It was gratifying that Congress responded so rapidly to my previous immigration post. http://nylaw2law.blogspot.com/search/label/Immigration
The theme was that the Democrats would never allow an immigation bill to be passed while Bush was President, and despite the pressing need, it will not happen until 2009, when a Democrat is President.
Within 48 hours of my post, the story of the big "compromise bill" hit the papers. Could I have been wrong? Are the various players in Congress working together in a bi-partisan manner for the good of the country? I would like to think so, but something smells funny about this bill (fish or rats, maybe both). Here are a few thoughts on this bill, and the ongoing debates:
1. It's curious that the Democrat at the forefront of the bill is Ted Kennedy, probably the only Democrat who never has to worry about being re-elected. He can afford to act bi-partisan, and also inject/infect the debate with all kinds of issues that would be unpalatable to most Senators and Congressmen.
(An aside -- I don't think this "compromise bill" has anything to do with actually passing a law, it's all about framing the debate for the law they are going to eventually pass. The one that's going to be signed by President Hillary or President Edwards. So now we are hearing some debate about the importance of re-uniting immigrant families, in the context of the immigration laws. Of course, most of us knew this was an issue in immigration policy, but not a FOCAL issue. The present debate is designed to get us all ready for this, when the real law is debated and passed)
2. President Bush is desparate to do SOMETHING good and memorable, so he has to support the compromise bill. There are some things in there for him. Some border security, some fines, some onerous "return home and wait" provisions, some English language preferences. Unfortunately for him, his right wing support base will not go for this bill, and will enter the debate in a shrill and partisan manner. This will further splinter an already divided Republican party. In their effort to frame the debate about what the immigration law SHOULD focus on (the security of out country and the best long term interests of the economy and our society), the Republicans will be cast as partisan racists.
3. In a normal world, when you are trying to reach a compromise in a complex conflict, it can be encouraging when "everyone is unhappy about the proposal". That seems to be the case here, but does anyone think this will lead to further workable compromise and a law?
4. None of the Presidential hopefuls on either side is saying much about this bill. I don't blame them. As Jackie Mason might say "It's not really any of my business". I suspect they know what this thing is really about, and they are going to sit this one out, until it's THEIR time.
Here's a fun thing to think about.....what would you rather have......a law that took all the decent ideas in the present bill, and worked through them in a true bi-partisan fashion in the best interests of our country, ending up with a law that may leave a few groups wishing for more, but really was designed to right the course of this unworkable mess....OR....
The law that will be passed in 2009 by a Democrat Congress and Democrat president?
OK.....it's not that funny....
Monday, May 28, 2007
Friday, May 25, 2007
The Why of Wills 4 (Kinship and more)
In a kinship proceeding, the cousins really have to not only prove who they are, they have to prove the non-existence of prior classes (spouse, children, siblings, etc). The level of proof is high, and the money is not going to be released if its not proven.
A related situation happens when such a person makes a will. For a will to be probated in New York, you must prove to the court that all persons "adversely affected" by the will have been notified. These are the people who would inherit under intestacy. Proof of their notification is shown by their signing a waiver, or by their being served with a Citation. What happens if the decedent made a will, and the distributees are cousins? Do you have to go through a "kinship proceeding", just to figure out who to put on notice for the will? The short answer is NO, you have to show "due diligence", both in searching for these people, and in notifying them. If you have looked for such relatives and can't find them, the court may let you serve them by "publication". That's what those little notices in the newspaper are. Those notices happen after a diligent search has been shown, and the court has authorized service on these people by publication. The notices are basically saying to these people....."Hey, the Will of Joe Blow, your uncle, is being offered for probate on July 15th, show up or forever hold your peace. It's rare that anyone responds to these, though it has happened. How much diligence is "due" diligence? I have found the courts to be practical about this. If the Estate is very large, they expect more diligence. They may require a professional investigation. On a smaller estate, they will sometimes permit the attorneys to show a search using available public records, including the internet.
In the overall scheme of things, a due diligence search in the course of probating a will is a much better situation than laughing heirs and a kinship proceeding. Better for whom, you may ask. Better for the cosmic karma of the universe, something I find myself noticing more as I get older.
