The Legal Intelligencer Blog

Another Candidate Responds to 'Not Recommended' Rating

By Amaris Elliott-Engel
Of the Legal Staff

The Legal reached one more Philadelphia judicial candidate after our print deadline passed for our story on the ratings arm of the Philadelphia Bar Association rating 13 judicial candidates as "not recommended."

Tracy Brandeis-Roman, who is running as Tracy B. Roman and who pulled the first ballot slot for Municipal Court and the second slot for Common Pleas Court, said this morning that she was "shocked and dismayed" by the "not recommended" rating. Brandeis-Roman said other lawyers with less experience were recommended, that she has more than 20 years of experience practicing law and that she is questioning the methods of the bar association. The full story can be read here.

Amaris Elliott-Engel can be contacted at 215-557-2354 or aelliott-engel@alm.com. Follow her on Twitter @AmarisTLI.

Is Your Headshot Telling the Real Story?

By Kimberly Alford Rice
Special to the Legal

“A picture is worth a thousand words.” We have all heard this over and again. The question I would ask is whether your headshot tells the story you want to tell.

As we work with our law firm clients on web development, social media, public relations and other business development initiatives, inevitably, the need arises for a current headshot. The pushback clients have for not updating their 10-year-old headshots (before color prints became the standard) usually goes something like this: “I was so much thinner/younger/taller/had more hair back then.”

Ultimately, it does not matter what you look like as long as it reflects what you look like today. To use and/or post a headshot that does not reflect your “current look” is to appear disingenuous or vain; neither a positive takeaway.

You may ask, what difference does it make whether you have a current headshot (taken in the last two or three years) or one taken a decade ago? Read on …

We are all visual creatures. Most people think and remember primarily through visual cues. And most people have very short attention spans. Giving people the right visual cues immediately is critical to getting their attention and gaining their trust.

People will likely notice your picture before they actively pay attention to what you have to say. First impressions matter (this is a one-shot deal) and they are almost always visual.

As our world (business world included) has evolved online and social media has mainstreamed into a powerful business development tool, it is no longer enough or productive to display an outdated headshot. You may be missing out on connections because of an inappropriate photo.

I’ll explain.

If you are engaged in active targeted networking and getting in front of qualified prospects, people you have met at these events may be looking for you on social media channels such as LinkedIn (Facebook has quickly become another social media channel source through which professional connections are made).

While it is less common on professional networks, some people still use pictures of things or animals instead of themselves on their profiles. If someone does a search for Susan Smith that produces multiple results, some of which are pictures of some random cat or outdoor shot, they will have to guess which profile belongs to you. Do not miss out on connections because of fear or insecurity of your current headshot or just complacency.

To alleviate your anxiety and support your desire to portray an accurate professional image, you may want to retain the services of a professional photographer. In our experience, investing in a professional headshot is well worth the cost. Moreover, with all the technological strides that have been made via digital photography, the actual cost is miniscule when weighed against the benefit of portraying your true image.

An appropriate profile photo should achieve a balance between being eye-catching and appropriate for your professional position. In the world of first impressions, there is such a thing as negative attention. Pictures that are poor quality or too casual can cast you in a negative light, which results in counterproductive marketing efforts. Avoid running this risk.

Ultimately, displaying and uploading a current, appropriate headshot accomplishes the following:

• Provides a visual of who you are physically – placing a face with a name and giving the viewer a sense of reference, which is so essential in today’s visual world.

• Provides the viewer with a personalized feel for you. Regardless of whether you have graying hair (which can tell the story of hard- and long-fought experience) or a scar down your neck (as a result of a childhood accident), everything about your physical features tells a unique story of you that becomes more alive when viewed.

A current professional headshot immediately communicates that you are a serious professional focused on building and growing your practice. A fresh and updated image gives you an advantage over the person who isn’t ready to hit the ground running. Do not to allow your personal discomfort to stand in the way of making that happen. Your marketing efforts will pick up steam and you will be glad you did.

Kimberly Alford Rice is principal of KLA Marketing Associates, a business development advisory firm focusing on legal services. As a legal marketing authority, she helps law firms and lawyers develop practical business development and marketing strategies which lead directly to new clients and increased revenues. Additionally, she provides career management services to lawyers in transition. She can be reached at 609-458-0415 or via email at kimberly@klamarketing.net.

Superior Court Declines to Reconsider PSU Insurance Venue Dispute

By Ben Present
Of the Legal Staff

The state Superior Court has denied re-argument in the appeal of a venue decision it issued in litigation between Penn State and its insurer over the extent to which the university may claim coverage for claims made by accusers of Jerry Sandusky.

The case, between Penn State and Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association Insurance Co., has turned into a protracted venue dispute, which, if you count the Superior Court’s April 25 order, has seen five rulings against the university.

