and other relevant documents in order. Having these documents organized will be a big help in your

defense. The more documentation you are able to present in your defense, the easier it will be to get you through the audit process successfully.

What kind of records might be requested from me?

The most common records the EDD requests during an audit are general employment questionnaire, payroll records, federal income tax return, bank statements, wage information for particular time frames, and employee registers. After these documents are requested, the actual audit begins and the EDD may request other additional documents.

Need a professional writer for your brochure?

What are the penalties associated with EDD audits?

Depending on the reason for your EDD audit, you could be liable to face a wide range of fines that can cause you a considerable amount of financial strain. These sorts of fines include a percentage of unpaid taxes, set dollar amounts for each case of unreported employees or independent contractors, and much more.

What happens if I don’t agree with the proposed assessment from the EDD? If you don’t agree with the proposed assessment the EDD gives you after their audit is complete, you can appeal the assessment.

How do I ensure the independent contractor I hired is not considered an employee by the EDD? This is the most difficult question to answer and it depends on your industry, the type of work you do, and how you treat the person working for you. The EDD will look for things such as whether you asked the contractor to work certain days and times, if you have signed contractors if you required them to attend company meetings or trainings, or if you did not want them working for other companies.

Receiving a California payroll tax audit is a confusing and scary matter, especially for small business owners and private practitioners who have a lot at stake. But knowing what to expect and handling the request will help you immensely as you navigate the murky waters of the EDD audit. n

Unless you have the time, desire and skills, hire people who do!

We can write and design everything from brochures to websites.

Allison Soares is a partner and tax attorney at Vanst Law. Before starting her own practice, Soares was a partner at a tax law firm where she honed her skills handling a wide variety of tax and employment-related cases. In addition to her legal work, she has worked in accounting and utilizes that knowledge to her advantage while handling cases involving EDD audits.

215-550-1435 • penn-creative.com

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

7

California Case Summaries ADR™ Organized Succinct Summaries of New California Civil Cases

by Monty A. McIntyre, Esq. Below are some recent cases summarized by Monty A. McIntyre in his publication California Case Summaries Civil™. Monty prepares short, organized summaries of every new published California civil case that California lawyers can subscribe to on either a biweekly, quarterly or annual basis. For more information go to https://californiacasesummaries.mykajabi. com. A California civil trial lawyer since 1980 and a member of ABOTA since 1995, Monty serves as a mediator, arbitrator and referee with ADR Services, Inc. handling cases in the areas of business, elder abuse, employment/wage & hour, insurance bad faith, legal malpractice, medical malpractice, personal injury, real property and wrongful death. To schedule a matter, contact Monty’s case manager Christopher Schuster at ADR Services, Inc. at (619) 233-1323 or christopher@adrservices.com.

CALIFORNIA COURTS OF APPEAL Arbitration Uber Technologies v. Google (2018) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2018 WL 4658745: The Court of Appeal reversed the superior court’s discovery order (in favor of Uber) that overruled an arbitration panel’s discovery order (in favor of Google). The case arose from an arbitration proceeding by Google against its former employees who had started a self-driving vehicle company, Ottomotto LLC, that was acquired by Uber. The Court of Appeal overruled Uber’s motion to dismiss the appeal. Because the superior court’s order determined all pending issues in the special proceeding between Google and Uber, it was a final appealable order. The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s discovery order. Due diligence-related documents prepared by the law firm Stroz Friedberg LLC were not protected attorney-client communications, nor were they entitled to absolute protection from disclosure under the attorney work product doctrine. While the materials had qualified protection as work product, denial of the materials would unfairly prejudice Google’s preparation of its claims.

(C.A. 1st, September 28, 2018.)

Attorney Fees Schulz v. Jeppesen Sanderson, Inc. (2018) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2018 WL 4718836: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s order awarding plaintiff attorneys only 10% attorney fees on a settlement they obtained of $18,125,000 in a wrongful death action. The contingent fee agreement provided for a fee of 40%, and the plaintiff attorneys requested a fee

8

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

of 31%. The Court of Appeal ruled the trial court gave too little consideration to California Rules of Court, rule 7.955(a) (2), which required it to take into account the terms of the engagement agreement with the clients from the perspective of when the agreement was signed. In addition, the court did not acknowledge the factors listed in California Rules of Court, rule 7.955(b). Instead of balancing the relevant factors, the court gave overwhelming weight to a single concern: the expense of the plaintiff children’s extensive medical needs. The Court of Appeal agreed that a child’s needs are a relevant and important factor in determining a reasonable attorney fee, but this single factor cannot overwhelm all other considerations.

Considering the difficulties in the case at the beginning, the fact that other attorneys would not take the case on a contingent fee basis, and the significant costs advanced by the lawyers, the trial court abused its discretion in awarding fees of only 10% percent. (C.A. 2nd, filed September 5, 2018, published October 2, 2018.)

Attorneys Lofton v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage (2018) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2018 WL 4659692: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order denying approximately $5.5 million of attorney fees to Initiative Legal Group, APC (ILG) and instead directing the payment of this amount to class members in Lofton v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage (Lofton). The trial court properly issued this order as the result of ILG concealing from the Lofton court and its class member clients a $6 million settlement with Wells Fargo for payment of ILG’s attorney fees in violation of California Rules of Court, Rule 3.769(b). The Court of Appeal also directed that a copy of its opinion be sent to the State Bar of California. (C.A. 1st, September 28, 2018.)

Civil Procedure Martinez v. Eatlite One, Inc. (2018) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2018 WL 4765268: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s award of pre-998 and post-998 attorney fees of $60,000 and costs of $4,905.07 to plaintiff after a jury found in her favor on her employment discrimination claim and awarded her damages of $11,490. Before trial, defendant had made a Code of Civil Procedure section 998 offer for $12,001 which plaintiff did not accept. The Court of Appeal ruled that the trial court should have compared the jury’s award plus plaintiff’s pre-offer costs and fees, with the amount of the 998 offer, plus plaintiff’s pre-offer costs and fees. Had it done this, it would have concluded that plaintiff did not obtain a better recovery. The Court of Appeal therefore reversed the portions of the postjudgment orders awarding post-offer costs and fees to plaintiff and denying post-offer costs to defendant. (C.A. 4th, October 3, 2018.)