A related situation happens when such a person makes a will. For a will to be probated in New York, you must prove to the court that all persons "adversely affected" by the will have been notified. These are the people who would inherit under intestacy. Proof of their notification is shown by their signing a waiver, or by their being served with a Citation. What happens if the decedent made a will, and the distributees are cousins? Do you have to go through a "kinship proceeding", just to figure out who to put on notice for the will? The short answer is NO, you have to show "due diligence", both in searching for these people, and in notifying them. If you have looked for such relatives and can't find them, the court may let you serve them by "publication". That's what those little notices in the newspaper are. Those notices happen after a diligent search has been shown, and the court has authorized service on these people by publication. The notices are basically saying to these people....."Hey, the Will of Joe Blow, your uncle, is being offered for probate on July 15th, show up or forever hold your peace. It's rare that anyone responds to these, though it has happened. How much diligence is "due" diligence? I have found the courts to be practical about this. If the Estate is very large, they expect more diligence. They may require a professional investigation. On a smaller estate, they will sometimes permit the attorneys to show a search using available public records, including the internet.
In the overall scheme of things, a due diligence search in the course of probating a will is a much better situation than laughing heirs and a kinship proceeding. Better for whom, you may ask. Better for the cosmic karma of the universe, something I find myself noticing more as I get older.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
The Why of Wills 3 (Kinship Proceedings)
This is part 3 of the things that happen when people who should have made a will, don't. I am talking here about the loners, spinsters, black sheep, oddballs, singletons, dancers to their own drum, keep their own counsel......people who die not only without a Will, but without close family members to inherit from them.
There is nothing wrong per se with being single and without children. Very often such people have close relationships with siblings, nieces and nephews. If they don't make a will, these relatives will inherit, and it seems just and proper.
Very often such people accumulate a lot of assets, and their closest relatives are cousins, sometimes lots and lots of cousins, scattered around the globe. If this person dies without a Will, and the Public Administrator administers the Estate up to the point of a kinship proceeding (see previous post), what happens in a kinship proceeding?
Simply put, the Estate is divided into two halves, for the decedents paternal and maternal sides, and the cousins on each side have to PROVE their respective interests. Of course, before they even get to prove who they ARE, they have to prove the non-existence of those relatives who would inherit ahead of them. Cousins have to prove that there is no spouse, no children or grandchildren, no parents, no siblings, no nieces or nephews. Proving a negative can be challenging.
In these proceedings we generally prove things by locating and producing certified documents. Things like birth certificates, death certificates, marriage and divorce papers, estate records, and some more obscure ones like obituaries and census records. The non-existence of spouse and "issue" (lawyer word for children or offspring) is usually proven through testimony of a non-interested witness. It can be challenging to find a person who knows enough about the decedent to testify that they knew the person well enough to say they were not married and never had children. There is a certain leniency with this kind of testimony, since one would think that if there WERE spouse and issue, they'd likely come forward.
Once spouse and issue are accounted for, cousins generally must use a geneologist to set forth a family tree, and obtain the appropriate documents as proof. These trees typically contain information about pre-deceased siblings and their issue, parents and grandparents, and aunts and uncles. The tree often contains many of these people, but they have predeceased the decedent. When the lawyers and court participants in these proceedings are referring to the proofs regarding these persons, we talk about "killing them off". Nothing personal, but as long as they existed and we can't prove their death, they'd inherit ahead of cousins, and so we try to kill them off.....by proving that they are dead.
These proceedings are designed to protect the interests of people who may have had inheritance rights. The last thing the court system wants to allow is for someone to show up later, after the money is distributed. This thought underlies many things that go on in Surrogates Courts.
Next post....even MORE on kinship proceedings.
There is nothing wrong per se with being single and without children. Very often such people have close relationships with siblings, nieces and nephews. If they don't make a will, these relatives will inherit, and it seems just and proper.
Very often such people accumulate a lot of assets, and their closest relatives are cousins, sometimes lots and lots of cousins, scattered around the globe. If this person dies without a Will, and the Public Administrator administers the Estate up to the point of a kinship proceeding (see previous post), what happens in a kinship proceeding?
Simply put, the Estate is divided into two halves, for the decedents paternal and maternal sides, and the cousins on each side have to PROVE their respective interests. Of course, before they even get to prove who they ARE, they have to prove the non-existence of those relatives who would inherit ahead of them. Cousins have to prove that there is no spouse, no children or grandchildren, no parents, no siblings, no nieces or nephews. Proving a negative can be challenging.
In these proceedings we generally prove things by locating and producing certified documents. Things like birth certificates, death certificates, marriage and divorce papers, estate records, and some more obscure ones like obituaries and census records. The non-existence of spouse and "issue" (lawyer word for children or offspring) is usually proven through testimony of a non-interested witness. It can be challenging to find a person who knows enough about the decedent to testify that they knew the person well enough to say they were not married and never had children. There is a certain leniency with this kind of testimony, since one would think that if there WERE spouse and issue, they'd likely come forward.
