What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Lawyer Thread Where We Stop Ruining Other Threads (6 Viewers)

read some zig zigler.
I don't need motivation - I'm still continually working on it. But I haven't gotten good at it yet. In the meantime, this other guy who doesn't know how to litigate very well wants to partner with me and he's great at it. Seems like a good match.
I'm not talking about motivation. Zigler will teach you how to sell, which is what marketing is. I'm great at getting clients, and it's because I have a background in sales. there are a lot of good lawyers. I'm no better or no worse than them. but most of them don't know how to talk to people or build relationships that result in business.
I will check Ziglar out, then. Thanks.

 
May seem dumb, but learning basic sales techniques like identifying and overcoming objections translates over any field of marketing. I work with a couple brilliant attorneys, but they're probably somewhere on the autism spectrum and they couldn't land a client if their lives depended on it because they have no idea how to talk to non-lawyers.

I spend as much time marketing as I do practicing law these days. I get paid the same (or more, since I get a piece of everything I generate). I'd rather be golfing and having lunch then hitting deadlines and writing briefs.

 
May seem dumb, but learning basic sales techniques like identifying and overcoming objections translates over any field of marketing. I work with a couple brilliant attorneys, but they're probably somewhere on the autism spectrum and they couldn't land a client if their lives depended on it because they have no idea how to talk to non-lawyers.

I spend as much time marketing as I do practicing law these days. I get paid the same (or more, since I get a piece of everything I generate). I'd rather be golfing and having lunch then hitting deadlines and writing briefs.
:goodposting:

I took some time to learn sales techniques since my first brief foray into private practice floundered and its helped immensely. Sounds like HF struggles a bit more in the outgoing personality department, but for me just simply learning things like: 1) state your price then shut up; 2)explain why if the potential client was your family member you'd encourage them to hire you or whatever, etc; and 3) tell them what you can immediately do in the short term to improve their legal position -- all helped immensely and my success rates for doing the up front consults soared.

ETA: As easy as that first one sounds - the state your rate then shut up - it's probably been the most helpful and the one I still struggle the most with. I want the sale and I want to help people. But suggesting without prompt that you'd work in a lower rate shows vulnerability and, inevitably, you'll either get talked down or work out a payment structure where you aren't going to get paid in full.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
-fish- said:
Yankee23Fan said:
May seem dumb, but learning basic sales techniques like identifying and overcoming objections translates over any field of marketing. I work with a couple brilliant attorneys, but they're probably somewhere on the autism spectrum and they couldn't land a client if their lives depended on it because they have no idea how to talk to non-lawyers.

I spend as much time marketing as I do practicing law these days. I get paid the same (or more, since I get a piece of everything I generate). I'd rather be golfing and having lunch then hitting deadlines and writing briefs.
I don't really have any problem once I get them in the door. It's just that I can't get them in the door. I'm not sure I've ever lost a client who had his/her butt in the chair in my conference room. I don't really know or meet many people, and that makes finding clients tough in my business.

 
I'm sure it can't hurt to read some sales stuff, but lots of lawyers just aren't the sales type. I consider myself pretty much the polar opposite of the type of person who enjoys sales. Meeting people doesn't energize me. I find it exhausting. Kind of like Henry, I think I do fine when their are certain parameters for the encounter already set. Tell me to come to a business lunch and I do fine. Put me in a meeting, and I'm probably better than that. Clients tend to find me honest and thoughtful.

But ask me to call a client out of the blue and pretend that I care about him or her as a person and it's going to come off as fake as a Ray Harryhausen film. I have a hard enough time showing my friends I value them as people. There are people I've known 20 years that I'm uncomfortable calling out of the blue to talk. I'm never going to be a natural at that. If I were to start my own firm, I'd probably want to partner with a guy who likes and enjoys that stuff.

 
I'm sure it can't hurt to read some sales stuff, but lots of lawyers just aren't the sales type. I consider myself pretty much the polar opposite of the type of person who enjoys sales. Meeting people doesn't energize me. I find it exhausting. Kind of like Henry, I think I do fine when their are certain parameters for the encounter already set. Tell me to come to a business lunch and I do fine. Put me in a meeting, and I'm probably better than that. Clients tend to find me honest and thoughtful.