Pagnini v. Union Bank, N.A. (2018) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2018 WL 5023812: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s order denying plaintiff’s motion for relief under Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b) after the trial court had sustained an unopposed demurrer to plaintiff’s complaint. The Court of Appeal ruled the trial court was obligated to grant relief under the mandatory provision of Section 473(b) where appellant presented a sworn declaration from his counsel attesting that counsel mistakenly failed to respond to the demurrer by timely filing an amended complaint. Defendants’ demurrer was effectively a “dismissal motion,” and appellant’s counsel’s mistaken failure to respond to the motion obligated the trial court to relieve appellant from counsel’s error. (C.A. 3rd, October 17, 2018.)

Elections City of Commerce v. Argumedo (2018) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2018 WL 5023813: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s judgment for defendant after a bench trial and its order denying defendant’s motion for attorney fees under Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5. Plaintiff sued in quo warranto (under Code of Civil Procedure section 803) to remove defendant from office claiming that his 2010 guilty plea for misdemeanor obstruction of justice constituted a conviction for malfeasance in office (as set forth in article VII, section 8, subdivision (b) of the California Constitution) that forever disqualified him from holding office pursuant to Government Code 1021. The Court of Appeal ruled that the record of defendant’s conviction did not unambiguously show that his guilty plea to obstruction of justice constituted a conviction for malfeasance in office. The crime of malfeasance in office evidences moral corruption and dishonesty, but a conviction for obstruction of justice does not necessarily imply moral corruption and dishonesty, nor does it imply conduct that occurred “in office.” Also, the trial court did not state for the

record the particular factual basis it found for the plea. The Court of Appeal also held that the trial court properly denied the motion for attorney fees because defendant’s defense of the action did not confer a significant benefit on the general public or a large class of persons. (C.A. 2nd, October 17, 2018.)

Employment Atempa v. Pedrazzani (2018) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2018 WL 4657860: The Court of Appeal modified part of the trial court’s judgment but otherwise affirmed it in a wage and hour action.

Defendant Paolo Pedrazzani (Pedrazzani) was the owner, president, secretary, and director of Pama, Inc. (Pama), which did business as Via Italia Trattoria, a restaurant in Encinitas, California. Following a bench trial, the trial court entered judgment against Pama and Pedrazzani for wage and hour violations. Pama filed a bankruptcy proceeding after the entry of judgment. The trial court properly assessed civil penalties, under Labor Code sections 558(a) and 1197.1(a), individually against Pedrazzani because he qualified as a person other than the corporate employer who either violated the overtime pay and minimum wage laws or caused the statutory violations.

However, because plaintiffs sought to recover the civil penalties under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA; Labor Code sections 2698 et seq.), the Court of Appeal ruled that the penalties had to be distributed 75 percent to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency and 25 percent to the aggrieved employees according to section 2699(i). The trial court’s judgment was modified to do this.

The Court of Appeal also affirmed the trial court’s award of attorney fees ($315,014) and costs against Pedrazzani. (C.A. 4th, September 28, 2018.)

Family Law R.B. v. D.R. (2018) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2018 WL 4927558: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s decision staying a California custody proceeding because India was a more appropriate forum. R.B. (father) and D.R. (mother) were citizens of India who were married in India. In October 2013, their only child, a daughter, was born in California.

In February 2017, the mother discovered that the father was involved with another woman and immediately left for India with the child. On February 11, 2017, in India, the mother obtained a restraining order giving her sole custody of the child. On February 24, 2017, in California, the father obtained an ex parte order giving him sole custody of the child. The trial court later held an evidentiary hearing under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA; Family Code, section 3400 et seq.) and ruled that: California had jurisdiction; California was an inconvenient forum and that India was a more appropriate forum; and stayed the father’s petition on the condition that the India custody proceeding go forward. The Court of Appeal ruled

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

9

that India was not required to have concurrent jurisdiction under the UCCJEA in order for the trial court to make an inconvenient forum finding, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in evaluating the inconvenient forum factors under section 3427. (C.A. 4th, October 11, 2018.)

defendant did not assert that it was prejudiced by the delayed notice of the insured’s disability, and there is no dispute that the insured was totally disabled within the meaning of the rider, the insured was entitled to the benefit promised by the rider. (C.A. 2nd, October 16, 2018.)

Insurance

Torts

Lat v. Farmers New World Life Ins. Co. (2018) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2018 WL 5004763: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s order granting summary judgment for defendant in an action by beneficiaries to recover life insurance policy proceeds. The insured purchased a whole life insurance policy with a disability rider where defendant agreed to waive the cost of the insurance while the insured was disabled if the insured provided defendant with notice and proof of her disability.

The insured was diagnosed with cancer in September 2012 and became disabled as a result, but she did not provide defendant with notice of her disability and made no payments on the policy after June 2013. On May 20, 2013, defendant sent a letter to the insured telling her the premium payments received to date were insufficient to pay for the coverage and warned that the policy would lapse and terminate if defendant did not receive a payment by the end of the grace period—July 20, 2013. In September 2013, the insured died. The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court because defendant failed to show any prejudice under the notice prejudice rule. Because

A.G. v. County of Los Angeles (2018) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2018 WL 5078749: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s summary judgment against plaintiff on the basis that he had no standing under Code of Civil Procedure section 377.60 to be a party plaintiff in a wrongful death action. Decedent died after an encounter with members of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. Plaintiff was the son of decedent’s partner who decedent had raised and held out as his own child. The trial court erred in ruling that the presumed parent, under Family Code section 7611(d), had no application to standing under Code of Civil Procedure section 377.60. The Court of Appeal ruled that the statutory scheme recognizes a presumed parentage for standing, and a non-biological parent can be a presumed parent. The Court of Appeal found that the record did not rebut the presumption that decedent was plaintiff’s parent, so defendants failed to meet their burden on summary judgment. (C.A. 2nd, filed October 1, 2018, published October 18, 2018.) n

10

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

WE DEAL EXCLUSIVELY WITH AUTOMOTIVE ACCIDENTS

160 Client Reviews

270 Client Reviews

125 Client Reviews

215 Client Reviews

Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum Member Client Champion Platinum 2018 Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent Rating 2018 Martindale-Hubbell A+ Rating Better Business Bureau

Referral Fees Paid

$120,550,136 We’ve won over one hundred million dollars for our clients in thousands of successful settlements.