Once spouse and issue are accounted for, cousins generally must use a geneologist to set forth a family tree, and obtain the appropriate documents as proof. These trees typically contain information about pre-deceased siblings and their issue, parents and grandparents, and aunts and uncles. The tree often contains many of these people, but they have predeceased the decedent. When the lawyers and court participants in these proceedings are referring to the proofs regarding these persons, we talk about "killing them off". Nothing personal, but as long as they existed and we can't prove their death, they'd inherit ahead of cousins, and so we try to kill them off.....by proving that they are dead.
These proceedings are designed to protect the interests of people who may have had inheritance rights. The last thing the court system wants to allow is for someone to show up later, after the money is distributed. This thought underlies many things that go on in Surrogates Courts.
Next post....even MORE on kinship proceedings.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
The Why of Wills 2 (Avoiding Laughing Heirs)
This is part 2 of "The Why of Wills".....
In New York, here's what happens when a person with no "close" family (no spouse, kids, parents, siblings, nieces or nephews) dies without a Will. The Public Administrator of the County where the person dies, begins to administer the Estate. The Public Administrator is a public official who steps into estate cases when there is nobody else available to act. In a County like Queens, with 2 million people, it happens quite often. They have a good sized staff, and a highly skilled law firm to represent them.
When it appears that a person has died without a Will, or if there is a Will but nobody is acting, the Public Administrator begins to administer the Estate. They do anything and everything that an Executor or close family member would do. They sometimes arrange burial, they clean out apartments and houses, they try to figure out who the closest living relatives are, they search for a Will, they receive mail, they sell houses or apartments, they marshal the accounts and assets of the decedent, they deal with claims of creditors, and anything else that may be needed.
When they reach the point where an Estate Administrator would ordinarily pay the money to the heirs, the Public Administrator will then file an "Accounting Proceeding". This is a proceeding where they set forth everything they have done, lay out all the money taken in and paid out, and ask the Court to set an attorneys fee for their attorneys, and approve the way they have handled the money and the claims. They notify all interested parties, and when the accounting proceeding is heard in Court, any disputes are resolved. The final thing the proceeding requests is the remaining money to be held by the City of New York, pending the establishment of "kinship".
A "Kinship Proceeding" should then follow. This is when the cousins have to prove who they are, and thereby claim and ultimately receive the money. This can be rather involved, and very interesting, depending on your perspective.
As a lawyer, I find these interesting. They are a lot of work, the kind of work we are well paid for. For the people who die and create these cases, or for the friends or family who WOULD have been included IF the decedent had made a Will, these laughing heir cases are often gut wrenching. The thing is, they can be simply avoided......a person whose closest family is cousins SHOULD make a will.
More on Kinship Proceedings in the next post.....
In New York, here's what happens when a person with no "close" family (no spouse, kids, parents, siblings, nieces or nephews) dies without a Will. The Public Administrator of the County where the person dies, begins to administer the Estate. The Public Administrator is a public official who steps into estate cases when there is nobody else available to act. In a County like Queens, with 2 million people, it happens quite often. They have a good sized staff, and a highly skilled law firm to represent them.
When it appears that a person has died without a Will, or if there is a Will but nobody is acting, the Public Administrator begins to administer the Estate. They do anything and everything that an Executor or close family member would do. They sometimes arrange burial, they clean out apartments and houses, they try to figure out who the closest living relatives are, they search for a Will, they receive mail, they sell houses or apartments, they marshal the accounts and assets of the decedent, they deal with claims of creditors, and anything else that may be needed.
When they reach the point where an Estate Administrator would ordinarily pay the money to the heirs, the Public Administrator will then file an "Accounting Proceeding". This is a proceeding where they set forth everything they have done, lay out all the money taken in and paid out, and ask the Court to set an attorneys fee for their attorneys, and approve the way they have handled the money and the claims. They notify all interested parties, and when the accounting proceeding is heard in Court, any disputes are resolved. The final thing the proceeding requests is the remaining money to be held by the City of New York, pending the establishment of "kinship".
A "Kinship Proceeding" should then follow. This is when the cousins have to prove who they are, and thereby claim and ultimately receive the money. This can be rather involved, and very interesting, depending on your perspective.
As a lawyer, I find these interesting. They are a lot of work, the kind of work we are well paid for. For the people who die and create these cases, or for the friends or family who WOULD have been included IF the decedent had made a Will, these laughing heir cases are often gut wrenching. The thing is, they can be simply avoided......a person whose closest family is cousins SHOULD make a will.
More on Kinship Proceedings in the next post.....