But ask me to call a client out of the blue and pretend that I care about him or her as a person and it's going to come off as fake as a Ray Harryhausen film. I have a hard enough time showing my friends I value them as people. There are people I've known 20 years that I'm uncomfortable calling out of the blue to talk. I'm never going to be a natural at that. If I were to start my own firm, I'd probably want to partner with a guy who likes and enjoys that stuff.
This. Much better worded than I have been expressing it.

I really like gutting witnesses like fish. I'm really good at it. I can convince a true prospective client that I'm the lawyer for them in a heartbeat. But if I have to come up with a conversation topic out of the blue with a stranger, I usually start off with something like "Hats are weird. Am I right?" It's just bad news.

 
I'm sure it can't hurt to read some sales stuff, but lots of lawyers just aren't the sales type. I consider myself pretty much the polar opposite of the type of person who enjoys sales. Meeting people doesn't energize me. I find it exhausting. Kind of like Henry, I think I do fine when their are certain parameters for the encounter already set. Tell me to come to a business lunch and I do fine. Put me in a meeting, and I'm probably better than that. Clients tend to find me honest and thoughtful.

But ask me to call a client out of the blue and pretend that I care about him or her as a person and it's going to come off as fake as a Ray Harryhausen film. I have a hard enough time showing my friends I value them as people. There are people I've known 20 years that I'm uncomfortable calling out of the blue to talk. I'm never going to be a natural at that. If I were to start my own firm, I'd probably want to partner with a guy who likes and enjoys that stuff.
This. Much better worded than I have been expressing it.

I really like gutting witnesses like fish. I'm really good at it. I can convince a true prospective client that I'm the lawyer for them in a heartbeat. But if I have to come up with a conversation topic out of the blue with a stranger, I usually start off with something like "Hats are weird. Am I right?" It's just bad news.
One PI guy I know in my area strives to meet with physical therapists to establish a mutually beneficial referral relationship. That's just one idea. Again, "bad at getting clients" isn't a trait like being tall or athletic or fat. It's an activity/skill that you can improve on if you want.

 
I'm sure it can't hurt to read some sales stuff, but lots of lawyers just aren't the sales type. I consider myself pretty much the polar opposite of the type of person who enjoys sales. Meeting people doesn't energize me. I find it exhausting. Kind of like Henry, I think I do fine when their are certain parameters for the encounter already set. Tell me to come to a business lunch and I do fine. Put me in a meeting, and I'm probably better than that. Clients tend to find me honest and thoughtful.

But ask me to call a client out of the blue and pretend that I care about him or her as a person and it's going to come off as fake as a Ray Harryhausen film. I have a hard enough time showing my friends I value them as people. There are people I've known 20 years that I'm uncomfortable calling out of the blue to talk. I'm never going to be a natural at that. If I were to start my own firm, I'd probably want to partner with a guy who likes and enjoys that stuff.
This. Much better worded than I have been expressing it.

I really like gutting witnesses like fish. I'm really good at it. I can convince a true prospective client that I'm the lawyer for them in a heartbeat. But if I have to come up with a conversation topic out of the blue with a stranger, I usually start off with something like "Hats are weird. Am I right?" It's just bad news.
One PI guy I know in my area strives to meet with physical therapists to establish a mutually beneficial referral relationship. That's just one idea. Again, "bad at getting clients" isn't a trait like being tall or athletic or fat. It's an activity/skill that you can improve on if you want.
I agree. I'm just bad now. I used to be worse.

 
I'm sure it can't hurt to read some sales stuff, but lots of lawyers just aren't the sales type. I consider myself pretty much the polar opposite of the type of person who enjoys sales. Meeting people doesn't energize me. I find it exhausting. Kind of like Henry, I think I do fine when their are certain parameters for the encounter already set. Tell me to come to a business lunch and I do fine. Put me in a meeting, and I'm probably better than that. Clients tend to find me honest and thoughtful.

But ask me to call a client out of the blue and pretend that I care about him or her as a person and it's going to come off as fake as a Ray Harryhausen film. I have a hard enough time showing my friends I value them as people. There are people I've known 20 years that I'm uncomfortable calling out of the blue to talk. I'm never going to be a natural at that. If I were to start my own firm, I'd probably want to partner with a guy who likes and enjoys that stuff.
This. Much better worded than I have been expressing it.