OC Headquarters 611 Anton Blvd., Suite 925, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 (800) 410-0082 | www.DKimLaw.com

COMMUNITY news n Keller/Anderle LLP, a nationally recognized bet-the-company business litigation firm based in Irvine, has been selected to the list of “Top Boutique Firms of 2018,” as chosen by the Los Angeles and San Francisco Daily Journals, one of only 20 firms so honored across the entire state. Keller/Anderle was selected in the Commercial Litigation category in recognition of its success as a powerhouse trial firm. The Daily Journal “Top Boutiques” honor is one of the most coveted in the state for specialized “niche” firms. Literally thousands of California firms fit in the “boutique” category, including hundreds in the commercial litigation category. “We are honored to have been selected again as one of the top boutique firms in California,” said Kay Anderle, managing partner. “This recognition reflects the excellent results our attorneys have achieved in high stakes, complex commercial litigation. We have some of the most highly-honored attorneys in the state for a firm of any size.” n Intellectual property litigation attorney Brent Babcock has represented clients in more than 130 Patent Trial and Appeal Board proceedings, more than 35 patent interferences and dozens of high-stakes cases in federal district court.

Now, Babcock brings that 26-year track record of successful patent litigation experience to Womble Bond Dickinson.

Babcock primarily focuses on serving tech BRENT BABCOCK industry clients. He has extensive experience in USPTO trials and post-grant proceedings, including Inter Partes Review (IPR), Covered Business Method Review (CBM), Post Grant Review (PGR), and Derivation proceedings.

Intellectual Asset Management magazine has repeatedly named Babcock one of its top 40 attorneys nationwide for PTAB post-grant matters.

Babcock will head Womble Bond Dickinson’s PTAB Trials practice group.

In addition, Babcock counsels IP clients in pre-litigation, pre-interference and post-grant proceeding issues, as well as in federal appeals and patentrelated alternative dispute resolutions. He is a frequent speaker on postgrant proceedings issues and has been regularly interviewed by numerous media outlets for patent litigation and PTAB insights. n Bick Law LLP has been included in the U.S. News & World Report’s “Best Law Firms” list for 2019. The 2019 rankings are based on the highest number of participating firms and highest number of client votes received on record.

To be eligible for a ranking, a firm must have a lawyer recognized first in The Best Lawyers in America, which recognizes the top five percent of practicing attorneys in the U.S. Bick Law received a Tier 1 ranking for Environmental Law in Orange County.

12

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

ALAN BICK

n Easton & Easton, LLP has been selected by the LA Times as the 2018 Readers’ Choice for “Best Personal Injury Law Firm” in Orange County. Additionally, Easton & Easton was one of only 14 law firms selected as a “Tier 1 – Best Law Firm” by U.S. News & World Report for Plaintiff’s Personal DOUG EASTON Injury Litigation in Orange County for 2019.

Principle Partners Doug and Matt Easton were each recognized again among The Best Lawyers in America for Plaintiff’s Personal Injury and Product Liability Litigation. Best Lawyers® selects attorneys who have earned peer recognition through exemplary MATT EASTON legal work that attracts the notice of their colleagues. Additionally, Matt Easton has been selected for the third consecutive year among Super Lawyers’ Top 25 Up-and-Coming Rising Stars in Orange County and Top 100 Up-and-Coming Rising Stars in Southern California. This year, Easton was also featured within Super Lawyers magazine for the expansion he has spearheaded at Easton & Easton using advanced legal and trial technologies. n Aitken Aitken Cohn has again been named one of the 50 most charitable companies in Orange County. The Civic 50 Orange County is presented by the Orange County Business Journal (OCBJ) in partnership with OneOC and provides a “local standard for superior corporate WYLIE AITKEN citizenship and showcases how companies can use their time, skills and other resources to improve the quality of life in the community where they do business.”

Orange County honorees were determined using True Impact’s adapted national Civic 50 online survey that is independently administered and scored.

OCBJ and OneOC selected companies based upon four factors of community engagement: investment, integration, institutionalization and impact. From donating money and sponsoring events, to serving on the boards and offering free legal expertise, Aitken Aitken Cohn attorneys enjoy giving back and support organizations that provide services to those in need.

n Snell & Wilmer is pleased to announce that Daniel S. Rodman, a partner in the firm’s Orange County office, has accepted an invitation from the American Bar Foundation (ABF) Board of Directors to become a Fellow of the ABF. Membership in The Fellows is limited to one percent of the lawyers licensed to practice in the U.S. and its territories and to a limited number of lawyers in jurisdictions outside the U.S. Rodman serves as co-chair of the Firm’s Product DANIEL S. RODMAN Liability Litigation group. He is a trial lawyer focused on defending motor vehicle manufacturers and suppliers against claims of wrongful death or catastrophic injury, and defending companies in complex commercial and employment litigation in California and Nevada. He received his J.D. from Loyola Law School and his B.S. from University of Southern California.

