Attorney Journal, San Diego, Volume 150 by Attorney Journals

SAN DIEGO

Volume 150, 2016 • $6.95

Tired of Paying Referral Fees? Seek Alternative Case Drivers

Tanner Jones

What Makes a Super Lawyer Can Also Make a Super Website

Helen Gulgun Bukulmez Where Do Attorneys Waste the Most Money in Their Marketing Efforts?

J.R. Oakes

What Does the Pace of Law Firm Mergers Mean?

Mike O’Horo

McIntyre’s Civil Alert Organized Succinct Summaries

Monty A. McIntyre

Predictions on What 2016 Will Hold for the Legal Profession

Bob Denney

Law Firm of the Month

Sanford Heisler Kimpel LLP, San Diego The Sum of San Diego’s Greatest Plaintiffs’ Parts

Court Reporting Access Wherever You Go. Read, Search, and Annotate Transcripts with ease using the convenience of your digital device.

DOWNLOAD OUR APP TODAY! DEPOSITION SERVICES •Certified Court Reporters •Court-Appointed Official Reporters •Certified Legal Interpreters •24/7, Last Minute Scheduling •Nationwide Deposition Coverage •Deposition Suites, Conference Centers •Realtime Depositions •Electronic Transcripts •Electronic Transcript CD •Litigation Support Software Integration •Complete Case Management

VIDEO SERVICES •Certified Legal Videographers •Video Conferencing •Video Deposition Streaming •Video Transcript Synchronization •Digital Deposition Streaming •Video Editing Tools ONLINE & MOBILE SERVICES •Online Deposition Scheduling •Online Document Repository •Jilio-Ryan Mobile App •Mobile Transcripts •Productivity Enhancing Transcript Tools

IMPROVED!

FREE App available

JILIO-RYAN C O U R T

W W W. J I L I O R YA N . C O M

R E P O R T E R S

800.454.1230

2016 EDITION—NO.150

TABLE OF CONTENTS

6 Predictions on What 2016 Will Hold for the Legal Profession by Bob Denney

8 McIntyre’s Civil Alert Organized Succinct Summaries by Monty A. McIntyre

12 COMMUNITYnews

EXECUTIVE PUBLISHER Brian Topor

14 Where Do Attorneys Waste the Most Money in Their Marketing Efforts? by J.R. Oakes

EDITOR Wendy Price CREATIVE SERVICES Skidmutro Creative Partners CIRCULATION Angela Watson

by Karen Gorden

PHOTOGRAPHY Chris Griffiths STAFF WRITERS Jennifer Hadley Bridget Brookman Karen Gorden CONTRIBUTING EDITORIALISTS Bob Denney Mike O’Horo Monty A. McIntyre Eric Dewey J.R. Oakes Tanner Jones Helen Gulgun Bukulmez WEBMASTER Mariusz Opalka ADVERTISING INQUIRIES info@AttorneyJournal.us SUBMIT AN ARTICLE Editorial@AttorneyJournal.us OFFICE 30211 Avenida De Las Banderas Suite 200 Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688 www.AttorneyJournal.us ADDRESS CHANGES Address corrections can be made via fax, email or postal mail.

LAW FIRM OF THE MONTH

16 Sanford Heisler Kimpel LLP, San Diego The Sum of San Diego’s Greatest Plaintiffs’ Parts

22 What Does the Pace of Law Firm Mergers Mean?

24 Tired of Paying Referral Fees? Seek Alternative Case Drivers

by Mike O’Horo

by Tanner Jones

29 What Makes a Super Lawyer Can Also Make a Super Website by Helen Gulgun Bukulmez

Editorial material appears in Attorney Journal as an informational service for readers. Article contents are the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of Attorney Journal. Attorney Journal makes every effort to publish credible, responsible advertisements. Inclusion of product advertisements or announcements does not imply endorsement. Attorney Journal is a trademark of Sticky Media, LLC. Not affiliated with any other trade publication or association. Copyright 2016 by Sticky Media, LLC. All rights reserved. Contents may not be reproduced without written permission from Sticky Media, LLC. Printed in the USA

The number of San Diego attorneys recognized among California’s Top 25 Plaintiffs Lawyers

Congratulations CaseyGerry partners David S. Casey, Jr. and Robert J. Francavilla for this well deserved recognition by the Los Angeles Daily Journal.