I really like gutting witnesses like fish. I'm really good at it. I can convince a true prospective client that I'm the lawyer for them in a heartbeat. But if I have to come up with a conversation topic out of the blue with a stranger, I usually start off with something like "Hats are weird. Am I right?" It's just bad news.
It is good you are assessing your own capabilities before striking out on your own. Sadly, marketing is incredibly important when you go solo or start a small firm, unless you already have a large and stable client base. So weigh everything carefully.

My story: got out of law school and didnt really want to practice law--I wanted to be a literary agent. After clawing my way into an art and entertainment boutique firm, I eventually made junior partner but I was constantly outvoted by my more senior partner. It was very problematic and it sounds like you have some experience there. Eventually I left and was in charge of the IP practice at a 75 lawyer firm, where I eventually made junior partner but didnt really fit the firm business model. So I started another partnership with one other lawyer I thought would be a good fit, and after five years I went out on my own and it is great. But I had clients and I am good at developing more (I am Board President of my local nonprofit in the industry). Going out on my own made my monthly overhead nut drop from around $5000 to $1000, so I knew that even if my practice stayed static, my takehome would jump. And my literary agency is doing well.

Run the numbers carefully. And remember that running your own firm requires a lot of admin time. Unless you can afford staff or a bunch of contractors (you will obviously need some) you basically become tech support, webmaster, billing, office services, bookkeeping, etc. It is very entrepreneurial but if you are successful it is a lot of fun and you are in the drivers seat. If you are seriously contemplating this move, start paying a lot of attention to how your current firm operates and think about what you like or would change.

Best of luck.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm sure it can't hurt to read some sales stuff, but lots of lawyers just aren't the sales type. I consider myself pretty much the polar opposite of the type of person who enjoys sales. Meeting people doesn't energize me. I find it exhausting. Kind of like Henry, I think I do fine when their are certain parameters for the encounter already set. Tell me to come to a business lunch and I do fine. Put me in a meeting, and I'm probably better than that. Clients tend to find me honest and thoughtful.

But ask me to call a client out of the blue and pretend that I care about him or her as a person and it's going to come off as fake as a Ray Harryhausen film. I have a hard enough time showing my friends I value them as people. There are people I've known 20 years that I'm uncomfortable calling out of the blue to talk. I'm never going to be a natural at that. If I were to start my own firm, I'd probably want to partner with a guy who likes and enjoys that stuff.
This. Much better worded than I have been expressing it.

I really like gutting witnesses like fish. I'm really good at it. I can convince a true prospective client that I'm the lawyer for them in a heartbeat. But if I have to come up with a conversation topic out of the blue with a stranger, I usually start off with something like "Hats are weird. Am I right?" It's just bad news.
It is good you are assessing your own capabilities before striking out on your own. Sadly, marketing is incredibly important when you go solo or start a small firm, unless you already have a large and stable client base. So weigh everything carefully.

My story: got out of law school and didnt really want to practice law--I wanted to be a literary agent. After clawing my way into an art and entertainment boutique firm, I eventually made junior partner but I was constantly outvoted by my more senior partner. It was very problematic and it sounds like you have some experience there. Eventually I left and was in charge of the IP practice at a 75 lawyer firm, where I eventually made junior partner but didnt really fit the firm business model. So I started another partnership with one other lawyer I thought would be a good fit, and after five years I went out on my own and it is great. But I had clients and I am good at developing more (I am Board President of my local nonprofit in the industry). Going out on my own made my monthly overhead nut drop from around $5000 to $1000, so I knew that even if my practice stayed static, my takehome would jump. And my literary agency is doing well.

Run the numbers carefully. And remember that running your own firm requires a lot of admin time. Unless you can afford staff or a bunch of contractors (you will obviously need some) you basically become tech support, webmaster, billing, office services, bookkeeping, etc. It is very entrepreneurial but if you are successful it is a lot of fun and you are in the drivers seat. If you are seriously contemplating this move, start paying a lot of attention to how your current firm operates and think about what you like or would change.

