For example, LegalMatch’s article on Fayetteville, North Carolina appears to have generated the most interest so far in 2009.

Also extremely popular are articles about lawyers in Bell County, Texas, and Broward County, Florida.

As past blog posts have mentioned, many areas of law that prospective clients are interested in (wrongful termination, bankruptcy, etc.) might be indicative of the current state of the economy, so it is also possible that the geographic regions are also a reflection on the economy.

Common wisdom is that small towns and rural areas have been hardest-hit by the current recession. While a person is not likely to be able to litigate themselves out of poverty, sometimes, when someone has lost their job, or is facing foreclosure on their home, another party has acted wrongfully, and they are entitled to redress.

Another reason why smaller markets in general (not particularly in the South) are a rich source of pageviews might be the fact that there are simply fewer lawyers in those areas than in big cities. For example, if you do an internet search for “New York Lawyers” or “San Francisco Lawyers,” you’re going to get a huge number of results, simply because there are a huge number of lawyers in those cities.

On the other hand, in a small town, with the legal market dominated by small firms and solo practitioners, doing a search for lawyers in those areas tends to bring up a LegalMatch article.

This is good for both lawyers and prospective clients in those areas – prospective clients, when they do a search for lawyers in a small town, rather than finding hundreds of websites for firms that may or may not be taking new cases, they come across the LegalMatch page for that town, where they know that there will be lawyers who have affirmatively indicated that they are taking new cases.

Most Popular City and County Pages on LegalMatch is a post from: LegalMatch Law Blog

Well, one lawyer has found a way around all of this.  I can’t for the life of me understand how no one figured out before.  Robert P. Mangieri, 68, discovered a way to outsmart all us dolts wasting our time with education and training.  He found that you can just practice law without a license.  It’s so easy and obvious, how did years of attorneys not figure it out sooner?  No need to waste all that money and time on law school or endure countless hours trying to understand how that freakin’ rule against perpetuities doctrine works, just lie and say you did all that crap.  Then all you have to do is open shop, maybe hang up some fake diplomas, and start raking in the money from hapless clients who are too poor to properly check out your credentials.  And the best part is that you don’t have to do any legal research since you’re already lying about your competency or that you’re even legally able to practice law.

I can’t tell guys – was I laying the sarcasm down a little too thick in that last paragraph, or not enough?

As I mentioned in a previous post lawyers in America already have a bad enough reputation without yahoos like Mangieri screwing it up even more for us.  If he had attended law school, he would have learned that lawyers are subject to an incredible number of rules on ethical lawyering, which cover everything from proper notice to guidelines on fees.  Though chances are as a fake lawyer, he probably already knew some of these and chose to ignore them.

Do any of Mangieri’s former clients have a legal recourse against him?  You better believe they do.  Not only is the would-be lawyer being subjected to criminal punishments including grand larceny, impersonating an attorney, and conspiracy to defraud (all of which carry an incredibly light sentence of 4 years – way to deter people federal government!), but he’ll also be open-season to a plethora of tort claims.  The most obvious being fraud and maybe malpractice, but since he’s not officially a lawyer that latter one might not be so obvious.  Though as the saying goes, you can’t get blood from a turnip.  Despite Mangieri duping people into paying him money for services he wasn’t qualified to render, most of his clients weren’t very wealth themselves so Mangieri himself might not be worth so much.

But don’t let Mangieri’s tale fool you into thinking all lawyers are shysters.  Though you should always be sure of your lawyers credentials, according to the latest LegalMatch statistics attorney malpractice cases are among the lowest received.  So don’t be scared to hire a lawyer, just make sure they are actually lawyers first…

Why You Should Always Check Out Your Lawyers Credentials: A Moral Tale is a post from: LegalMatch Law Blog

OK, not really.

Frivolous lawsuits are bad. Just about everyone agrees on that, though there’s plenty of room for reasonable disagreement as to what makes a lawsuit frivolous. What we don’t hear about nearly as often are frivolous defenses.

According to the New York Personal Injury Law Blog a defendant in a personal injury lawsuit has sent a demand letter to a plaintiff’s attorney demanding that any reference to “pain” be deleted from the injuries claimed in a lawsuit because “pain is not an injury.”

While it’s true that physical pain is generally an effect of which physical trauma is the cause, the defendants here seem to forget that pain, in itself, can be debilitating. If humans were incapable of feeling physical pain, many injuries which we view as horribly debilitating would be quite trivial.