www.caseygerry.com Dedicated to the Pursuit of Justice since 1947. SERIOUS PERSONAL INJURY, MARITIME, AVIATION, PRODUCT LIABILITY, CLASS ACTION, MASS TORTS AND PHARMACEUTICAL LITIGATION San Diego Office – 110 Laurel Street, San Diego, CA 92101 | 619-238-1811 | 800-292-5865 North County Office – 120 Birmingham Dr., Ste. 120E, Cardiff by the Sea, CA 92007 | 760-743-8448

Predictions on What 2016 Will Hold for the Legal Profession by Bob Denney

For more than 30 years Bob Denney has been regarded as a leading authority on strategy, marketing management and leadership for law firms throughout the United States and parts of Canada. He is a Fellow in the College of Law Practice Management and was one of the first inductees into the Legal Marketing Association’s Hall of Fame.

very December, David J. Bilinsky, an international practice management consultant based in Vancouver, invites experts on the legal profession to predict what will happen in the coming year and publishes their responses on his blog, www.thoughtfullaw.com. The following was recently posted on that blog. The winds of change that have been buffeting the legal profession, not only in the United States and Canada but also world-wide, will intensify. These will be some of the strongest gusts: 1. The number of non-law service providers will continue to increase, as will the number of services they provide at less cost than firms can afford to charge. 2. Legal departments in corporations and non-profit organizations will continue to grow in size because clients will keep more legal work in-house since it is less costly and can be managed more efficiently.

3. The large international firms will continue to grow in size as they merge-in other firms, but the total number of practicing lawyers in firms and legal departments will continue to decrease and fewer people will enter the profession. 4. Non-lawyers with backgrounds in business, marketing and technology will continue to play a greater role in the management and operations of law firms. 5. The Big Four Accounting firms will continue quietly but steadily building their legal services divisions in the countries that have authorized multi-disciplinary practices (MDPs), Britain, Australia and Mexico. However, rather than trying to build full-service practices, they will continue to concentrate on areas of law that complement their existing services such as immigration, which fits with expatriate tax work, labor which fits with human resources consulting and compliance, commercial contracts and due diligence. n

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA’S LEADERS IN…

• ESI Processing & Hosting • Data Acquisition & Forensics • Managed Document Review • Paper-based Discovery Services • Court Reporting

FREE MCLE SEMINARS!

With offices in LA Downtown, LA Century City, Irvine and San Diego DTIGlobal.com

501 West Broadway, Suite 400 San Diego, CA 9210 Office: (619) 234-0660

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

Call us for information to schedule a complimentary in-person or webinar MCLE seminar on a variety of electronic discovery topics.

McIntyre’s Civil Alert Organized Succinct Summaries by Monty A. McIntyre, Esq.

Monty A. McIntyre has over 30 years of experience as a mediator and arbitrator. More than 35 years of experience as a civil trial lawyer representing both plaintiffs and defendants in business and commercial, bad faith, brain injury, construction, land use/CEQA, medical malpractice, personal injury, real property and wrongful death cases. To schedule a meeting with Monty A. McIntyre contact Kelsey Hannah at ADR Services, Inc. at (619) 233-1323 or kelsey@adrservices.org

CALIFORNIA COURTS OF APPEAL Attorneys M’Guinness v. Johnson (2015) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2015 WL 9583486: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s order denying a motion to disqualify a law firm. The motion arose in a lawsuit between shareholders over the operation of a small construction firm. One of the grounds argued by the moving parties was concurrent representation. In denying the motion, the trial court reasoned that the evidence was insufficient to warrant automatic disqualification based upon a concurrent representation conflict of interest. The Court of Appeal disagreed and held that the undisputed facts demonstrated that the law firm continued to represent the corporation through the time the lawsuit was instituted. If a party moving to disqualify an attorney establishes concurrent representation, the court is required, in all but a few instances, to automatically disqualify the attorney without regard to whether the subject matter of the representation of one client relates to the representation of a second client in the lawsuit. While disqualification is a drastic measure, and motions to disqualify are sometimes brought by litigants for improper tactical reasons, disqualification is not generally disfavored. When the circumstances of a disqualifying conflict exist, disqualification is required. (C.A. 6th, December 30, 2015.)