Friday, May 11, 2007
The Why of Wills
WHO SHOULD MAKE A WILL AND WHY DON’T THEY?
WHY….do people who have no close family, and who think their distant relatives “don’t care about them”, frequently neglect to make a will, die with a lot of money, so these same distant relatives inherit their money?
WHY…..don’t people who have “nobody to leave my money to” make bequests to charity?
WHY…..do some people have a pathological abhorrence to paying attorneys fees, and accept heavy financial consequences when an ounce of prevention would have led to a better result?
WHY…..do people hold family grudges for years and never make the first move towards resolving the issues?
I know, I ask these sarcastic “why” questions. The kind of questions we could probably answer, but what would it accomplish?
What happens when a person dies without a Will? Contrary to popular misconception, their assets do NOT “go to the State”. When there is no will, and a person dies, the laws of intestacy apply. All States have such laws, essentially a logical order with the closest relatives inheriting. In New York, it goes like this:
- if a spouse and no children, all to the spouse
- if children and no spouse, all to the children
- if spouse and children, first $50,000 to the spouse, then 50/50 spouse/children
- if no spouse or children, all to the parent(s)
- if no parents, all to siblings (or children of predeceased siblings)
- if no siblings or nieces/nephews, you start getting to aunts/uncles and cousins.
The above is a rough sketch, and there are rules to cover EVERY situation you could think of, and they ALL come up. It is almost impossible for there not to be at least SOME cousins. It is actually fairly common to have an older person who never married or had children, whose parents are long gone, and who either had no siblings, or outlived them all. If a person like this does not make a will, their cousins inherit!!! In law school the professors refer to this as “laughing heirs”. Everyone laughs about this in law school, and probably thinks it some obscure situation that never happens in real life.
Experience teaches otherwise…..
More tomorrow….
WHY….do people who have no close family, and who think their distant relatives “don’t care about them”, frequently neglect to make a will, die with a lot of money, so these same distant relatives inherit their money?
WHY…..don’t people who have “nobody to leave my money to” make bequests to charity?
WHY…..do some people have a pathological abhorrence to paying attorneys fees, and accept heavy financial consequences when an ounce of prevention would have led to a better result?
WHY…..do people hold family grudges for years and never make the first move towards resolving the issues?
I know, I ask these sarcastic “why” questions. The kind of questions we could probably answer, but what would it accomplish?
What happens when a person dies without a Will? Contrary to popular misconception, their assets do NOT “go to the State”. When there is no will, and a person dies, the laws of intestacy apply. All States have such laws, essentially a logical order with the closest relatives inheriting. In New York, it goes like this:
- if a spouse and no children, all to the spouse
- if children and no spouse, all to the children
- if spouse and children, first $50,000 to the spouse, then 50/50 spouse/children
- if no spouse or children, all to the parent(s)
- if no parents, all to siblings (or children of predeceased siblings)
- if no siblings or nieces/nephews, you start getting to aunts/uncles and cousins.
The above is a rough sketch, and there are rules to cover EVERY situation you could think of, and they ALL come up. It is almost impossible for there not to be at least SOME cousins. It is actually fairly common to have an older person who never married or had children, whose parents are long gone, and who either had no siblings, or outlived them all. If a person like this does not make a will, their cousins inherit!!! In law school the professors refer to this as “laughing heirs”. Everyone laughs about this in law school, and probably thinks it some obscure situation that never happens in real life.
Experience teaches otherwise…..
More tomorrow….
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
Immigration
After reading about all the immigration issues, proposed bills and reforms, and talking to a lot of people who know more than I do, I make the following observations:
1. Something meaningful needs to be done.
2. There are a lot of good ideas being discussed.
3. Sooner would be better than later.
4. If there were ever a situation where Congress and the President should work together in a bi-partisan fashion for the good of the country, this is it.
Now, here is a PREDICTION.........
There will not be comprehensive immigration reform, nor will there even be a viable bill presented by Congress, until 2009.
It's difficult to say, but my prediction is going to come true because the Democrats will NEVER let an immigration law get passed while Bush is President. If you read all the proposals being bantered about, from both Democrats and Republicans, it's clear there is the making for a sweeping new law that will address the present crisis. It cries out to be addressed, NOW, and for the future of our economy, our security, and our culture.
Is President Bush a belligerent jerk about most things? Surely he is. But isn't it clear that everything in the immigration realm is negotiable? Isn't it also clear that if Congress and the President WANTED to fashion a law that dealt with all the issues, they could? Would the President negotiate on the areas of disagreement on immigration? Yeah, he would. And yeah, part of the reason would be for his "legacy", as the President who passed immigration reform. It won't save him from the Iraq war legacy, and he surely knows it. So, the Democrats COULD negotiate the fine points with him and his people.
