Lawyer Louisiana Attorney & Lawyer

It has always been the practice that a lawyer has his or her own unique way of doing things. However, it doesn?t go to show that law offices run in a more or less similar fashion. Most law offices share a surprising number of similar characteristics. These similarities could be in terms of how they do business. Or it could just be in how they run an office, which, despite its legal relation, is just like any typical after all.

For a consumer or a potential client seeking legal advice from a law office, understanding some of these common practices could help you get more effective legal representation.

The first thing you need to know about a law office is, as what was mentioned earlier, that it is just like any typical office. It ranges in size. A law office may be a sole practitioner where there is only one legal counsel offering his or her services for potential clients. A law office may also be a partnership, comprised of anywhere between two to three lawyers sharing the same office and the brunt of the work. Still, a law office may be a firm with literally hundreds or even thousands of lawyers at its beck and call. While all of them charge for their time in one form or another, there are some practical distinctions to keep in mind that can roughly be broken down by the following categories:

After passing the bar exam, a lawyer only has to rent an office space and hanging up a sign on the door indicating that he is offering legal services to start his or her own practice. Law offices by sole practitioners start in typically the same way. Thus, it is therefore not surprising that sole practices are the biggest single category of practicing lawyers.

Law offices by sole practitioners can offer you excellent lawyers. And often, it may be a good idea to retain their services if it makes sense, given the nature of your legal problem. Some of the potential benefits you can get from a law office ran by a sole practitioner include the following:

· Since the law office is only comprised of one lawyer and perhaps a clerk or two, you are entitled to pay lower fees and costs.

· If your case is small, a sole practitioner?s law office is the best choice since big firms do not consider these as cost effective.

· Because you will only be dealing with one person, the working relationship between lawyer and client is more informal.

· Conflicts are easier to handle since the law office handles few clients so fewer chances of any conflicts arising from the problem of one client that clashes with that of another client.

A law office ran by a partnership can be a formal one or informal. By formal, it means that the lawyers working in the same law office share the workload and share in the benefits reaped by one lawyer who won a case. An informal partnership is one where the lawyers are usually related simply because of the fact that they share the same office space and share in its rent. However, when it comes to benefits, to each his own.

This article courtesy of http://www.mentzlaw.com.
You may freely read this information.

Recall Information about lawyer

* Government Statistics on Legal Verdicts and Jury Awards - $ U.S. district courts terminated approximately 512,000 civil cases during fiscal years 2002-03. Nearly 20% or 98,786 of these cases were torts in which plaintiffs claimed injury, loss, or damage from a defendant’s negligent or intentional acts. $ Of the 98,786 tort cases terminated in U.S. district courts in 2002-03, about 2% or 1,647 cases were decided by a bench or jury trial. $ An estimated 9 out of 10 tort trials involved personal injury issues C most frequently, product liability, motor vehicle (accident), marine, and medical malpractice cases. $ Juries decided about 71% of all tort cases brought to trial in U.S. district courts; judges adjudicated the remaining 29%. $ Plaintiffs won in 48% of tort trials terminated in U.S. district courts in 2002-03. Plaintiffs won less frequently in medical malpractice (37%) and product liability (34%) trials. $ Eighty-four percent of plaintiff winners received monetary damages with an estimated median award of $201,000. $ Plaintiffs won more often in bench (54%) than in jury (46%) tort trials. The estimated median damage awards were higher in jury ($244,000) than in bench ($150,000) tort trials. April 2006 - A Jury in New Jersey found last week that Vioxx significantly contributed to a 77-year-old man's heart attack awarded him $9 million in punitive damages yesterday, raising Merck & Co.'s liability in the case to $13.5 million and intensifying pressure on it to settle such lawsuits. Example of Personal Injury Case 2004 : Ford Explorer rollover-prone and roof not crash safe and worthy- CASE TYPE : Product Design Defect, Auto Truck Vehicle - SUV, Motor Vehicle – Rollover CASE : Buell-Wilson v. Ford Motor Co., San Diego Co., Calif., Super. Ct. GIC 800836 Los Angeles, Calif. JURY VERDICT: $369,000,000 (369 Millions Dolalrs 2005 - In what may be one of the biggest massive medical malpractice tort verdicts in the state of Texas, a state jury awarded $606 million - including a remarkable $ 600 million dollars in punitive damages - to the family of an 82-year-old patient who had cancer and then who died after receiving an overdose of chemotherapy drugs. 2005 - In the 9th big loss for Ford in SUV Explorer rollover cases, a Florida jury awarded $61.2 million to the parents of an 18-year-old boy who was killed in a 1997 (wrongful death & Product Defect and Product Liability Issues) Example of Personal Injury Lawyer Case 2004 : Dodge Caravan seatback collapsed on baby in a car-seat - CASE TYPE : Automobiles, Products Liability - Product Design Defect, Wrongful Death, Motor Vehicle - Rear-ender, Motor Vehicle - Passenger, Motor Vehicle - Minivan CASE : Flax v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., Davidson Co., Tenn., Cir. Ct. O2C-1288 JURY VERDICT : $105,500,000 (105 Million Dollars 2005 – Billion Dollar Verdicts - In one of 2005's largest verdicts to an individual plaintiff regarding financial fraud , a Florida jury ordered Morgan Stanley Broker Dealer to pay $1.45 billion to investor Ronald O. Perelman for defrauding him in the sale of his camping gear company - Coleman. 2005 - February, a prominent Houston law firm and a Texas bank were SMACKED and Beaten with a $65.5 million verdict in a highly complex estate planning case that involved major problems and conflicts of interest. (65 million dollar jury award) 2005 – 3 years after a jury acquitted a company in Florida of manslaughter and criminal charges, a Florida civil jury SLAMMED the outdoor advertiser with a $65 million jury award verdict for the shock and electrocution of a sixth-grade boy. Age Discrimination - In December, a Los Angeles California jury found that PrivatAir - an aviation company focusing on private airline services - wrongfully fired Captain Doyle D. Baker on the basis of his age, defaming him in the termination process and causing extreme emotional distress.

Punitive damages serve a number of important functions which—despite a few horror stories, which are themselves either apocryphal or overturned in the courts, the functions remain valid and in the public interest. Persons causing great harm—persons deliberately or with gross negligence causing great harm should not view paying damages as merely a cost of doing business, a cost that might fit neatly into a risk analysis of wrongdoing. That is what happened in the Ford Pinto case in which the cost of paying claims to victims of a known deadly hazard was deemed less than the cost to retool the assembly line, and thus the hazard was maintained knowing full well that further people—more people would be injured or killed. This is the purpose of punitive damages, to punish this kind of egregious wrongdoing, and to deter, to be a deterrent to such conduct. It is not immediately clear why a deterrent—or the necessity of the deterrent should bear any great relationship to the amount of actual damages in a given case. There is nothing wrong and indeed something highly desirable in maintaining this disincentive to wrongdoing in an appropriate relationship to the harm and the conduct of the tort-feasor. This trend has led one commentator to suggest that ''[p]unitive damages have replaced baseball as our national sport.'' Theodore B. Olson, Rule of Law: The Dangerous National Sport of Punitive Damages, Wall St. J., Oct. 5, 1994, at A17. See also Malcolm E. Wheeler, A Proposal for Further Common Law Development of the Use of Punitive Damages in Modern Products Liability Litigation, 40 Ala. L. Rev. 919, 919 (1989) (''Today, hardly a month goes by without a multimillion-dollar punitive damages verdict in a product liability case.'').

Law Office