Best of luck.
I had no idea you were a literery agent. I've often thought that might be the one career in the world that I might like and I'm actually qualified for. I have an undergrad degree in literature/writing and tried to pursue a career in writing before law school. Do you like it?

 
I'm sure it can't hurt to read some sales stuff, but lots of lawyers just aren't the sales type. I consider myself pretty much the polar opposite of the type of person who enjoys sales. Meeting people doesn't energize me. I find it exhausting. Kind of like Henry, I think I do fine when their are certain parameters for the encounter already set. Tell me to come to a business lunch and I do fine. Put me in a meeting, and I'm probably better than that. Clients tend to find me honest and thoughtful.

But ask me to call a client out of the blue and pretend that I care about him or her as a person and it's going to come off as fake as a Ray Harryhausen film. I have a hard enough time showing my friends I value them as people. There are people I've known 20 years that I'm uncomfortable calling out of the blue to talk. I'm never going to be a natural at that. If I were to start my own firm, I'd probably want to partner with a guy who likes and enjoys that stuff.
This. Much better worded than I have been expressing it.

I really like gutting witnesses like fish. I'm really good at it. I can convince a true prospective client that I'm the lawyer for them in a heartbeat. But if I have to come up with a conversation topic out of the blue with a stranger, I usually start off with something like "Hats are weird. Am I right?" It's just bad news.
It is good you are assessing your own capabilities before striking out on your own. Sadly, marketing is incredibly important when you go solo or start a small firm, unless you already have a large and stable client base. So weigh everything carefully.

My story: got out of law school and didnt really want to practice law--I wanted to be a literary agent. After clawing my way into an art and entertainment boutique firm, I eventually made junior partner but I was constantly outvoted by my more senior partner. It was very problematic and it sounds like you have some experience there. Eventually I left and was in charge of the IP practice at a 75 lawyer firm, where I eventually made junior partner but didnt really fit the firm business model. So I started another partnership with one other lawyer I thought would be a good fit, and after five years I went out on my own and it is great. But I had clients and I am good at developing more (I am Board President of my local nonprofit in the industry). Going out on my own made my monthly overhead nut drop from around $5000 to $1000, so I knew that even if my practice stayed static, my takehome would jump. And my literary agency is doing well.

Run the numbers carefully. And remember that running your own firm requires a lot of admin time. Unless you can afford staff or a bunch of contractors (you will obviously need some) you basically become tech support, webmaster, billing, office services, bookkeeping, etc. It is very entrepreneurial but if you are successful it is a lot of fun and you are in the drivers seat. If you are seriously contemplating this move, start paying a lot of attention to how your current firm operates and think about what you like or would change.

Best of luck.
I had no idea you were a literery agent. I've often thought that might be the one career in the world that I might like and I'm actually qualified for. I have an undergrad degree in literature/writing and tried to pursue a career in writing before law school. Do you like it?
Love it. If I didnt also love some of the art and entertainment stuff I do I would close that part of my practice and just be literary agent. It is a tough tough industry, though, because of all of the changes in publishing over the last 10 plus years. Agents essentially work on commission (15%), so you may have to read hundreds of manuscripts before you find one that might make money, and then there are a whole lot of constantly changing variables that go into whether it ever will.

 
Just don't go into the SS disability racket, HF:

Social Security Disability Firm Binder & Binder Files for Chapter 11 Reports Up to $50 Million in Debt in Bankruptcy FilingBinder & Binder, one of the nation’s largest Social Security disability firms, filed for bankruptcy protection Thursday night amid shrinking demand for its services as government scrutiny of disability claims tightens.

The Wall Street Journal previously reported that Binder & Binder had been preparing for Chapter 11 to restructure its debt. The firm listed assets and liabilities each between $10 million and $50 million in a bankruptcy petition filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in White Plains, N.Y.

Those debts include $23 million in secured debt to lenders U.S. Bank and Capital One Bank and $16.7 million in unsecured debt to Stellus Capital Management, a spinoff of investment firm D.E. Shaw & Co., court filings show.

U.S. Bank and Capital One Bank are prepared to lend up to $26 million in bankruptcy financing, filings show, subject to court approval.