Do you think they will? Or will they windbag their way through as much rhetoric and mud as they can, and then we will all look up, the election of 2008 will have occurred, and Hillary or Edwards will be President, and then they can pass a law that suits THEM, and their proud new constituents, and they can take the credit for it.
Looking at the Democrats as a whole here and now, with a sorrowed and shameful feeling that my prediction is dead on correct, I will say to the Democrats in Congress....
If you cannot reform the immigration laws NOW......SHAME ON YOU!!!
1. Something meaningful needs to be done.
2. There are a lot of good ideas being discussed.
3. Sooner would be better than later.
4. If there were ever a situation where Congress and the President should work together in a bi-partisan fashion for the good of the country, this is it.
Now, here is a PREDICTION.........
There will not be comprehensive immigration reform, nor will there even be a viable bill presented by Congress, until 2009.
It's difficult to say, but my prediction is going to come true because the Democrats will NEVER let an immigration law get passed while Bush is President. If you read all the proposals being bantered about, from both Democrats and Republicans, it's clear there is the making for a sweeping new law that will address the present crisis. It cries out to be addressed, NOW, and for the future of our economy, our security, and our culture.
Is President Bush a belligerent jerk about most things? Surely he is. But isn't it clear that everything in the immigration realm is negotiable? Isn't it also clear that if Congress and the President WANTED to fashion a law that dealt with all the issues, they could? Would the President negotiate on the areas of disagreement on immigration? Yeah, he would. And yeah, part of the reason would be for his "legacy", as the President who passed immigration reform. It won't save him from the Iraq war legacy, and he surely knows it. So, the Democrats COULD negotiate the fine points with him and his people.
Do you think they will? Or will they windbag their way through as much rhetoric and mud as they can, and then we will all look up, the election of 2008 will have occurred, and Hillary or Edwards will be President, and then they can pass a law that suits THEM, and their proud new constituents, and they can take the credit for it.
Looking at the Democrats as a whole here and now, with a sorrowed and shameful feeling that my prediction is dead on correct, I will say to the Democrats in Congress....
If you cannot reform the immigration laws NOW......SHAME ON YOU!!!
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
WHY....
Here are some "Why" questions. I don't claim to have the answers, though I readily admit that the nature of the questions often suggest how I feel about the topic. So, in the interest of provoking some thoughts......
WHY....do people who are "always having problems" with other people, never realize that the problem is with THEM?
WHY....are people proud of things they should be ashamed of, like "I'm computer illiterate." "I am a couch potato who only eats junk foods." and "I never vote"?
WHY....do people not attend to obvious medical problems?
WHY....do people with marital problems use their children to punish each other, rather than try to salvage the one positive thing they may have done together?
WHY....are some people not interested in anything new?
WHY....do people know in advance that they "freeze up on tests"?
WHY....would anyone not TRY to overcome certain fears (flying, dogs, public speaking)?
WHY....does anyone still smoke?
WHY....did women generally support and admire Bill Clinton more than any politician in recent memory?
WHY....are there commercials for erectile dysfunction pills during "The Wonder Years"? which leads to a related question....obviously the makers of boner pills think that middle aged people must watch the The Wonder Years, to fondly recall growing up in the 60's. WHY would it not occur to anyone that a present day young teenager might watch and enjoy The Wonder Years and all the good that's in that show? Are we that far gone????
WHY....doesn't someone stand up and say that Mayor Bloomberg is a great mayor, primarily because he is a super smart businessman, who is so rich that he is uncorruptable, and this is a good thing. There, I said it.
WHY....does having any kind of insurance not feel assuring?
WHY....are there still thousands of people who do not have EZ Pass?
WHY....in the aftermath of the Imus fiasco, will Jason Whitlock not emerge as an influential person in the African American community? If you have never seen this, check it out....
http://youtube.com/watch?v=L5ZQXaXmCW4
WHY....do people who are "always having problems" with other people, never realize that the problem is with THEM?
WHY....are people proud of things they should be ashamed of, like "I'm computer illiterate." "I am a couch potato who only eats junk foods." and "I never vote"?
WHY....do people not attend to obvious medical problems?
WHY....do people with marital problems use their children to punish each other, rather than try to salvage the one positive thing they may have done together?
WHY....are some people not interested in anything new?
WHY....do people know in advance that they "freeze up on tests"?
WHY....would anyone not TRY to overcome certain fears (flying, dogs, public speaking)?
WHY....does anyone still smoke?
