AN UNPLANNED EXPERIMENT IN CLIENT RELATIONS

Recently, several lawyers left our firm. As is always the case in such situations there is the question of which clients go and which clients stay. Most of the work was related to either insurance defense or tort litigation involving employees of corporate entities. As a practical matter, in those cases there was not really any issue of who went where regardless of how individual defendants might have felt about the change. Two of the lawyers, however, were involved in our vaccine injury practice which involves the representation of individual petitioners, as plaintiffs are called in that practice.

In accordance with bar guidance, an agreed letter was sent to each of the vaccine clients represented by these two lawyers. Clients had the choice of going with the departing lawyer, staying with the firm or seeking new counsel. The two lawyers were the only attorneys who had dealt with these clients and, as the process is a slow moving one, many of them had been clients for a long time. On the theory that clients hire and retain lawyers, not law firms, I did not expect that many, if any, of these cases would remain with the firm - at most we might keep a couple of matters.

I was wrong. Although there are still a few responses outstanding, a significant proportion of the clients opted to stay with the firm. For one of the lawyers it was about half. We kept more than we expected from the other one. We were happy about keeping these clients, but at the same time it was quite surprising.  Why would clients choose to leave the known lawyer they have had for an extended period for an unspecified new one?

There was no “smoking gun.” A few of the clients who stayed made comments about their cases moving too slowly. From a management perspective, I certainly tended to agree, but I also recognized that almost all clients in all types of cases generally feel that the legal process moves too slowly. From the client’s standpoint, such a view is understandable.

I cannot put my finger on any specific problems with these cases, but I suspect that the biggest lesson here is that client contact really does matter. Keeping the client informed, returning calls, responding to emails, as well as any number of other efforts, big and small, are vital efforts for any lawyer. From the time we start practicing, we hear this message all the time in various forms. It becomes almost like background noise, but the directive is critical. And let’s be honest: It’s easy to put off client interactions and most of us are guilty of doing so at times. We get busy and anyone who says that client discussions are not sometimes frustrating has likely never had many clients. Still, we should all remember that we avoid or ignore our clients at our peril.

Along the same lines, it is worth noting that the paralegals working on these matters likely had the bulk of direct contact with these clients. That is not surprising, nor is it necessarily a problem. As is often the case, many day-to-day actions fall to non-lawyers. More than the lawyers, the paralegals are often the ones who clients actually get to know. In this instance, I have to conclude that the excellent work of these individuals was a huge factor in the decision of these clients to stay with the firm. These paralegals will all remain with the firm – something the clients did not know at the time they made their choice - and I am proud to have them as my colleagues. Again, this is a reminder that a firm’s paralegals and staff have a huge impact on its success. That factor is hard to overestimate. 

Another factor is that firm identity probably does make a difference. In the last few years we have worked hard to develop a firm brand, especially in those areas involving individual clients. While it was not likely the decisive factor, neither can it be discounted. We were not just a “law office.” The firm is a distinct entity. 

Finally, there is a management issue here – and I have to take the hit on that. Lawyers like autonomy and none of us like oversight, myself included. However, I think we need to do a better job making sure we know what is going on in the cases the firm is handling. That did not happen here and as the leader of the firm that is my failing. It may be a cliché but it is still true: Unlike wine, problems generally do not get better with age. It is best to deal with troublesome issues by finding them sooner rather than later and then promptly taking the necessary corrective action.  

We have learned from this experience and I share this with the hope that others can as well. The bottom line is simple. Treat your clients like clients. They are our customers, the ones who ultimately pay our bills. This all sounds obvious – and it is – but it is easier to forget than one might think.