For example, if you step on a nail, you probably won’t be able to walk correctly for several weeks afterward, even if the wound were somehow guaranteed to heal properly, not become infected, and not cause any permanent damage. It’s the pain caused by such an injury which would make it debilitating.

Based on that, it’s absurd on its face to claim that pain is not an injury. Relatively “minor” injuries (minor in the sense that they have relatively little impact on a person’s overall health and lifespan) can cause severe, long-term pain, which impacts a person’s quality of life, and their ability to earn a living. From this, it seems absurd on its face to argue that pain is not an injury, in the legal sense. After all, tort law exists to compensate the victims of wrongdoing for injuries, and the “value” (really, the cost) of an injury is generally calculated through objectively observable facts, such as medical expenses, lost wages, etc. The cost of pain can, at least in part, be measured by a diminution in a person’s earning capacity, which is an objective measure.

Of course, we also award damages for “pain and suffering” in the abstract – and usually leave the decision of how much to award to a jury, which is the best course of action, as ordinary members of a community, especially those who might have experienced similar injuries, are in the best position to gauge what such an injury is worth.

According to statistics generated from LegalMatch case, of the tens of thousands of personal injury clients who came to the website over the past year, the overwhelming majority describe their injuries in terms of the pain they suffered, such as chronic back pain, neck pain, and headaches, as well as other difficult-to-quantify injuries such as insomnia and memory loss.

According to this defense attorney, have they not suffered any injuries?

Is Pain an Injury? is a post from: LegalMatch Law Blog

But there are some things that have always been viewed as important.  The necessities, you know, like making sure you have food to eat, a place to sleep, or clothes to wear.  Oh, and not getting arrested.

Getting popped by the police and hauled down to the pokey can be a traumatic event.  The only thing worst is actually being convicted and sentenced by a judge afterward.  This is usually true.  I say usually because even in this seemingly clear-cut territory, another one of life’s oddities can sometimes rear its head (I know, I know, I really need to cut back on the clichés).  Because for some people (probably the cool kids) as long as the conviction isn’t a felony than there’s nothing to worry about, right?  Umm… no, not right.  Oh, misguided cool kids, and to think I once wanted to be like you.

A misdemeanor is no laughing matter (there I go again).  Misdemeanor offenses range from vandalism to petty theft to narcotic possession and more.  Penalties vary from state to state, but in general a misdemeanor conviction can result in fines up to $1000, a year in jail, and/or community service.  And depending on the type of offense, you can also be ordered to complete a rehabilitation program or have your driver’s license suspended or even revoked.

But that’s just the tip of the iceberg (ugh, another one).  The negative byproduct effects of a misdemeanor can cause chaos in the rest of your life, as well.  Depending on the severity of the offense, a misdemeanor conviction can limit what jobs are available to you or even get you expelled from college depending on your school’s student conduct policy, not to mention the embarrassment of having a blotch on your otherwise clean record (last one, I swear).  The cost of contracting an attorney, though helpful in resolving a misdemeanor criminal case, can be high, too.

The sheer amount of conduct that can be categorized as a criminal misdemeanor is often confusing, as well.  Once again, laws and what is considered illegal vary from state to state.  LegalMatch has received misdemeanor cases for everything from skate boarding on school grounds to noise violations.  Though the vast majority of LegalMatch’s misdemeanor cases still involve drug and theft offenses, it’s important to note the caveat of obscure laws.

So what can be done?  A good way to keep yourself out of the big house is to stay knowledgeable about changes in your local laws, especially those that concern you or your particular industry.  You can do this by contacting your local city hall, law library, or do the modern thing and research on the internet.

What else can you do, you ask?  Well, you can also stay out of trouble by doing the most obvious thing and not commit well-established crimes, such as robbery.  Duh.  That’s you’re best bet (dammit…).

Demystifying the Misdemeanor is a post from: LegalMatch Law Blog

The media doesn’t help this image either.  For every Atticus Fitch, there is a multitude of Lilah Morgans.  It’s no wonder then why so many distrust attorneys.  With a reputation like that, who would ever want to deal with one, let alone be forced to hire one to represent them?

Though as bad as a Lilah Morgan can be, what hurts the image of attorneys more are the Lionel Hutzes, the incompetent lawyer who takes your money and does absolutely nothing in return.  This image is in many ways much worst then the evil money-grubbing one.  Chances are most people would rather have an amoral competent attorney than an amoral idiotic attorney.  Couple this fear with the terrifying prospect of actually being involved in a legal dispute where the only way out is to retain a lawyer, and you’ve just described hell.