WHY....did women generally support and admire Bill Clinton more than any politician in recent memory?
WHY....are there commercials for erectile dysfunction pills during "The Wonder Years"? which leads to a related question....obviously the makers of boner pills think that middle aged people must watch the The Wonder Years, to fondly recall growing up in the 60's. WHY would it not occur to anyone that a present day young teenager might watch and enjoy The Wonder Years and all the good that's in that show? Are we that far gone????
WHY....doesn't someone stand up and say that Mayor Bloomberg is a great mayor, primarily because he is a super smart businessman, who is so rich that he is uncorruptable, and this is a good thing. There, I said it.
WHY....does having any kind of insurance not feel assuring?
WHY....are there still thousands of people who do not have EZ Pass?
WHY....in the aftermath of the Imus fiasco, will Jason Whitlock not emerge as an influential person in the African American community? If you have never seen this, check it out....
http://youtube.com/watch?v=L5ZQXaXmCW4
Saturday, April 7, 2007
Lord of the Fleas Part 2
This is Part 2 of "Lord of the Fleas", a fictional account of a business idea I have not actually done, but which I believe would work. Part 1 is at http://nylaw2law.blogspot.com/search/label/Lord%20of%20the%20Fleas%20Part%201
.......I really didn't know what was going to happen that first day. My break even point was roughly two paying matters coming out of spending my day. Of course, I wasn't in this to break even. Come to think of it, the objective of making real profits and hitting it big in law practice, is something too many of us fail to do.
I set up my booth with a sign containing my name and the words "Lawyer" and "Abogado". Using the word abogado forced me to bring my bilingual secretary Carmen. I could have tried to consult with the thousands of Spanish speaking clients in waiting, figuring that living in NYC they probably speak SOME English. I knew better, half the time my high school Spanish is better than the clients English, and while this makes good comedy, it doesn't start an effective attorney/client relationship.
From the moment I put up my sign at 7:30 AM, drinking my Dunkin Donuts Coffee, until we left when the sun went down, I consulted on 127 matters. I know this because I kept a running log. Actually, I had not planned to keep a log, but I DID have a yellow pad and pen, so after the 5th conversation, by 8 AM, I asked Carmen to set up a log. Perspective is a funny thing. Many lawyers, upon being told that I had a day with 127 consultations, responded that I must have talked to a lot of nuts, and had a day filled with things that turned out to be "nothing". There is some truth in that. Some of the people WERE nuts, some of the matters WERE "nothing". But, that first day, I did talk to clients leading to four personal injury cases, four real estate closings, three wills, two estates, one incorporation, and twelve matters which ended up being "real" referrals ("real" because I particpated in the fees, within the ethical guidelines of course). Of the referrals, there was one med mal, one legal mal, three business transactions, five immigration matters, and two matrimonials.
The next week we were busy, working the new matters and preparing for week 2 at the Aqueduct Flea Market.....
.......I really didn't know what was going to happen that first day. My break even point was roughly two paying matters coming out of spending my day. Of course, I wasn't in this to break even. Come to think of it, the objective of making real profits and hitting it big in law practice, is something too many of us fail to do.
I set up my booth with a sign containing my name and the words "Lawyer" and "Abogado". Using the word abogado forced me to bring my bilingual secretary Carmen. I could have tried to consult with the thousands of Spanish speaking clients in waiting, figuring that living in NYC they probably speak SOME English. I knew better, half the time my high school Spanish is better than the clients English, and while this makes good comedy, it doesn't start an effective attorney/client relationship.
From the moment I put up my sign at 7:30 AM, drinking my Dunkin Donuts Coffee, until we left when the sun went down, I consulted on 127 matters. I know this because I kept a running log. Actually, I had not planned to keep a log, but I DID have a yellow pad and pen, so after the 5th conversation, by 8 AM, I asked Carmen to set up a log. Perspective is a funny thing. Many lawyers, upon being told that I had a day with 127 consultations, responded that I must have talked to a lot of nuts, and had a day filled with things that turned out to be "nothing". There is some truth in that. Some of the people WERE nuts, some of the matters WERE "nothing". But, that first day, I did talk to clients leading to four personal injury cases, four real estate closings, three wills, two estates, one incorporation, and twelve matters which ended up being "real" referrals ("real" because I particpated in the fees, within the ethical guidelines of course). Of the referrals, there was one med mal, one legal mal, three business transactions, five immigration matters, and two matrimonials.
The next week we were busy, working the new matters and preparing for week 2 at the Aqueduct Flea Market.....