The result, it seems, is that the coverage issues will play out in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas.

Penn State and PMA have been in court since January of last year after the first civil suit naming the university was filed by an accuser of Sandusky, the former Penn State assistant football coach and convicted serial child molester at the center of the scandal.

The litigation is over PMA's responsibility to provide coverage for Penn State's court costs and damages related to that claim. PMA, one of the university's general liability carriers for decades, first filed suit in Philadelphia in January 2012 seeking to limit coverage; Penn State has twice filed cases in Centre County, alleging breach of contract and other claims. Both have been steered to the First Judicial District.

Most recently, a Philadelphia judge directed Penn State’s second lawsuit, which was filed after the Superior Court’s initial ruling, to Philadelphia. Though it is not an injunction, Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Gary S. Glazer’s April 11 order appears to be its functional equivalent.

In a footnote to his order, Glazer said: "If the parties file any additional coverage actions involving similar underlying claims against [Penn State], they shall file them in Philadelphia County.”

Glazer also denied a motion for sanctions filed by PMA, in which the insurer asked the court to force Penn State to pay its legal fees and costs in connection with legal work on the venue dispute after the Superior Court had already ruled in PMA's favor.

Ben Present can be contacted at 215-557-2315 or bpresent@alm.com. Follow him on Twitter @BPresentTLI.

Watch a Documentary on Philadelphia Senior Judges

By Amaris Elliott-Engel
Of the Legal Staff

 The Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas has completed a modern twist on the judicial portrait: a documentary with interviews with the seasoned jurists. You can watch the documentary, which clocks in at less than a half-hour, here. My story, which includes blunt thoughts from three senior judges on mandatory judicial retirement, can be read here.

 

The Oldest Law Firms in Pennsylvania

In honor of The Legal's 170th anniversary, we will be publishing a special magazine later this year, covering both the history of the legal profession in Pennsylvania and our newspaper's history. With that in mind, we would like to provide an accurate representation of the oldest Pennsylvania-based law firms. If your firm has been around for more than 100 years, please email Ben Seal at bseal@alm.com to share with us the year it was founded. 

Superior Court Offers Refresher Course on Appeals Procedures

By James W. Cushing
Special to the Legal

The recent Pennsylvania Superior Court matter of J.J. DeLuca v. Toll Naval Associates, 2012 Pa.Super. 222, involved a large construction contract, alleged breaches of that contract and allegations of fraud over the life of the relationship of the parties in this case. Although the underlying case is interesting, the focus of this article is what amounted to the primer the court gave in its opinion regarding appellate practice.

After a verdict and an appeal and remand of the same, the trial court again calculated damages that were appealed again by both parties. On appeal, DeLuca raised a whopping 16 issues while Toll raised nine. When faced with potentially 25 issues raised on appeal, the court recalled U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Senior Judge Ruggero J. Aldisert’s statement in his opinion prepared in the case of Kenis v. Perini, 452 Pa.Super. 634 (1996), when he said, “When I read an appellant’s brief that contains 10 or 12 points, a presumption arises that there is no merit to any of them. I do not say that it is an irrebuttable presumption, but it is a presumption that reduces the effectiveness of appellate advocacy. Appellate advocacy is measured by effectiveness, not loquaciousness.” When reviewing DeLuca’s issues raised on appeal, the court further observed that they often overlapped with one another and were inconsistently numbered and lettered.

Some of DeLuca’s arguments regarded the sums of money paid by Toll at one point during the matter. Despite DeLuca’s taking the time to make the arguments, they had virtually no references to places in the record to support their claims. The court noted that Pa.R.A.P. 2119(c) requires references made to pleadings and evidence and such to be specifically cited to in the record. Indeed, the court, citing Commonwealth v. Imes, 603 Pa. 680 (2009), specifically said it would not “scour the record to find the evidence to support an argument.” As a result, the insufficiently cited claims were deemed waived by the court.

The subsequent argument raised by DeLuca presented a conclusory statement without any supporting authority and was therefore deemed waived by the court. DeLuca’s next argument was quickly deemed “demonstrably incorrect” by the court when compared to the clear testimony of the record. DeLuca’s argument after that was also deemed waived because “DeLuca has failed to develop an argument in support of its … claim, and offers no authority at all to support it.” DeLuca also proposed an argument based on the statute of limitations. The court ruled this argument, too, was waived, as “DeLuca [did] not present any citation to the record to support its claim, or to show where Toll’s evidence was deficient.”