Active in several bar organizations, Rodman is currently a member of the American Bar Association and the Orange County Bar Association. He has been a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers since 2017 and he is a current member of the Defense Research Institute. n Newmeyer & Dillion LLP is pleased to announce the addition of four associates, Patrick Hunt, Scott Satkin, Jasmine Shams, and Stephanie Talavera, to the Newport Beach office. The addition of these associates fortifies the firm’s commitment to provide unparalleled service to JASMINE SHAMS PATRICK HUNT our clients.

Each attorney has unique strengths that continue to diversify the firm’s approach to their clients.

In addition to serving clients in commercial litigation, Patrick Hunt served as a judicial extern to the Honorable Justice David A. Thompson. Scott Satkin SCOTT SATKIN STEPHANIE TALAVERA will support clients as it relates to cybersecurity and litigation.

Jasmine Shams will support the Labor & Employment group by leveraging her experience representing management throughout all stages of litigation before federal courts, state courts, and administrative agencies.. Stephanie Talavera will be a resource to the firm’s clients in the areas of land use and environmental law.

Have a Press Release you would like to submit for our Community News?

Email it to PR@AttorneyJournals.com Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

13

REFERRAL & CO-COUNSEL RELATIONSHIPS

Your

NEVADA

PER SO N AL IN JURY PA RTNE R

NEVADA’S LARGEST & HIGHEST RATED INJURY LAW FIRM Your

NEVADA

“Rick is one of the best lawyers in the country. I call him every time I have any issue in Nevada and would not hesitate to refer him any type of case ofPER anySON size.”AL IN JURY PA RTNE R ~ C. Michael Alder, Esq., Alder Law, Los Angeles, California CAALA Past President and Former Trial Lawyer of the Year

“I recently co-counseled a serious Las Vegas injury case with Rick Harris and his law firm. Rick’s advocacy and skills are extraordinary, and were instrumental in resolving and maximizing our client’s sizable recovery.” ~ Carl Wolf, Esq., Callaway & Wolf Northern California Super Lawyers San Francisco, California

© 2016 RHLF

We Do What’s Right for Our and Your Referred Clients IRVINE’S PREMIER FAMILY LAW FIRM • DIVORCE • SEPARATION • CHILD CUSTODY • CHILD SUPPORT • CHILD VISITATION • DOMESTIC VIOLENCE • RELOCATION

• RESTRAINING ORDERS • PATERNITY • POST-JUDGEMENT MODIFICATIONS • ASSET & DEBT DIVISION • SPOUSAL SUPPORT & ALIMONY

GENEROUS REFERRAL FEES PAID At Sullivan Law & Associates, we are dedicated to doing the right thing and taking care of our clients, first and foremost. We understand what your referred clients are going through and strive to use our experience in this complex field to provide the best possible representation.

Our Irvine attorneys are committed to excellence in every case we take on. Led by Richard Sullivan, a family lawyer with 40 years of legal experience, our team is here to deliver effective solutions by addressing every need and concern.

1920 Main Street, Suite 250 | Irvine, CA 92614 | (949)-590-8100 | Sullivan-Law.com

Personal Injury 2.0 RMD Attorneys’ High Tech Law Practice

by Dan Baldwin

A

fter only three years in business, RMD Law has established itself as a ground-breaking leader in personal injury cases in Orange Country. The firm’s energetic approach combines hard work, the application of high-tech equipment, tenacity and drive, and a joy at doing their work that is obvious even to the casual observer.

Partners John Rajaee, Aria Miran and Nicole Dolle provide each client with “three attorneys for the price of one” in a process they call “Personal Injury 2.0.” Practice areas range broadly, from simple dog bites to spinal and brain injuries to such leading edge arenas as self-driving car accidents. RMD Law differs from many PI firms in that they have the talent to litigate cases in-house and do not have to refer complex matters to outside attorneys.

The joy of helping people successfully get through some of their most trying times is evident in how they communicate with each other and in the way they practice. Miran says, “We are happy at work. We avoid the personality conflicts that can make other firms miserable. Our team is composed of inspired, intelligent, and, yes, funny humans who love their work and can’t wait to show up every single day.”

A Natural Evolution to Striking Their Own Path Years before forming RMD Law, Miran and Dolle worked together at another PI firm. They became instant friends who shared a dedication to the work combined with a playful spirit. Becoming partners at some time was a natural evolution. Rajaee is Miran’s brother-in-law and that relationship easily led to a desire to work with each other. In a very real sense RMD Law is a family firm.

That new path wasn’t without challenges. During their first eight months, business was conducted at Miran’s Irvine kitchen table with client meetings conducted at a Servcorp executive suite. They kept overhead low so they could focus on satisfying clients instead of buying “bells and whistles.” Today, the firm has eight employees: the three partners, a postbar law clerk, one paralegal, and three case managers.

16

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

JOURNALS

The RMD Team: John Rajaee, Nicole Dolle and Aria Miran.

LAW FIRM

OF THE MONTH

© christopher TODD studios

2018

“We opened a firm together because we have deep respect for one another and we wanted to strike our own path. That gives us the freedom to choose how we wanted to serve our clients. This was something that cannot come from working for someone else. You have to take a risk and hang out your shingle,” Dolle says.

Their 2.0 approach has proven to be an effective one. For example, the firm received a call late in the evening from a mother whose son lost his little finger after riding down a public slide in a city park. Miran and Rajaee rushed over to the parents’ house and sat with the family. Later they walked over to the park in the pitch black darkness to investigate the situation. All three partners worked with the family to make sure the child received the best medical treatment possible, that they properly filed with the city, and that they were able to make it to mediation. The mediator was convinced that they would not get their top asking value, and believed that even a great settlement would be no more than $400,000. Ignoring the mediator, they pushed forward. At the end of the day the city settled for $600,000, ensuring that the child had more than adequate compensation for his loss. The city was held accountable for its negligence.

Creating Personal Injury 2.0 The term “Personal Injury 2.0” isn’t a clever marketing slogan.