This fear can be described in two simple words: legal malpractice.  This horrible phrase inevitably lingers in the back of the mind of every person who has hired a lawyer.  Because poor representation not only means you’ll likely lose whatever legal issue you’re involved in, but it also means that you’ll probably have to deal with the expensive headache of cleaning up your lawyer’s mess afterward.  Not to mention the additional nightmare of bringing a new lawsuit against your old attorney.  To some people, this prospect is enough for them to want to represent themselves rather than to retain a lawyer.

But is legal malpractice really something you should be afraid of?  Yes, it is.  But is it really all that likely to occur?  Probably not.

Legal malpractice isn’t as common as the public may think.  Lawyers are subject to constant scrutiny, from the court, their respective state bars in the form of continuing education, and their clients.  Furthermore, the process of becoming a lawyer is no easy task in of itself.  To be admitted into law school takes top grades and a high LSAT score, not to mention the three years it takes just to finish law school.

In fact, the total number of legal malpractice cases handled by LegalMatch.com in California alone is on average 50 percent less then the number of medical malpractice cases handled in just the northern half of California.  This statistic is true almost uniformly across the board.  Personal injury, family law, even wrongful termination cases on average total more in number than legal malpractice cases.  In a sense, it’s much easier to find a good attorney, than it is to locate a good doctor, employer, or spouse!

Trusting America’s Lawyers is a post from: LegalMatch Law Blog

In the past 12 months LegalMatch.com has been the destination for quite a few people looking for attorneys in their defective auto product claims. I decided to look at what injuries these products were causing, and here is what the data was telling me:

• Anxiety: 19%
• Difficulty sleeping: 14%
• Headaches: 12%
• Nausea: 4%
• Difficulty breathing: 4%
• Cuts and bruises: 3%
• Impaired vision: 2%
• Broken bones: 1%

A little while ago, we had an article debunking the myth that car accident lawsuits were a golden ticket to retirement. In reality, insurers fight these actions tooth and nail. Common injuries that do not exhibit obvious physical marks-such as neck and back pain-make a case more difficult to win.

This sage wisdom is relevant here because most of the injuries listed above aren’t visible. Maybe these folks have a perfectly valid warranty claim, but as far as product liability goes they may have an uphill battle. 

In fact only 6% of the above are the type of injuries that a doctor (and a jury) can see. The rest are based on doctor’s opinions and trusting someone’s word. Of course we all want to take someone’s word for it, but the insurance company that is being told to pay $100,000 because someone can’t sleep at night isn’t going to go down quietly. These plaintiffs should be ready for a fight.

Top Injuries from Defective Auto Products is a post from: LegalMatch Law Blog

I decided to take a look at the top types of injuries claimed in medical malpractice cases submitted to LegalMatch.com in the past 12 months. Here is what I found:

• Possibility of future harm: 34%
• Long term or permanent loss of physical ability: 29%
• Short term loss of physical ability: 15%
• Disfigurement or cosmetic injury:  13%
• Minor injury: 6%
• No injury: 3%

More than half of the above claims are potential cases of doctor discipline if the claims are taken at face value. This means that in addition to a malpractice claim, the doctor can be subject to punishment by medical licensing boards.

Unfortunately, the stunning reality is that hardly any of the medical malpractice claims won by plaintiffs will result in doctor discipline. According to a study by Public Citizens Health Research Group, of all the medical malpractice payouts between 1990 and 2004, only 5.4% of doctors were subject to discipline. Even worse, of those doctors who had three or more medical malpractice payouts to plaintiffs, only 11.4% were disciplined. 

Why does that matter? Malpractice cases cost everyone money. They raise rates and they clog the tort system. If more doctors were subject to discipline for their negligence in addition to monetary sanctions, perhaps we would see less malpractice lawsuits? It would be a double whammy for doctors; they might take discipline more seriously and they might not be able to continue to practice if their negligence is brought before the proper authorities.

In fact, maybe we can get rid of malpractice lawsuits altogether? Establish some sort of board that can not only discipline doctors but extract compensation from them, or from some general client fund (such as those run by many state bars to compensate clients, like in California).

Certainly all the categories listed above face an uphill climb to get any compensation for the simple reason that litigating malpractice claims is costly. The big winners in our current malpractice system are not patients or the medical profession-they are (surprise surprise) the lawyers. Let’s change the equation and make this about good health and good medicine, not making money.