Founded by brothers Harry and Charles Binder, the firm represents people seeking disability benefits from the federal government. It rose to prominence in recent years thanks to an aging workforce, high unemployment and less oversight than in the current environment, although it now must confront a shrinking number of people seeking benefits and tougher scrutiny from the Social Security judges who decide cases.

A number of the judges who paid high amounts of benefits in recent years have either been placed on leave or left the agency, data show. The agency has also tightened its controls.

People familiar with the matter have told the Journal that the Chapter 11 filing isn’t immediately expected to affect the majority of the firm’s 966 employees, many of whom aren’t lawyers, or its nearly 58,000 active cases.

In projections filed in court papers, Binder estimates its employee head count will drop to under 400 over the next two years.

 
I'm sure it can't hurt to read some sales stuff, but lots of lawyers just aren't the sales type. I consider myself pretty much the polar opposite of the type of person who enjoys sales. Meeting people doesn't energize me. I find it exhausting. Kind of like Henry, I think I do fine when their are certain parameters for the encounter already set. Tell me to come to a business lunch and I do fine. Put me in a meeting, and I'm probably better than that. Clients tend to find me honest and thoughtful.

But ask me to call a client out of the blue and pretend that I care about him or her as a person and it's going to come off as fake as a Ray Harryhausen film. I have a hard enough time showing my friends I value them as people. There are people I've known 20 years that I'm uncomfortable calling out of the blue to talk. I'm never going to be a natural at that. If I were to start my own firm, I'd probably want to partner with a guy who likes and enjoys that stuff.
This. Much better worded than I have been expressing it.

I really like gutting witnesses like fish. I'm really good at it. I can convince a true prospective client that I'm the lawyer for them in a heartbeat. But if I have to come up with a conversation topic out of the blue with a stranger, I usually start off with something like "Hats are weird. Am I right?" It's just bad news.
It is good you are assessing your own capabilities before striking out on your own. Sadly, marketing is incredibly important when you go solo or start a small firm, unless you already have a large and stable client base. So weigh everything carefully.

My story: got out of law school and didnt really want to practice law--I wanted to be a literary agent. After clawing my way into an art and entertainment boutique firm, I eventually made junior partner but I was constantly outvoted by my more senior partner. It was very problematic and it sounds like you have some experience there. Eventually I left and was in charge of the IP practice at a 75 lawyer firm, where I eventually made junior partner but didnt really fit the firm business model. So I started another partnership with one other lawyer I thought would be a good fit, and after five years I went out on my own and it is great. But I had clients and I am good at developing more (I am Board President of my local nonprofit in the industry). Going out on my own made my monthly overhead nut drop from around $5000 to $1000, so I knew that even if my practice stayed static, my takehome would jump. And my literary agency is doing well.

Run the numbers carefully. And remember that running your own firm requires a lot of admin time. Unless you can afford staff or a bunch of contractors (you will obviously need some) you basically become tech support, webmaster, billing, office services, bookkeeping, etc. It is very entrepreneurial but if you are successful it is a lot of fun and you are in the drivers seat. If you are seriously contemplating this move, start paying a lot of attention to how your current firm operates and think about what you like or would change.

Best of luck.
I had no idea you were a literery agent. I've often thought that might be the one career in the world that I might like and I'm actually qualified for. I have an undergrad degree in literature/writing and tried to pursue a career in writing before law school. Do you like it?
Love it. If I didnt also love some of the art and entertainment stuff I do I would close that part of my practice and just be literary agent. It is a tough tough industry, though, because of all of the changes in publishing over the last 10 plus years. Agents essentially work on commission (15%), so you may have to read hundreds of manuscripts before you find one that might make money, and then there are a whole lot of constantly changing variables that go into whether it ever will.
need someone to help read manuscripts?

 
I'm sure it can't hurt to read some sales stuff, but lots of lawyers just aren't the sales type. I consider myself pretty much the polar opposite of the type of person who enjoys sales. Meeting people doesn't energize me. I find it exhausting. Kind of like Henry, I think I do fine when their are certain parameters for the encounter already set. Tell me to come to a business lunch and I do fine. Put me in a meeting, and I'm probably better than that. Clients tend to find me honest and thoughtful.