Indeed, another of its arguments was dismissed because DeLuca offered “no other substantiation or explanation” aside from a bald assertion offering “no other support of its claim,” not to mention that it “fail[ed] to present or develop an independent argument in support of its claim.” Furthermore, the court noted that DeLuca’s arguments did “nothing to refute the trial court’s findings.” When reviewing DeLuca’s arguments regarding punitive damages, the court indicated that they were “incomplete” and ignored certain issues and/or merely “incorrectly assumed it would prevail on its assertion[s].” The court also believed that DeLuca “misapprehend[ed the court’s] standard of review” and misapplied (or misunderstood) certain constitutional requirements.

As stated above, the Superior Court’s decision is useful as guidance on what to do (or not do) when filing an appeal. First, when filing an appeal, make the issues on appeal concise, specific and clear, as opposed to sprawling, numerous and repetitive. Second, be sure to cite to the record at all times whenever possible, as the court will not do your work for you in this regard. Third, and this seems quite obvious, one’s arguments must be fully developed, based on the facts and evidence available, supported by authority and the record, consistent with the law and clearly explained and articulated to the court.

James W. Cushing is an associate at the Law Office of Faye Riva Cohen and research attorney for Legal Research Inc. He is licensed to practice law in both Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

10 Law Firm Management and Marketing Tips from GCs

By Gina F. Rubel
Special to the Legal

At this year’s Legal Marketing Association International Conference, several GCs shared tips for winning and maintaining law firm relationships with big business. The panel of general counsel discussed best practices law firms need to implement to get their companies’ legal business and foster long-term relations with in-house counsel.

Here’s what they had to say, shared through the tweets of attendees:

“Law firms must invest in leadership training and professional development for their lawyers.” -Tammy Mangan

“Lawyers need to understand their corporate clients’ pressures, billing deadlines, business and growth objectives, financials, accounting calendar and more.” - Lindsay Griffith

“Lawyers who don't routinely read their clients' public filings have bigger problems than marketing.” – Jonathan Ezor

“Don’t send email alerts about law changes a week after they happen. GCs all read The Wall Street Journal.” – Nancy Myrland

“Law firm clients communicate in a variety of media. Don’t always assume email is the easiest, most efficient way to communicate. Sometimes a simple phone call is the way to go.” - Jill Clark Rako

“In-house lawyers never pick a law firm because they have a great social media presence but they love and use timely blogs and use LinkedIn for validating outside counsel.” - Adrian Dayton

“Law firm billing must be reviewed internally before sending an invoice to a client. One of the worst things that can happen is to have to review and redact incorrect bills. For outside counsel, pay attention to billing guidelines.” – Sheenika Shah

“The corporate client’s job is not to ensure that the lawyer hits the threshold of their minimal billable hour.” – Heather Morse

“In-house attorneys call around to ask each other who the go-to firms are in specific areas. They do refer their colleagues to lawyers and firms they like.” – Nancy Myrland

“The role of the outside lawyer should be a strategic partnership. There is no longer room for ‘back room lawyering.’ Businesses need business partners.” – Shelly Swanson

The program was moderated by Tom Duggan, group publisher of InsideCounsel and Cate Flahardy, editor-in-chief of InsideCounsel. The panelists included Megan Belcher, vice president and chief employment counsel of ConAgra Foods Inc.; Kevin M. Schubert, associate general counsel – transactions, Las Vegas Sands Corp.; Simon Manoucherian, assistant general counsel, director of litigation, GRIFOLS; and Karen Cottle, senior counsel, Sidley Austin (former SVP, GC and corporate secretary of Adobe Systems Inc.).

Gina F. Rubel is the owner of Furia Rubel Communications, a strategic marketing and public relations agency with a niche in legal marketing. A former trial attorney, she is the author of Everyday Public Relations for Lawyers. Rubel and her agency have won many awards for legal communications, PR, media relations, website and graphic design, strategic planning, corporate philanthropy and leadership. She maintains a blog, is a contributor to National Law Review, The Legal Intelligencer Blog, AVVO Lawyernomics and The Huffington Post. You can find her on LinkedIn or follow her on Twitter. For more information, go to www.FuriaRubel.com.

Nelson Levine Hires Nationwide Senior Vice President

By Zack Needles
Of the Legal Staff

Blue Bell, Pa.-based insurance law firm Nelson Levine de Luca & Hamilton has added Thomas W. Dietrich, the former senior vice president and deputy general counsel of Nationwide Insurance Companies, to the insurance regulation practice in its Columbus, Ohio, office.

Dietrich joins the firm as of counsel, but will also serve as a member of the executive team.

“Tom knows the insurance industry inside and out," Nelson Levine Chairman Mike Nelson said in a press release. "His insider's perspective – combined with the knowledge and experience of other insurance experts at Nelson Levine – will no doubt provide insurers confronting the evolving regulatory landscape with unmatched insight.”