It’s a very real, time-tested process created to provide exceptional service. Through that process Rajaee, Miran and Dolle provide a number of advantages.

For one, as a young firm, they are filled with energy and drive. They are motivated not only by the obvious need to succeed as a business, but also to achieve results as representatives for their clients.

RMD Law takes pride in its ability to respond instantly.

Whether the case is a complex auto accident, a dog bite, or a simple slip and fall, all three partners can be instantly contacted by e-mail. Potential clients can expect an immediate reply.

This approach applies to attorney referrals, too. “Even if we have to investigate further, 100 percent of the time we will reach out to the client. No more referrals that go into a ‘black hole,’” Miran says. The firm’s main referral partners are getting six figures in referral fees annually. They have paid out more than $200,000 in referral fees. They sign 2-200 letters at the onset of the case, so the other attorney is involved from the get go. And they make sure all payments are on time.

The partners believe in intense preparation for each case.

Even seemingly impossible results can be obtained if the attorney is thoroughly prepared for the negotiation or the trial.

Achieving and maintaining the Personal Injury 2.0 concept required significant investment and the partners believe in investing in the best of everything from Class-A furniture to topof-the-line computer technology. The firm is totally paperless and highly digital. There is no cumbersome filing system.

18

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

Customized software does the busy work so the attorneys and staff can focus on doing what they do best—helping injured people get the care and compensation they deserve.

Personalized care starts from the initial client contact, which is always with one of the partners. The firm does not employ investigators. Clients receive individual text numbers, so that they can send us pictures, videos, or messages 24 hours a day.

A True Concierge Experience An example of how the firm provides that personalized service was in response to a call from a woman who was distraught and pregnant with her first child. She related the story of her husband who was killed on the side of the road after getting out to check his tires one evening. No other firm she had contacted was willing to take her case, assuming the husband to be at fault. The partners were eager to take on this difficult case.

Rajaee personally drove more than 100 miles to meet the client

© christopher TODD studios

and her grieving family in person and after sitting with them for more than three hours, decided to take on the case. After intense investigation they were able to find fault with the driver of the vehicle, enabling RMD Law to recover the full policy limits and obtain $100,000 for the family.

Rajaee says, “When a client works with us, they are truly receiving the concierge experience. We pride ourselves on making sure our clients are always taken care of 24 hours a day, seven days a week and I personally meet with each individual client myself instead of sending an impersonal investigator. We take the burden of the case and rest it on our shoulders so that our clients can simply focus on their treatment and recovery.”

The proof of their approach is found in the results obtained for their clients. RMD Law has settled millions of dollars in claims. Miran is a Multi-Million Dollar Advocate, and all three partners are Super-Lawyers rated. Each has been named Rising Star Super Lawyers, and have won countless attorney awards

such as The National Trial Lawyers Top 40 under 40, the Avvo Client Choice Award, the Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Award, the 10 Best Attorney Award by American Institute of Personal Injury Attorneys, and the 2018 Excellence Award by Lead Counsel. The firm recently was awarded a $2 Million settlement for a wrongful death claim and a $375,000 victory for a minor child who was hit by a vehicle.

“Nobody can touch RMD in the PI game, and in general hustle. When you’re really prepared and enthusiastic about your case, the process actually feels easy because you’ve done your homework and you are doing it right. Basically, we are high energy, and we truly get after our cases,” Rajaee says.

“End Result—We Ended up Winning.”

The typical RMD Law client is someone who has suffered some type of terrible accident and is in over their head—hit by a careless driver, bitten by a dog, or something striking from Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

19

© christopher TODD studios

left field while they were just minding their own business.

Suddenly, enormous medical bills pour in and the client experiences anxiety over how to cover the mounting expenses.

Rajaee is generally the initial contact who shows the client a path to recovery. He assures them that proper medical treatment is available, that the lawyers truly care, and that they will be professionally represented in the face-off with the insurance companies. The typical client is someone without resources who desperately needs someone to go to bat—real people in need of someone to help out on a contingency fee basis.

An example of a successful outcome involved a woman who had been told by other firms that her case wasn’t worth pursuing.

A former client, Megan S., says, “When I first spoke to Aria at RMD Law, I was at the end of my rope with a personal injury case I had been told by several other lawyers wasn’t worth pursuing. No one else was willing to take it on. Aria was honest with me from our initial consultation that it was a shot in the dark, but because he saw the potential he was willing to give it his best shot. It wasn’t long before he put the details together and called me to say, ‘Wow, looks we have a really promising case here actually.’ End result: we ended up winning. Beyond securing a successful outcome, the RMD Law team was great to work with. They were honest, which I appreciated, but also very reassuring, diligent, and communicative. Legal issues are definitely over my head, so it gave me a boost of confidence working with someone who could very clearly explain the 20

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

process and keep me in the loop on everything. They definitely made the process easy for me. Every time I talked to Aria on the phone, he was upbeat and optimistic, and he was kind to me while answering all my novice questions. Again, I’m not referring to the type of ‘blind optimism’ that makes you feel lied to—I’m sure if I didn’t actually have a case he would have been honest about it. Through the process, we talked about a lot of complex issues and he gave honest feedback but was extremely nice about it and I would get off the phone feeling like this person actually cared about me and my future.”