But ask me to call a client out of the blue and pretend that I care about him or her as a person and it's going to come off as fake as a Ray Harryhausen film. I have a hard enough time showing my friends I value them as people. There are people I've known 20 years that I'm uncomfortable calling out of the blue to talk. I'm never going to be a natural at that. If I were to start my own firm, I'd probably want to partner with a guy who likes and enjoys that stuff.
This. Much better worded than I have been expressing it.

I really like gutting witnesses like fish. I'm really good at it. I can convince a true prospective client that I'm the lawyer for them in a heartbeat. But if I have to come up with a conversation topic out of the blue with a stranger, I usually start off with something like "Hats are weird. Am I right?" It's just bad news.
It is good you are assessing your own capabilities before striking out on your own. Sadly, marketing is incredibly important when you go solo or start a small firm, unless you already have a large and stable client base. So weigh everything carefully.

My story: got out of law school and didnt really want to practice law--I wanted to be a literary agent. After clawing my way into an art and entertainment boutique firm, I eventually made junior partner but I was constantly outvoted by my more senior partner. It was very problematic and it sounds like you have some experience there. Eventually I left and was in charge of the IP practice at a 75 lawyer firm, where I eventually made junior partner but didnt really fit the firm business model. So I started another partnership with one other lawyer I thought would be a good fit, and after five years I went out on my own and it is great. But I had clients and I am good at developing more (I am Board President of my local nonprofit in the industry). Going out on my own made my monthly overhead nut drop from around $5000 to $1000, so I knew that even if my practice stayed static, my takehome would jump. And my literary agency is doing well.

Run the numbers carefully. And remember that running your own firm requires a lot of admin time. Unless you can afford staff or a bunch of contractors (you will obviously need some) you basically become tech support, webmaster, billing, office services, bookkeeping, etc. It is very entrepreneurial but if you are successful it is a lot of fun and you are in the drivers seat. If you are seriously contemplating this move, start paying a lot of attention to how your current firm operates and think about what you like or would change.

Best of luck.
I had no idea you were a literery agent. I've often thought that might be the one career in the world that I might like and I'm actually qualified for. I have an undergrad degree in literature/writing and tried to pursue a career in writing before law school. Do you like it?
Love it. If I didnt also love some of the art and entertainment stuff I do I would close that part of my practice and just be literary agent. It is a tough tough industry, though, because of all of the changes in publishing over the last 10 plus years. Agents essentially work on commission (15%), so you may have to read hundreds of manuscripts before you find one that might make money, and then there are a whole lot of constantly changing variables that go into whether it ever will.
need someone to help read manuscripts?
Maybe. I have some people doing it, and that is actually how one breaks into the agenting industry. Shoot me a pm.

 
I mean sales people, consultants, whatever. Specialists that directly try to sign clients to firms who themselves aren't lawyers.

 
If you guys are board why don't you weigh in on the Phenoms debacle.

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=722689&page=28#entry17605434

Basically a guy running hundreds of leagues and holding the cash spent all the money. Made an announcement that he couldn't make end of season payouts 2 weeks before the season ended and will be declaring bankruptcy. In theory, are all the fantasy owners who signed up entitled to their money back since the business owner didn't have any way to make final payouts or does the fantasy season need to play out to see who might be entitled to any cash (yes pennies on the dollar). You guys are smart enough to get the point of what I'm getting at. We'd appreciate any input in that thread.

 
This isn't theoretical - dozens of people on this board will be looking for actual legal advice against another person on this board. I really wouldn't feel comfortable touching that.

 
  • Smile
Reactions: Zow
This isn't theoretical - dozens of people on this board will be looking for actual legal advice against another person on this board. I really wouldn't feel comfortable touching that.
The courts are going to make the decision. Surely a couple of you know if there's been any precedence in something like this. Obviously you can give a disclaimer that you're not offering legal advice. Let's say you had played in Tim's leet which got caught up in this, would you be seeking a refund from you cc company due to fraud?