Thursday, April 5, 2007
Lord of the Fleas
I once started writing a fictional piece about a lawyer who became a multi-millionaire after using one of my business ideas. The piece was written from the perspective of a dying old man explaining how he had done it. (I was thinking "Little Big Man".....#14 on my 100 Favorite Movies List http://nylaw2law.blogspot.com/2007/01/100-favorite-movies-list.html)
I never did anything with the piece or the idea, because in a strange way, I thought some day I might do the idea myself. I now accept that I will not do the idea, so I will reveal it here, where no doubt thousands of hungry young lawyers will read it. Maybe someone will DO IT!!!! In any event, describing the idea may give someone SOME business inspiration. I don't want much for it, just.....let me know if I can help.
LORD OF THE FLEAS
I'm that guy. The first lawyer to realize that setting up at a flea market would be the best marketing strategy ever. It came to me one Saturday morning at the Aqueduct Flea Market. I'm not sure why I went there, other then a vague notion that I needed sox for basketball. After buying my tube sox, I was done shopping, so instead of looking at the booths, I looked at the people. The Aqueduct Flea Market is in the parking lot of a racetrack in Ozone Park, Queens. Trolling amidst the vague odor of manure, were hundreds, maybe thousands of my past, present, and future clients.
Even on a Saturday, my idle thoughts always turned to my practice. I hated my mix of cases, and even worse, I hated the direction my practice was going......if "nowhere" counts as a direction. Twenty years in practice, and I finally had learned enough to really run a law practice. After many, many painful lessons, I knew how to evaluate cases. Knew which ones to take and which ones to run away from. Learned how to evaluate clients and their stories, how to size up the profitability of their proposed business. That’s all a law practice is, really. Hearing a person’s story, and making a business decision on whether they and their story are profitable business. No matter what anyone says, there is plenty of business out there. The real question, the one that separates the successes from the strugglers, is knowing and getting GOOD business, and staying away from BAD business.
They say Queens is the most ethnically diverse County in the nation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queens#_note-0 The Aqueduct Flea Market is like that. It's often suggested that young lawyers "join organizations" and "make themselves known in their community". I'm not knocking that, but in those places you mostly have "other young lawyers looking for business". You want business, go where the clients are. To me, the Aqueduct Flea Market looked like a client convention, with folks milling around while carrying their particular concerns with them.........immigration, divorce, real estate, estates, comp, accidents, wills, business transactions, criminal. Unlike most people I knew at "the Lodge" or "the Club" it did not look like most of these people had a lawyer in the immediate family. They looked like people ready to spend some time at the flea market, looking at things that interested them. I wondered how many of the thousands were shopping for a lawyer. It struck me that the flea market was like a Yellow Pages without the phone calls.
This is what I did.......I contacted the managers of the flea market and asked what was involved in "taking a booth". I made a list of the supplies I’d need: table and chairs, some signs, cell phone, laptop with extra batteries, yellow pads, pens, calculator, PalmPilot, bottle of water. I was sure there would be more, but knew I'd figure those out as I went.
Then I did something I always do when thinking about a new business idea. I got out my pad and pen and calculator and ran some numbers. I'm always amazed at how many lawyers DON'T do this. The thinking and the calculations are as simple as this...."If it costs $XXX to take the booth, and I am committed for Y weekends, h0w much will it cost? Are there any other expenses (I couldn't think of any other than my time and my lunch, which I have to eat anyway)? I then made four colums regarding potential income, I called them break even, make some profit, hit a home run, and hit a grand slam. I assigned dollar values to the first three columns but did not define grand slam.
The thing is......it was a GRAND SLAM.
more tomorrow....
I never did anything with the piece or the idea, because in a strange way, I thought some day I might do the idea myself. I now accept that I will not do the idea, so I will reveal it here, where no doubt thousands of hungry young lawyers will read it. Maybe someone will DO IT!!!! In any event, describing the idea may give someone SOME business inspiration. I don't want much for it, just.....let me know if I can help.
LORD OF THE FLEAS
I'm that guy. The first lawyer to realize that setting up at a flea market would be the best marketing strategy ever. It came to me one Saturday morning at the Aqueduct Flea Market. I'm not sure why I went there, other then a vague notion that I needed sox for basketball. After buying my tube sox, I was done shopping, so instead of looking at the booths, I looked at the people. The Aqueduct Flea Market is in the parking lot of a racetrack in Ozone Park, Queens. Trolling amidst the vague odor of manure, were hundreds, maybe thousands of my past, present, and future clients.