Miran says, “I feel like we are the lawyer version of ‘Shark Tank’—You’ve got three smart partners who really care about the outcome. Ideas come in and we debate all the benefits and drawbacks. We want our clients to have the absolute best, and we are always asking ourselves how we can deliver that. Our decisions aren’t driven by the bottom line, they are based on how well we serve the community and the clients who have trusted us with their cases.” n Contact RMD Law 19700 Fairchild Road, Suite 350 Irvine, CA 92612 949-326-5000 www.rmdlaw.com

Torri Sherlin Associate

Peter Maretz Shareholder

Adam Parry Associate

Jacque Godoy Senior Counsel

Providing Boutique, White-Glove Service to the Hospitality Industry Stokes Wagner, ALC Los Angeles, CA San Diego, CA Atlanta, GA Pittsburgh, PA Ithaca, NY

Tel: 619.232.4261 Fax: 619.232.4840 info@stokeswagner.com www.stokeswagner.com

Dedicated To Protecting Our Clients’ Rights Specializing in: • Employment • Catastrophic Personal Injury / Wrongful Death • Insurance Bad Faith • Financial Fraud • Elder Abuse

Awards • Two-time Top Gun Trial Attorney of the Year (OCTLA: 2015, 2017) • California Top 100 Trial Lawyer Since 2007 (National Trial Lawyers: 2007-2017) • Southern California SuperLawyer (SuperLawyers: 2007-2013, 2015-2018)

440 W. First Street, Suite 101, Tustin, CA 92780 | 714.953.1010 Donahoo.com

Richard E. Donahoo

Referral Fees Paid

Are You Suffering From Solo/ Small Firm Imposter Syndrome?

by Cynthia Morgan-Reed

U

ntil recently, practicing law in the private realm pretty much came down to two pathways: joining a Big Law firm, or becoming a solo practitioner/starting a small boutique law firm. Most attorneys who opt for the solo practitioner route do so because they want more control over their career. They want to determine how much they work, keep more of the money they collect, and have greater say as to which clients they serve.

While the solo/small firm life sounds like a better alternative to Big Law, there’s a downside that’s not often talked about in attorney profiles and at networking events.

It’s what I call “imposter syndrome”—many solo/small firm attorneys are not making very much money and are constantly juggling practicing law with running a firm.

A recent survey by the Thomson Reuters Solo and Small Law Firm group found some interesting statics from 301 attorneys practicing in firms of less than 30 attorneys.

Among solos, about two-thirds have annual revenues less than $200,000, with 28% less than $100,000. Only three percent of solos have revenues of $600,000 to $1 million.

In firms of 11 to 29 lawyers, about one-third have revenue of $1 million to $5 million, about one-third have revenue more than $5 million, and about one-third do not say.

Evaluating a “best case scenario,” each partner at an 11-person firm with revenue of $5,000,000 makes

24

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

approximately $454,545. Not a bad number except when you realize that is revenue to the firm, and not earnings per partner. After subtracting overhead costs, which even for a very lean firm may account for 20% of revenue, each of those attorneys is paying $90,909 dollars in overhead for a net revenue of $363,636. Less efficient firms’ overheads range from a third to half of revenue meaning that if the firm is not efficiently run, each of those partners could be taking home only half of their revenue or $227,272.

Many small firm attorneys are taking home half of their revenue because their overhead on office rent, equipment, personnel, and other expenses is high. Smaller firms who want to behave like larger firms and have nice offices and all the bells and whistles must devote a higher percentage of revenue to overhead since there are fewer attorneys to share the costs. A friend of mine who founded a seven-person firm recently admitted that he starts to get angry if he isn’t taking home “at least 50 percent of his collectibles.” Many attorneys are working harder, not smarter, than they should.

While a solo may have better luck in controlling overhead costs, after all, it’s just them; and they often don’t factor in their “lost hours costs.” Solos spend the least amount of their daily time practicing law: only 55% of each day.

Compare that to 69% of a day for lawyers at firms of 11 to 29 attorneys. Solos must spend more time managing the

firm’s operations and participating in business development to keep their solo engine moving forward. That leaves them less time to bill and generate revenue.

One way attorneys can work smarter is by investing more toward technology to streamline business expenses and duties.

Unfortunately, many solos and small firms do not have the money, or inclination, to invest in technology that can help them work smarter. The other answer is to reduce overhead costs. Getting rid of unnecessary expenses like office space, and practicing virtually, can greatly reduce overhead.

A business like Uber, the world’s largest taxi company, owns no vehicles. Facebook, the world’s most popular media company, produces no shows. They operate in a virtual space.

Such examples show that successful businesses of the 21st century no longer need to operate in a traditional manner.

In the case of law firms, many attorneys no longer need a regular office space where clients come to acquire their services.

The Internet and cloud-based software makes it possible to conduct business virtually and provide more efficiency and choices. As a transactional attorney, 95% of the clients who engage me do not meet with me prior to hiring me. I do not meet in person with 85% of the clients I advise; we communicate by email, telephone, text or video. Frankly, my clients are often too busy and prefer not to waste time meeting.

The future of business is changing, and solo practitioners/ small firms would be served well by taking a virtual approach and harnessing the power of technology to make their lives easier, more productive, and much more profitable. The virtual law firm model pays its attorneys more because there is less overhead. This is especially appealing to women who seek the opportunity to earn as much—if not more than— the standard 89% of their male attorney counterpart’s salary.

Minority and male attorneys who are seeking better income opportunities also benefit.

If you’ve chosen the solo practitioner or small firm route to practice law, ask yourself if you are working smarter, not harder. If you are not, stop being an imposter and start looking for a new business model. You’ve worked too hard to be trapped in imposter syndrome. The virtual road may be the solution to help you achieve freedom and flexibility while earning what you are truly worth. n Cynthia Morgan-Reed is the CEO of Vanst Law, LLP., a modern law firm that operates virtually and pays attorneys 70% of what they collect.

She practices in land use, real estate and lobbying transactional work.

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

25

The Lateral Attorney Transition

Two Tips

To Make Your Next Hire a Good One

by Steve Fretzin

A

nyone in the legal community knows that a popular method for growing business is to acquire laterals— successful attorneys who already have built a significant book of business. The idea is simple and straightforward: find a lawyer or group of lawyers with millions in business and acquire the business they control.

This is a proven approach that can and does help corporations expand exponentially, but how can you ensure you’ll have a successful lateral attorney transition?

Unfortunately, I can say from my 20-plus years of experience in recruiting, business and sales, that many law firms make two substantial mistakes when adding laterals to their firms, which can greatly hinder the success of the firm and the newly hired attorney.

