Set in Style

The Internet Marketing Attorney surveys general counsel, and one of the results is this:

GCs expressed no consistent preference for the method of receiving newsletters or client alerts through e-mail or hardcopy. Some prefer the ability to take the hard copy home with them. Others mentioned the value in forwarding the electronic version to other interested parties in the company. Many GCs did note, however, that only the first newsletter or client alert in the door on a particular topic likely would get read, regardless of the form.

So, if you were just getting ready to write an alert about Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLP, or Cable Connection v. DIRECTV, or Peterson v. Cellco Partnership, don’t bother — unless, of course, you’ve got something to add to what’s already been said.

A CMO explains CRM to a marketing coordinator.

 Suppose that producing a Web site was something like going through boot camp.

Think about it! There you are, standing for inspection. Some big, mean-looking guy with a weird accent isn’t far away. He can find a flaw in any candidate at any time, and when he can’t, he gets very frustrated. When that happens — and it rarely does — the next candidate with the slightest flaw gets blasted like you’ve never seen before.

He’s getting closer and closer, and you’re getting anxious. You wonder, “Did I miss anything?”

Read the rest of this entry »

Have you heard yet of Google Chrome? It’s a new (beta version) of a browser built by the folks at Google.

“And that has what to do with law firm marketing?” you might ask.

Nothing. But the story does say something about marketing efforts and how alien they are to so many lawyers.

Read the rest of this entry »

You’ve been looking for information. You’ve not yet found exactly what you’re looking for, but things are looking up.

Why? Because Google just notified you of this article that seems to be right on point. The article was written by someone at a big firm that handles employment law matters.

Who knows? If you’re impressed with the article, you might just call up the author and chat.

After that, who knows? You just might ask for help.

Unfortunately, you click the link and realize the information is useless.

So, why bother to call?    

____________
Look! If you’re responsible for that article, if you want your firm to project the most positive image — if you want to be seen as really serious about client service — then the very least you should do is apologize. That’s right! Rather than say 404 NOT FOUND, say you’re sorry.

You published something. It got noticed by the search engines, and then it showed up when someone went searching for . . . who knows? Let’s say the search was on Palmer & Cay v. Marsh & McLennan and multi-state noncompete contracts.

Now, you claim that you’ve got a client alert about those very things, but you don’t.

Read the rest of this entry »

Marque Lawyers makes two interesting claims:

1. It is Australia’s newest law firm.

2. It has the world’s worst Web site.

Last year, I wrote this post about a federal court decision in which the registered trademark symbol was attached to every instance of one trademark in the decision, but not others.

“Why the heck would a court attach the symbol to a trademark in a decision? What an odd thing to do. Why didn’t they go ahead and attach it to all the trademarks in the decision?”

This morning, I happened upon the Press Room of the Altera Law Group, and discovered this:

“Now, why would an IP firm attach the registered trademark symbol to a mark that belongs to Adobe? What an odd thing to do. And why didn’t they attach it to the first instance of Adobe?”

Read the rest of this entry »

Today, two lawyers are showing up in the news because of what they wrote.

First is Melissa Ruman Stewart, a partner at Winstead PC who wrote an article about lawyers, competitive intelligence, and ethics that was published in the National Law Journal.

Second is Gregory Bartko, an attorney in Atlanta who’s married to a woman from Nigeria. Bartko wrote a press release detailing a lawsuit against Delta Air Lines because the airline wouldn’t let his wife board a flight to the U.S.

The press release is showing up in all sorts of places. And that’s good, because it takes attention away from Wachovia Bank’s lawsuit against Bartko.

Consider the following paragraph from this article published by Thelen LLP (the firm’s new name):

The origin of U.S. copyright law is found in the United States Constitution. Article One, Section 8, clause 8, which delegates to Congress the power to “promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.” Congress has passed and amended a number of copyright laws effectuating this Constitutional mandate, with the modern iteration being embodied primarily in the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. §101 et seq., and its subsequent amendments.

Consider the reference to one clause in the U.S. Constitution — Article One, Section 8, clause 8.

Notice that Section is set up, while clause is set down. One is set up and 8 is set as a numeral. If you think that’s the right way to set things, see if you can find an authority that agrees with you.

The second line isn’t a sentence; it’s a fragment.

Take a look at the third sentence. Constitutional is set up, rather than down. If you think constitutional is a proper adjective, see if you can find an authority that agrees with you.

Big deals? Of course not. But they suggest that the firm doesn’t review its own work — that it doesn’t pay attention to detail.

For a law firm, that can’t be good.

Steve Bennett, a partner in the New York office of Jones Day, has written an article titled “Communication Skills are Crucial to Success.”

It’s geared towards young attorneys, and it starts like so:

Law is a service profession. Good service depends on good communication. Good communication must be relevant, focused and timely.

Yet, law school essentially teaches future lawyers nothing about good communication skills. There are courses in legal writing and advocacy, but little about the day-to-day practice of law.

Freshly minted lawyers, as a result, often have poor communication skills. Such underdeveloped skills can, in practice, be as harmful to a budding career as lapses in judgment or even downright incompetence.

Let’s review some key aspects of good communication that junior lawyers should begin to develop in their first days of practice. These skills are enduring. No matter the area of practice, type of position (government, in-house or law firm) or size of the institution with which the lawyer associates, good communication skills will always serve a lawyer well.

Paul Horowitz, associate professor of law at The University of Alabama, offers some good advice to 1Ls:

Well, OK, it is a course.  But it’s not just a course. Don’t make the mistake of thinking that it is something separate and apart from your substantive courses — or worse, that it is less important than them. Effective legal writing is effective legal practice — both because good legal writing is good legal analysis, and because most of what you do as a lawyer will involve communicating clearly to others, either in written or oral form and regardless of whether you’re communicating with an adversary, a client, or someone on the other side of a corporate transaction. Moreover, mastering good legal writing is the best “strategy” there is for mastering your substantive exams: a great legal exam, in my view, is just a great legal memo written under unusual time pressure. So treat legal writing as one of your most important courses, whether or not it’s pass/fail, and do your best to internalize the form of the legal memo so that you can use it on your exams.