‘Thank
you!
Now
I
won’t
be
fined.’
Firms
that
rely
on
trial
advocacy
need
their
lawyers
to,
you
know,
go
to
trial.
It’s
like
calisthenics
and
attorneys
who
aren’t
routinely
going
through
the
crucible
of
trial
can
see
their
skills
atrophy.
Consider
Rudy
Giuliani,
who
used
to
appear
in
court
all
the
time
as
a
federal
prosecutor
and
now
he
thinks
this
is
an
acceptable
courtroom
strategy.
But
can
a
firm
introduce
financial
incentives
to
push
its
lawyers
into
court.
Potentially
to
the
detriment
of
their
clients?
This
conversation
kicked
off
after
an
interesting
LinkedIn
post
from
Mockingbird
Marketing
president
and
Lunch
Hour
Legal
Marketing
podcast
co-host
Conrad
Saam:
Imagine
the
client
suffering
from
a
debilitating
injury
rejecting
a
big-ticket
settlement
offer
and
then
heading
into
court
as
their
lawyer
turns
to
them
and
explains…
If
the
firm
considers
a
lawyer
picking
up
a
pro
bono
criminal
trial
on
behalf
of
a
client
that
the
prosecutors
refuse
to
deal
with
because
they
know
they’ve
got
him
up
against
a
three-strikes
law
or
something,
that’s
fine.
But
if
the
firm
is
telling
its
attorneys
to
potentially
compromise
the
best
interests
of
their
clients
to
pad
their
own
wallets?
That
feels
like
an
ethical
problem:
Or
put
more
entertainingly:
And
the
lawyer’s
problem
might
not
be
limited
to
the
disciplinary
authorities.
Clients
and
malpractice
carriers
could
find
themselves
involved:
More
often
than
not,
the
client’s
insurance
carrier
is
probably
trying
to
screw
them
and
going
to
trial
is
in
the
best
interest
of
the
client
anyway.
But
some
lawyer
getting
toward
the
end
of
the
year
without
a
trial
is
incentivized
by
this
policy
to
take
risks
that
could
disadvantage
the
client.
But
consider
this
scenario…
One
probably
wouldn’t
balk
at
the
idea
of
awarding
bigger
bonuses
for
trial
work
—
or
at
the
very
least
awarding
bigger
bonuses
for
bigger
recoveries,
which
would
be
a
likely
proxy
—
but
isn’t
that
functionally
the
same?
The
lawyer
not
going
to
trial
is
still
making
less
than
peers
who
are.
Is
there
something
uniquely
problematic
about
structuring
the
policy
as
a
disincentive
rather
than
an
incentive?
There
probably
shouldn’t
be,
but
it
feels
like
it
might
be.
But
the
key
takeaway
is
if
you
are
injured
in
an
accident
and
it’s
December,
you
might
want
to
ask
your
lawyer
about
that
compensation
structure.
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or
Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.