First, the firms don’t properly identify, interview and select the best fit candidates. And secondly, there’s no specific onboarding process to ensure a successful lateral attorney transition. When added together, many firms are bringing in the wrong people from the get-go or finding the right people who are left on their own to figure things out.

As the popular saying goes, “If you fail to plan, you plan to fail.”

The good news is that I have two simple tips to share that law firms can employ to avoid costly mistakes.

Tip #1: Create a solid and thorough interview process.

When taking a case to trial, you probably have steps that you follow that have proven effective in the past. You may have even learned these steps from a mentor or someone who got experience in the process before you. Why not approach your interviewing process the same way? The future of the firm and the attorney being sought are both at risk here, so try these alternatives: • Get ideas and processes from the most successful people you know. This may include former managing partners, HR directors and even the recruiters you may be using.

26

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

• Create a specific series of steps that guides the candidate through the interview process. Start with a resume and online review (LinkedIn, Facebook, etc.) and move things to a phone call. If that goes well, continue the process, making each step gets you more in-depth information.

• Make the most of all the personnel assessment tests available, such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. There are some very sophisticated assessments that will help you understand the candidate’s behaviors, personality, intelligence and social skills. Use these assessments to weed out candidates who won’t fit your firm’s culture.

• Create “telling questions” that are open-ended to get the most from the interview. Have two to three highly successful and experienced attorneys or executives conduct the interviews to get a variety of opinions on the candidate. Running an interview in an unstructured manner will lead to a poor hiring decision every time.

Tip #2: Make sure you have a structured on-boarding plan for new laterals.

While many firms think that they have this in place as part of the lateral attorney transition, they don’t. I regularly hear stories of the million-dollar lateral that is brought in and then told, “Here’s your office and your phone, let us know if you need anything else.” WHAT?!

Your law firm has just made a huge investment in a new attorney, and your on-boarding process (or lack of it) can make or break a successful future for all involved. The right onboarding plan has multiple steps and details that might include: • Assigning one executive committee member to mentor the new lateral. This person would invest time over the first 90 days introducing the new attorney and making him or her comfortable with the team. This also helps get the cross-marketing efforts off the ground.

• Setting up a written plan for the on-boarding and training process. Creating a predictable and manageable plan for the attorney makes a world of difference. Most attorneys thrive when structure is provided. This plan would break down the first week, month and quarter of the attorney’s time as it relates to internal and external activities. The worst feeling is when the lateral has been around for 90 days and nothing has been accomplished to integrate him into the firm.

• Most importantly, it is critical to assist the new lateral in bringing over and growing his or her book of business. If they have sold you on the million-dollar book, that must be realized for this to work for both parties. Be sure to find external or internal training and support to get your new attorney off to a great start. Fretzin, Inc. can provide attorney coaching services, among other things. Everyone loses when originations that are expected aren’t realized.

Just one unsuccessful lateral transition can cost a firm significantly. This could be the million-dollar book that isn’t realized, the recruiter’s fees or the unbillable time that was invested and lost forever. The time and money lost for all involved is so unfortunate, given that it’s easy to avoid mistakes when you have the right plan in place. Having an actual plan and process can make all the difference and is the bottom line for firms that want to think more strategically than in the past. n Steve Fretzin is regarded as the premier business coach, trainer, and speaker on business development and marketing for attorneys. In addition to writing three books on legal business development, Steve has devoted 14+ years of his career to helping law firms and lawyers master the art of business development and branding to achieve their financial goals and the peace of mind that comes with developing sustainability in the legal space. Learn more at: https://www.fretzin.com.

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

27

6 Reasons Why Content Is too Important for Lawyers to Write

by Jim Bliwas

C

ontent is about the music, not the words. That’s why it is too important to be written by lawyers and other professionals. It’s not that you don’t know your stuff; rather, it’s that you know it too well. As a result, few attorneys understand how to explain something simply in a blog, article or even a new business presentation in a way that clients will understand both the facts and why it’s important to them.

A C-suite executive explained it this way in a focus group I ran once for a law firm client.

“I want to read about a dining room chair,” he said in response to a question, shaking his head in exasperation. “But they write blogs that explain six chairs, a table and a sideboard.

I’m sure they’re very nice but all I needed to read about was one chair.”

Whether it’s a blog, a magazine article, a website or the

28

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

executive summary to an RFP response, writing for clients is an art you probably didn’t learn in law school. How you were taught to write documents creating a merger or craft a filing for a judge or regulatory agency is the exact opposite of how people read, assimilate and remember information.

Flipping the Pyramid To do this successfully and thus attract—and retain—readers who could become clients, content must be written the way the brain gathers and sorts information.

Attorneys are trained in law school to assemble facts and stack them up one after another to draw a conclusion. It’s how a court, a regulatory agency or any business document needs to be drafted so that it is crystal clear and legally binding.

Conclusion Fact Fact Fact Fact Fact Fact Conclusion How Lawyers Write

How People Read

But for readers of a blog, an article in a trade or industry publication, or even a piece of leave-behind material handed out at a new business presentation, the pyramid needs to be flipped on its head. A reader needs to know the conclusion first and then see the supporting information. Journalists call it “the lead” and it’s what entices someone into reading the rest of the article.

6. A writer will put a forward spin at the end of a blog, so readers will know what they should do, including contacting you to see how they must adjust what they’re doing—or not doing.

Six Reasons Not to Write Your Own Content

There are many people who claim they can create content.

How do you sort through them all?

First off, find a writer with a background in journalism— especially business writing. They are accustomed to taking complicated topics and making them understandable and readable for people who need to know something about the subject but don’t care to know about the law. Second, the writer should have experience with lawyers and law firms, so they understand the dynamics of business development in the profession as well as what bar associations and law societies allow for ethical promotion of legal services.