 
This isn't theoretical - dozens of people on this board will be looking for actual legal advice against another person on this board. I really wouldn't feel comfortable touching that.
The courts are going to make the decision. Surely a couple of you know if there's been any precedence in something like this. Obviously you can give a disclaimer that you're not offering legal advice. Let's say you had played in Tim's leet which got caught up in this, would you be seeking a refund from you cc company due to fraud?
Bankruptcy is a different animal than anything most people think of when it comes to legal proceedings. Given that there is talk of the company filing bankruptcy the debate over what can be done right now is hard to deal with even if I were willing to because the rules aren't anything non-lawyers understand most of the time. And I don't want to get into an ifight with people just looking for answers or feeling like I am berating them for trying to figure this out.

I will say this though - the talk I have seen about how a bankruptcy would work hasn't been right. EVeryone would do themselves a favor not assume anyone posting about bankruptcy knows what they are talking about.

 
This isn't theoretical - dozens of people on this board will be looking for actual legal advice against another person on this board. I really wouldn't feel comfortable touching that.
The courts are going to make the decision. Surely a couple of you know if there's been any precedence in something like this. Obviously you can give a disclaimer that you're not offering legal advice. Let's say you had played in Tim's leet which got caught up in this, would you be seeking a refund from you cc company due to fraud?
Bankruptcy is a different animal than anything most people think of when it comes to legal proceedings. Given that there is talk of the company filing bankruptcy the debate over what can be done right now is hard to deal with even if I were willing to because the rules aren't anything non-lawyers understand most of the time. And I don't want to get into an ifight with people just looking for answers or feeling like I am berating them for trying to figure this out.

I will say this though - the talk I have seen about how a bankruptcy would work hasn't been right. EVeryone would do themselves a favor not assume anyone posting about bankruptcy knows what they are talking about.
I figured that was the case which is why I ask some of you smart guys to weigh in.

 
BassNBrew said:
Zow said:
That thread is a mess.
If only someone with numerous years education could straighten it out...
The issue is that as soon as a lawyer starts giving out actual advice to real people on a real case there's an argument that the lawyer has formed an attorney-client relationship (and, most importantly, the lawyer's malpractice insurance is probably on the hook). I recognize that oftentimes attorney on this board will provide some input to people which may look like advice but in those situations the information provided is usually broad and the facts are anonymous enough and no actual party names are ever used. In the case of that thread, however, there's a real named party with factual issues directly impacting the purpose of this board - fantasy football - and it crosses into a couple different areas of law with a much more broad fact pattern than the generic, "my landlord. owes me 500 dollar" type questions. These differences may not seem like much, but they're enough to where, I guess speaking only for myself but I would imagine others share the thought process, offering advice isn't wise.

 
BassNBrew said:
Zow said:
That thread is a mess.
If only someone with numerous years education could straighten it out...
The issue is that as soon as a lawyer starts giving out actual advice to real people on a real case there's an argument that the lawyer has formed an attorney-client relationship (and, most importantly, the lawyer's malpractice insurance is probably on the hook). I recognize that oftentimes attorney on this board will provide some input to people which may look like advice but in those situations the information provided is usually broad and the facts are anonymous enough and no actual party names are ever used. In the case of that thread, however, there's a real named party with factual issues directly impacting the purpose of this board - fantasy football - and it crosses into a couple different areas of law with a much more broad fact pattern than the generic, "my landlord. owes me 500 dollar" type questions. These differences may not seem like much, but they're enough to where, I guess speaking only for myself but I would imagine others share the thought process, offering advice isn't wise.
:goodposting: You'd have to be a moron to offer advice in this forum regarding that situation. And as BnB keeps reiterating, there are a lot of smart people in this thread.

 
BassNBrew said:
Zow said:
That thread is a mess.
If only someone with numerous years education could straighten it out...
The issue is that as soon as a lawyer starts giving out actual advice to real people on a real case there's an argument that the lawyer has formed an attorney-client relationship (and, most importantly, the lawyer's malpractice insurance is probably on the hook). I recognize that oftentimes attorney on this board will provide some input to people which may look like advice but in those situations the information provided is usually broad and the facts are anonymous enough and no actual party names are ever used. In the case of that thread, however, there's a real named party with factual issues directly impacting the purpose of this board - fantasy football - and it crosses into a couple different areas of law with a much more broad fact pattern than the generic, "my landlord. owes me 500 dollar" type questions. These differences may not seem like much, but they're enough to where, I guess speaking only for myself but I would imagine others share the thought process, offering advice isn't wise.
Ahh…so this one has you stumped.