Even on a Saturday, my idle thoughts always turned to my practice. I hated my mix of cases, and even worse, I hated the direction my practice was going......if "nowhere" counts as a direction. Twenty years in practice, and I finally had learned enough to really run a law practice. After many, many painful lessons, I knew how to evaluate cases. Knew which ones to take and which ones to run away from. Learned how to evaluate clients and their stories, how to size up the profitability of their proposed business. That’s all a law practice is, really. Hearing a person’s story, and making a business decision on whether they and their story are profitable business. No matter what anyone says, there is plenty of business out there. The real question, the one that separates the successes from the strugglers, is knowing and getting GOOD business, and staying away from BAD business.
They say Queens is the most ethnically diverse County in the nation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queens#_note-0 The Aqueduct Flea Market is like that. It's often suggested that young lawyers "join organizations" and "make themselves known in their community". I'm not knocking that, but in those places you mostly have "other young lawyers looking for business". You want business, go where the clients are. To me, the Aqueduct Flea Market looked like a client convention, with folks milling around while carrying their particular concerns with them.........immigration, divorce, real estate, estates, comp, accidents, wills, business transactions, criminal. Unlike most people I knew at "the Lodge" or "the Club" it did not look like most of these people had a lawyer in the immediate family. They looked like people ready to spend some time at the flea market, looking at things that interested them. I wondered how many of the thousands were shopping for a lawyer. It struck me that the flea market was like a Yellow Pages without the phone calls.
This is what I did.......I contacted the managers of the flea market and asked what was involved in "taking a booth". I made a list of the supplies I’d need: table and chairs, some signs, cell phone, laptop with extra batteries, yellow pads, pens, calculator, PalmPilot, bottle of water. I was sure there would be more, but knew I'd figure those out as I went.
Then I did something I always do when thinking about a new business idea. I got out my pad and pen and calculator and ran some numbers. I'm always amazed at how many lawyers DON'T do this. The thinking and the calculations are as simple as this...."If it costs $XXX to take the booth, and I am committed for Y weekends, h0w much will it cost? Are there any other expenses (I couldn't think of any other than my time and my lunch, which I have to eat anyway)? I then made four colums regarding potential income, I called them break even, make some profit, hit a home run, and hit a grand slam. I assigned dollar values to the first three columns but did not define grand slam.
The thing is......it was a GRAND SLAM.
more tomorrow....
Monday, April 2, 2007
Passover
Monday afternoon, first night of Passover is tonight. I'm taking a break from preparations. Tonight we are hosting 10 for a Seder. Tomorrow night we are hosting a reunion Seder with the cousins from my Mom's side. All my Passover Seders growing up were with these cousins. Passover and Thanksgiving have always been neck and neck as my favorite holidays. Lately, Passover is starting to pull away. Here are the top 10 things I like about Passover:
10. Usually there are people there you haven't seen for awhile.
9. At least for the first two days, the Passover specific foods (matzo, horseradish, matzo ball soup, charoses, hard boiled eggs, macaroons, Maneschevitz wine) taste GREAT.
8. Whether you host the Seder, or visit someone elses, however they choose to conduct it is perfect.
7. You always remember Passover. When there are kids at the Seder, you know they will always remember it too.
6. Strangers and non-Jewish people are always welcome.
5. Hearing the songs the way you heard them as a child.
4. Everybody understands the holiday in their own way, and everybody is OK with that.
3. Matzo brei for breakfast.
2. Thinking about the value of freedom never gets old.
1. Continuity - At the beginning of Passover I always think that all over the world, Jewish people are doing the same thing we are. They have been since the days of Moses. People can be skeptical about a lot of things, but the telling and retelling of the Passover story is an unbroken and unbreakable chain. May it always be!
לשנה הבאה בירושלים
Next year in Jerusalem.
10. Usually there are people there you haven't seen for awhile.
9. At least for the first two days, the Passover specific foods (matzo, horseradish, matzo ball soup, charoses, hard boiled eggs, macaroons, Maneschevitz wine) taste GREAT.
8. Whether you host the Seder, or visit someone elses, however they choose to conduct it is perfect.
7. You always remember Passover. When there are kids at the Seder, you know they will always remember it too.
6. Strangers and non-Jewish people are always welcome.
5. Hearing the songs the way you heard them as a child.
4. Everybody understands the holiday in their own way, and everybody is OK with that.
3. Matzo brei for breakfast.
2. Thinking about the value of freedom never gets old.
1. Continuity - At the beginning of Passover I always think that all over the world, Jewish people are doing the same thing we are. They have been since the days of Moses. People can be skeptical about a lot of things, but the telling and retelling of the Passover story is an unbroken and unbreakable chain. May it always be!
לשנה הבאה בירושלים
Next year in Jerusalem.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)