Finally, find a writer who can turn out your copy in a hurry. We’re not talking about a Hemingway or Le Carre who fret over a single sentence for months. A blog isn’t The Old Man and the Sea or Smiley’s People. They should produce nearly-finished copy in a day or two. Just because you use a writer doesn’t mean that your voice or intent will be lost. What it means is that your blog, article or other material will be more likely to resonate with readers. n

You know about the law; writers know how to write. Here’s why your content should be written by people who are professional communicators.

1. A writer will put a different angle on something that’s been covered by the business or trade press so that you’re not giving readers old news.

2. A writer will distill your complex, technical and sometimes arcane information down to the understandable basics.

3. A writer will make your writing “sing” by using vibrant language, word pictures so readers can “see” what they’re reading.

4. A writer will construct the piece with a compelling “lead” so that readers will want to know more.

5. A writer will explain your ideas as well as the information, giving readers something to think about that will help them do their job better.

Finding Help

Law marketing veteran Jim Bliwas has spent most of his career working in and with law firms in the U.S. and Canada. He is senior marketing and communications strategist for Professional Services Marketing LLP, and managing director of Leaner Law Marketing Strategies. Reach him at Jim@PSM-Marketing.com.

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

29

Amp up Your LinkedIn Profile With These 10 Tips for Lawyers

by Bill Tilley

T

he new year is approaching fast and amidst the last-minute holiday shopping, you can be thinking of your professional goals for 2019. One of the best networking sources available is LinkedIn. Unlike other social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, LinkedIn is geared towards professionals, which makes it ideal for lawyers. It connects you with people that you may know through your course of business or other connections. Utilizing everything that LinkedIn has to offer can be extremely beneficial to your 2019 professional goals. Here are 10 tips for taking your LinkedIn profile to the next level:

1. Grow your connections. Send personal invitations to people you may know and tell them how you know them. Conventions and conferences are a great way to network and then connect via LinkedIn. You may be surprised at how many people know each other within your circles. Connections on LinkedIn are also great referral sources. Seek out attorneys that work in other fields than you practice and refer out cases outside of your field.

2. Use the Profile Strength Meter. LinkedIn provides several tools to help you understand how it works and get started. The Profile Strength Meter will tell you where to add more content and will provide an All-Star profile rating once the meter is full. Your search results discoverability will increase the fuller your profile is. On that note: your profile should be up-to-date, professional and free of spelling errors. Make sure to proofread anything that you write on LinkedIn and never publish an article without personally reviewing it.

3. Schedule posts frequently. Along with making sure that your profile is up-to-date, you should also get into the habit of publishing regularly. Use LinkedIn Publisher or an outside managing service like Hootsuite to publish content to LinkedIn and all your social media accounts. The more you post, the more visible your profile will be.

4. Make sure you have a separate Firm Page. If you haven’t already created a separate page for your law firm. Post to that profile page with relevant articles or updates about your firm.

Link to your firm’s blog and any social media accounts as well as your website.

5. Be aware of ethics opinions. As with all platforms, you should be aware of any ethics opinions issued by your state.

Steer clear of any potential conflicts of interest. Be very careful of listing yourself as an expert or specialist and make sure that others are not endorsing you in a field of law that you do not practice or listing you as a specialist when you have not been certified as a specialist. Pay special attention to state bar rules 30

Attorney Journals Orange County | Volume 153, 2018

concerning advertising and marketing and how they apply to social media platforms.

6. Toot your own horn. Don’t be shy about showcasing what makes you special. Add Skills to your profile, list certifications under “additional education,” add any special projects that you may have completed. Make sure to use your summary section to the fullest. This is the time to share what makes you unique, what makes you someone that a client would want to hire.

7. Get and Give. Send requests for recommendations. Get them from a variety of sources and make sure that they are people that would truly recommend you. Never post fake recommendations and make sure that the people you solicit for a recommendation know specifics about you. While you are collecting recommendations, make sure to dish some out. Be honest and detailed when giving recommendations and endorse other attorneys or field experts where appropriate.

8. Customize. Add media to your profile. Consumers are drawn to images and videos. There is no reason that your LinkedIn profile should be left out of this trend. Make sure you personalize your LinkedIn URL and all other areas of your profile. Where you can customize, do it. Use a call to action with your firm website links. Make people want to visit your blog. Utilize all the features that LinkedIn has to offer. Somewhat new to all the profile perks? Use LinkedIn’s Help feature to read through guides and information on how to get started.

9. Know your target audience. Design your profile to appeal to potential clients. Showcase your experience according to what a prospective client might be looking for. Know that LinkedIn is a great referral source, feature skills on your profile accordingly. Be sure that your profile is professional with a photo that is a good representation of you.

10. Pay attention to your professional headline. Avoid seeming unprofessional with a cheesy headline. Make sure it is clear and concise. Think about who is reading your profile and what you want them to know about you. It is your introduction to potential connections that don’t know you and are trying to learn more about you. n Bill Tilley is a visionary in the ever-evolving field of Litigation Finance, Law Firm Management and Legal Media and is more than just an entrepreneur, he is a leader in law firm growth and risk management. As CEO of Amicus Capital Group and Amicus Media Group, Mr. Tilley manages both firms’ day-to-day operations. Learn more at: AmicusCapitalGroup.com and AmicusMediagroup.com.

STATEWIDE

COLLECTION DEFENSE FIRM WE CAN ASSIST WITH: • Clients that don’t qualify for BK • Non-dischargeable debts such as student loans and fraud judgments • Commercial and consumer debt settlement • Judgment defense—everything from settlement to postjudgment enforcement and lien removal • Collection harassment • Collection lawsuit defense

Fitzgerald & Campbell, APLC 400 N. Tustin Avenue, Suite 375, Santa Ana, CA 92705 Office (855) 709-5788 | DebtorProtectors.com

Performance-Based Fees | Referral Fees Paid (Per CA State Rules)

PRSRT STD U.S. POSTAGE

PAID

Post Falls, ID PERMIT NO. 32