Don't have time to elaborate now, but you know this is horse hockey. If someone makes the statement that a lot of non-factual information is being posted they can point that information out without offering legal advice.

 
BassNBrew said:
Zow said:
That thread is a mess.
If only someone with numerous years education could straighten it out...
The issue is that as soon as a lawyer starts giving out actual advice to real people on a real case there's an argument that the lawyer has formed an attorney-client relationship (and, most importantly, the lawyer's malpractice insurance is probably on the hook). I recognize that oftentimes attorney on this board will provide some input to people which may look like advice but in those situations the information provided is usually broad and the facts are anonymous enough and no actual party names are ever used. In the case of that thread, however, there's a real named party with factual issues directly impacting the purpose of this board - fantasy football - and it crosses into a couple different areas of law with a much more broad fact pattern than the generic, "my landlord. owes me 500 dollar" type questions. These differences may not seem like much, but they're enough to where, I guess speaking only for myself but I would imagine others share the thought process, offering advice isn't wise.
Ahhso this one has you stumped.

Don't have time to elaborate now, but you know this is horse hockey. If someone makes the statement that a lot of non-factual information is being posted they can point that information out without offering legal advice.
Look, several different lawyers have now told you that we feel we have an ethical obligation to refrain from discussing this issue on this board. If you want to call B.S. on that... I appreciate your expertise in lawyers' ethical obligations, but I think we are all going to stick with our own interpretations of the rules.
 
BassNBrew said:
Zow said:
That thread is a mess.
If only someone with numerous years education could straighten it out...
The issue is that as soon as a lawyer starts giving out actual advice to real people on a real case there's an argument that the lawyer has formed an attorney-client relationship (and, most importantly, the lawyer's malpractice insurance is probably on the hook). I recognize that oftentimes attorney on this board will provide some input to people which may look like advice but in those situations the information provided is usually broad and the facts are anonymous enough and no actual party names are ever used. In the case of that thread, however, there's a real named party with factual issues directly impacting the purpose of this board - fantasy football - and it crosses into a couple different areas of law with a much more broad fact pattern than the generic, "my landlord. owes me 500 dollar" type questions. These differences may not seem like much, but they're enough to where, I guess speaking only for myself but I would imagine others share the thought process, offering advice isn't wise.
Ahh…so this one has you stumped.

Don't have time to elaborate now, but you know this is horse hockey. If someone makes the statement that a lot of non-factual information is being posted they can point that information out without offering legal advice.
It's not that simple.

 
Ahh…so this one has you stumped.

Don't have time to elaborate now, but you know this is horse hockey. If someone makes the statement that a lot of non-factual information is being posted they can point that information out without offering legal advice.
This is the best part, doesn't have time to elaborate, demands detailed analysis of complicated fact pattern touching on multiple fields of law.

 
  • Smile
Reactions: Zow
BnB is good folks. I think sometimes though people don't understand how close the line is for you guys in this kind of setting when it comes to advice.

 
BnB is good folks. I think sometimes though people don't understand how close the line is for you guys in this kind of setting when it comes to advice.
I get that. But challenging the intellect of and outright calling BS on an individual, one of who you are asking for free advice from and who provides you with a polite explanation of why he must decline, is incredibly inconsistent with someone who is "good folks".

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BnB is good folks. I think sometimes though people don't understand how close the line is for you guys in this kind of setting when it comes to advice.
I get that. But challenging the intellect of and outright calling BS on an individual, one of who you are asking for free advice from and who provides you with a polite explanation of why he must decline, is incredibly inconsistent with someone who is "good folks".
I didn't say he was polite or particularly diplomatic.

 
BnB is good folks. I think sometimes though people don't understand how close the line is for you guys in this kind of setting when it comes to advice.
I get that. But challenging the intellect of and outright calling BS on an individual, one of who you are asking for free advice from and who provides you with a polite explanation of why he must decline, is incredibly inconsistent with someone who is "good folks".
I didn't say he was polite or particularly diplomatic.
Gotcha.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top