Top Injuries Claimed in Medical Malpractice Lawsuits is a post from: LegalMatch Law Blog

There has been a lot of talk recently about the legalization of drugs as a means of saving tax dollars and cracking down on crime. At last week’s “Internet Town Hall,” President Obama was asked whether he thought legalizing marijuana could help improve the economy and create jobs. He responded with a blunt “no” while the audience laughed and applauded the President’s ability to be the same as everyone else.

Of course, no one is seriously considering legalizing meth as a means of dealing with the problem of methamphetamine abuse. But could legalizing other drugs such as marijuana help law enforcement and drug treatment professionals concentrate on this more dangerous drug? After all, statistics (and health concerns) prove it is clearly California’s biggest drug problem.

I have previously opined on the likelihood of marijuana legalization saving us billions of dollars, but what about this other possible side benefit? California Judges, Probation Officers, and Diversion Programs will similarly be able to concentrate more of their efforts on dealing with the startling fact that 50% of drug charges in California now deal with methamphetamines. By freeing up resources to better treat meth abusers and reduce recidivism and future abuse, we may also reduce incarceration rates and save the state even more money.

In a sense, legalization of one drug could have a domino effect on our state’s treatment of other, more serious drugs. Perhaps if President Obama had decided to answer a more serious question, we may have gotten something more than derisive laughter.

LegalMatch Data Shows Meth California’s Most Abused Drug is a post from: LegalMatch Law Blog

• LLC (limited liability company): 45%
• Corporation: 17%
• S Corporation: 15%
• Nonprofit: 9%
• Partnership: 8%
• LLP (limited liability partnership): 3%

Don’t they realize there is an impending war on the rich and on business owners?! That this country is going to be socialist before the year is over?!?! (OK, now I am really ending the sarcasm, I promise…)

All jokes aside, LegalMatch.com statistics support the conventional wisdom that LLCs are the most popular type of new business in the country. Limited Liability Companies are a relatively new invention, but a powerful tool if one wants to limit their exposure while running a business.

Are lawyers helping this increase? Lawyers typically operate LLCs when they form their own small firm. The tanking economy is affecting everyone, attorneys included, and more and more attorneys are looking to go it alone. Newly minted attorneys, thousands of whom are regularly churned out every year, are facing stiff competition in a vastly shrinking field. Business is so bad (or is it good?) that an online university offering courses on how to build and run a solo practice has recently opened. Because clearly, the best thing a recent law graduate can do is spend more money on school. (I thought I stopped being sarcastic?)

Obviously new grads aren’t the only ones going it alone; the vast majority may be experienced lawyers or attorneys with a year or two already under their belt. As more and more biglaw firms collapse, we may be seeing more and more fragmenting in the legal community. This could be good thing for clients and attorneys. More lawyers competing may mean lower fees for our services, and more new lawyers getting out of their biglaw basements and acting like real attorneys means more experience and possibly more options down the line. In every crisis there is an opportunity; is now the time for a change?

Top Types of Business Formations in Past Year is a post from: LegalMatch Law Blog

1. Give me general advice on how to proceed to protect my interests: 30%
2. Bring a lawsuit against the other party: 25%
3. Act as my agent in the transaction: 14%
4. Assist me in the remaining stages of the transaction: 13%
5. Other: 10%
6. Defend against a lawsuit filed by the other party: 5%

Thankfully, the vast majority of people are securing legal advice at the right time; i.e., before the deal goes down the tubes. Considering the fortune you are about to put down on your investment, it is always a good idea to get a legal assessment of a real estate contract, as well as legal advice concerning your rights and liabilities.

Unfortunately, 30% of people coming to LegalMatch.com have waited until something went terribly wrong to hire an attorney. This predicament is not unique to real estate. In almost every facet of society, lawyers typically do not get involved to prevent bad things from happening. They get involved once the mess has been made.

Now as lawyers we don’t always mind this. After all, we get paid to clean the mess up. And from a client’s perspective, not wanting to hire a lawyer until it is absolutely necessary is understandable. Attorney fees, even for an hour of advice and consultation, are expensive. (Arguably too expensive). It’s no secret there are also unsavory attorneys who will claim this or that needs to be done to try and milk even more of a client’s time.

For clients, however, the old adage that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure rings true. Solid legal advice before a big investment, a major business deal, or any significant endeavor can save lots of money, time, and anxiety down the road. One hour of a good lawyer’s time is a heck of a lot cheaper than one month.

Top Reasons Clients Seek Lawyers in Real Estate Transactions is a post from: LegalMatch Law Blog