Dietrich, who worked for Nationwide for 40 years, focuses his practice on advising clients on their business practices as they relate to the rapidly changing regulatory landscape.

Zack Needles can be contacted at 215-557-2493 or zneedles@alm.com. Follow him on Twitter @ZNeedlesTLI.

Make It Easier for Clients to Choose Their Lawyer

By Barbara S. Kaplan
Special to the Legal

We learned that Christopher Columbus refuted the prevailing belief that the world was flat.

However, if he were here today, we could prove him wrong.

The Internet gives us free access to information. It’s very democratic. There are no barriers to entry. This is a critical paradigm shift from the days when a seller or provider of services held the power because they had access to and were keepers of information that those who purchased from them didn’t have and couldn’t acquire. In today’s world, clients and customers often know as much, if not more, than those with whom they transact.

Because we all have access to the same content, the world has become flat. There is a leveling of power. We live in a buyer’s market. Purchasers have more choices than ever before and often call the shots. With this phenomenon comes a decrease in loyalty. Purchasers negotiate on their own terms. It is not about what you are selling; it is about what they are buying.

How often is it that we pump our own gas, buy books, plan our vacations, and apply for loans online? We go to a car dealership knowing what we want. We go to the Apple store set on the iPhone we have already determined meets our needs. More and more, purchases take place one-on-one. We find the best deal because we can.

What does this have to do with the legal marketplace? Attorney bios (proven to be the first stop for those searching for a lawyer), websites, microsites, LinkedIn and other social media, rankings, ratings, referrals and recommendations, and opportunities to examine results and compare and contrast have changed the conversation and the way we need to connect with clients. Clients don’t have trouble finding lawyers. They have trouble choosing one.

It has always been about putting the client first, providing outstanding client service and earning client satisfaction. Now, however, lawyers have to come to clients and prospects with a stable of well-honed client development skills that make them unique and enable them to distinguish themselves by building a special kind of relationship.

How will you stand out? How will you be the one who is chosen?

Here are some action steps that will move you toward making a new kind of connection:

• Go into each meeting with a trio of powerful questions. Ask open-ended questions that let you unpeel the onion to get to the core of the thought, for this is where real business development conversations take place. Open-ended questions get you to concerns, motivations and pain points. When you plan your questions in advance, it’s far easier to have the conversation.
• Listen more. Talk less. Listen more than 50 percent of the time.
• Make the client your friend. Connections are often a combination of the personal and the professional.
• Probe for your prospect’s perception of “value.” What are the factors upon which you will be evaluated beyond the givens? What will help you exceed expectations in order to be memorable and engender loyalty?
• Steer the conversation so it is always about the client. They know about you. You want to know about them.

Everyone can do this. There is no one right way. Know your strengths, play to your strengths and take advantage of your strengths.

Barbara S. Kaplan is the principal of BSK Strategies, a firm working with lawyers and law firms to hone their business development skills, target and win higher-value work, and earn client satisfaction and loyalty.

Schnader Harrison Hires Former UPMC CLO

By Gina Passarella
Of the Legal Staff

Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis has hired Robert J. Cindrich as counsel in its Pittsburgh office. The former U.S. attorney, judge and chief legal officer of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center is joining the firm from a health care consulting company he created in 2010. Along with his role at Schnader Harrison, Cindrich will maintain his duties as president of Cindrich Consulting.

Cindrich will work in Schnader Harrison’s business services and litigation departments, the firm said. “We are honored that Judge Cindrich has joined us. His experience as a litigator, judge and counsel for one of Pittsburgh’s leading health enterprises will be an invaluable addition to Schnader and our clients," Schnader Harrison Chairman David Smith said in a statement.

Cindrich opened his own health care consulting company, Cindrich Consulting, in 2010 after serving as senior adviser to the president, senior vice president and chief legal officer of UPMC, beginning in 2004. In those roles, Cindrich advised UPMC's senior management and board of directors on key corporate governance, strategic business issues and biosecurity initiatives.

Prior to joining UPMC, Cindrich served on the bench of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania beginning in 1994.

“I am thrilled – after a nearly 20-year hiatus – to begin practicing law again with Bob, whose advice, counsel and friendship means so much to me,” said Schnader Harrison’s Paul H. Titus of his former law practice partner.

Prior to being named to the bench, Cindrich served as chairman of the Pennsylvania Legislative Reapportionment Commission from 1992 to 1993. He was the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania from 1978 to 1981 and an assistant district attorney in Allegheny County from 1970 to 1972. While in private practice, he served as defense counsel in business and commercial litigation.

Gina Passarella is the senior reporter for The Legal. She can be contacted by email at gpassarella@alm.com or phone at 215-557-2494. Follow her on Twitter at @GPassarellaTLI.