f/k/a archives . . . real opinions & real haiku

August 16, 2004

your right to haggle

Filed under: pre-06-2006 — David Giacalone @ 11:08 pm

 














too much$ flip


this world today–
for one chrysanthemum
a gold coin







 


spring rain–
in the window they haggle
over fish


 


spring rain–
in the wife’s sleeve
coins jingle


 







at the market
with all his might
firefly flits


from Kobayashi Issa, translated by David G. Lanoue  


breathless pundit





    • I guess there’ll no more haggling with the Curmudgeonly Law Clerk, who is moving on to post-clerking legal practice.  Thanks for the good work and best wishes!


    • Have you read Dowbrigade lately?  I just perused the Aug. 15 & Aug 16 postings and was informed, entertained and impressed (yet again) — from global politico-social analysis to a bad kitty on catnip.

to reform, inform

Filed under: pre-06-2006 — David Giacalone @ 10:38 pm

contingency fee reform is past due


We interrupt our poetry for a pet project: contingency fee reform.  Tomorrow, Point of Law is beginning a Featured Discussion where “Two of the nation’s leading experts on legal ethics, Lester Brickman and Richard Painter, will discuss potential ways to improve the legal system through reforming the way lawyers charge contingency fees.”




  • Despite it’s current haiku format, you’ll find much on the standard contingency fee at this website, as it has been an obsession of the Editor for years.  In the posting Suggestions for the ABA Contingency Fee Task Force  (Jan. 7, 2004), there is a good summary of ethicalEsq‘s position and arguments, with many links.

I’m no ethics professor or bigwig (I only play one on the net), but I think I know the very best and quickest way to achieve contingency fee reform: inform the public — let consumers/clients know (1) they can and should negotiate for a fair contingency fee; (2) [click here for the rest of this posting, ]


too much$ 


Update (Aug. 18, 2004): At Point of Law, Prof. Richard Painter makes very good sense with his New American Rule for Contingency Fees, originally described in this article.



“In essence, the New American rule requires the lawyer charging a contingent fee to say to the client in advance that “my fee will be X% of any judgment or settlement in this case but will be no higher than Y dollars per hour.” Under the proposal, the lawyer and client are free to agree on any numbers for X and Y that they want (subject of course to the existing provision in ethics rules and thus implied in the retainer agreement that a lawyer’s fees must ultimately be reasonable). . . .  [T]he lawyer who chooses to charge on a contingency must specify both X and Y. After the case is over, the client has the option of paying the lower of X or Y.

to reform, inform

Filed under: pre-06-2006 — David Giacalone @ 10:38 pm

contingency fee reform is past due


We interrupt our poetry for a pet project: contingency fee reform.  Tomorrow, Point of Law is beginning a Featured Discussion where “Two of the nation’s leading experts on legal ethics, Lester Brickman and Richard Painter, will discuss potential ways to improve the legal system through reforming the way lawyers charge contingency fees.”




  • Despite it’s current haiku format, you’ll find much on the standard contingency fee at this website, as it has been an obsession of the Editor for years.  In the posting Suggestions for the ABA Contingency Fee Task Force  (Jan. 7, 2004), there is a good summary of ethicalEsq‘s position and arguments, with many links.

I’m no ethics professor or bigwig (I only play one on the net), but I think I know the very best and quickest way to achieve contingency fee reform: inform the public — let consumers/clients know (1) they can and should negotiate for a fair contingency fee; (2) [click here for the rest of this posting, ]


too much$ 


Update (Aug. 18, 2004): At Point of Law, Prof. Richard Painter makes very good sense with his New American Rule for Contingency Fees, originally described in this article.



“In essence, the New American rule requires the lawyer charging a contingent fee to say to the client in advance that “my fee will be X% of any judgment or settlement in this case but will be no higher than Y dollars per hour.” Under the proposal, the lawyer and client are free to agree on any numbers for X and Y that they want (subject of course to the existing provision in ethics rules and thus implied in the retainer agreement that a lawyer’s fees must ultimately be reasonable). . . .  [T]he lawyer who chooses to charge on a contingency must specify both X and Y. After the case is over, the client has the option of paying the lower of X or Y.

for Dafur’s victims

Filed under: pre-06-2006 — David Giacalone @ 12:17 pm



 

 

the killer’s hands

    fold a paper

         crane

 

 




seen it all, done it all

         and now

        forgetting







pawn pawn horiz


by David G. Lanoue, from Haiku Guy (a novel). 


(Red Moon Press, 2000)  

 

 









it is!   it isn’t!

genocide – –

just stop it         

                  [Aug. 16, 2004]

 

red check smaller  Please join the Sudan Day of Conscience, August 25th (see NYT editorial; and passion of the present)


one-breath pundit  





Update on our July 17 posting:  Brian Breedlove, whose NY law firm is openly competing on contingency fees with its Fair Fee Promise ads, is hearing grumbling from other lawyers for “breaking the Holy Grail.”  Ethically speaking, he correctly concludes ,  “Nobody does it, but I think it’s required.” (Rocky Mountain News, On Point, Aug. 11, 2004)


for Dafur’s victims

Filed under: pre-06-2006 — David Giacalone @ 12:17 pm

the killer’s hands
    fold a paper
         crane

seen it all, done it all
         and now
        forgetting

pawn pawn horiz

by David G. Lanoue, from Haiku Guy (a novel).  

(Red Moon Press, 2000)  

it is!   it isn’t!
genocide – –
just stop it         
                  [Aug. 16, 2004]

one-breath pundit  

Update on our July 17 posting:  Brian Breedlove, whose NY law firm is openly competing on contingency fees with its Fair Fee Promise ads, is hearing grumbling from other lawyers for “breaking the Holy Grail.”  Ethically speaking, he correctly concludes ,  “Nobody does it, but I think it’s required.” (Rocky Mountain News, On Point, Aug. 11, 2004)

 

Powered by WordPress