Civil Procedure Castillo v. DHL Express (USA) (2015) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2015 WL 9703433: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s wage-and-hour class action and individual complaint defendants for failure to prosecute within the five-year period provided by Code of Civil Procedure section 583.310. The tolling provision regarding mediation in section 1775.7(b) applies only to mediation conducted in a court-annexed alternative dispute resolution program. The Court of Appeal also concluded that plaintiff failed to show it was impossible, impracticable or futile to bring his case to trial within five years. (C.A. 2nd, filed December 15, 2015, published January 14, 2016). 8

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

Civil Rights Fetters v. County of Los Angeles (2016) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2016 WL 98581: The Court of Appeal reversed a $1.1 million compensatory damages jury verdict for plaintiff, and an attorney fee award of over $2 million, following the trial court’s ruling, in a bifurcated bench trial, denying defendant’s argument that, under Heck v. Humphrey (1994) 512 U.S. 477, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (Heck), plaintiff’s 42 U.S. Code section 1983 claim was barred by his plea bargain in a juvenile court proceeding that admitted he had brandished an imitation firearm so as to cause the two deputies and a third party fear of bodily harm. The Court of Appeal concluded the trial court erred in denying the Heck defense because plaintiff was convicted and/or sentenced for brandishing an imitation firearm, a judgment for plaintiff in his section 1983 action would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction and sentence, and the dismissal of the criminal petition against plaintiff following his successful completion of probation was not a termination of the criminal proceeding in his favor. (C.A. 2nd, January 8, 2016).

Corporations Speirs v. Bluefire Ethanol Fuels, Inc. (2015) _ Cal.App.4th _ : The Court of Appeal affirmed in part, and reversed in part, the trial court’s rulings following a bench trial in a case where plaintiffs alleged breach of fiduciary duty and breach of warrant agreements after defendant refused to apply an anti-dilution provision in the warrants to an equity line of credit transaction entered into by defendant. The Court of Appeal agreed with the trial court’s ruling that the breach of fiduciary duty cause of action was unmeritorious as a matter of law. A corporation’s officers do not have a fiduciary duty to warrant holders. The Court of Appeal also agreed with the court’s interpretation of plaintiffs’ warrants. The anti-dilution provision applied to the equity credit line agreement and stock issuances to the finance company resulting from that agreement. However, the Court of Appeal found that the trial court erred in reducing plaintiffs’ exercise price to $0 because substantial evidence did not support that decision. The matter was reversed and remanded for retrial solely on the proper remedy for defendant’s breach of contract. (C.A. 4th, filed December 15, 2015, published January 12, 2016.)

Employment Alvarado v. Dart Container Corporation of California (2016) _ Cal. App.4th _ , 2016 WL 164636: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s summary judgment for defendant. The sole question was whether defendant’s formula for calculating overtime on flat sum bonuses paid in the same pay period in which they are earned was lawful. There is no California law specifying a method for computing overtime on flat sum bonuses. Because defendant’s formula complied with federal law, which provides a formula for calculating bonus overtime, defendant’s formula was lawful. (C.A. 4th, filed January 14, 2016.)

Insurance Vardanyan v. Amco Insurance Company (2015) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2015 WL 9654037: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s directed verdict for defendant based upon a special jury instruction the trial court decided to give regarding coverage. The special instruction requested by defendant ran afoul of the efficient proximate cause rule in California. A policy cannot extend coverage for a specified peril, then exclude coverage for a loss caused by a combination of the covered peril and an excluded peril, without regard to whether the covered peril was the predominant or efficient proximate cause of the loss. The trial court erred in deciding to give the special instruction rather than CACI No. 2306. The Court of Appeal also concluded that the special instruction was improper because it placed on plaintiff the burden of proving his loss fell within the contested coverage provision, instead of requiring defendant to prove that the loss was excluded. (C.A. 5th, filed December 11, 2015, published January 7, 2016.)

Legal Malpractice Kelly v. Orr (2016) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2016 WL 107907: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s order sustaining a demurrer, without leave to amend, in a legal malpractice action. The Court of Appeal ruled that the continuous representation tolling provision in Code of Civil Procedure section 340.6(a)(2) applies to toll legal malpractice claims brought by successor trustees against attorneys who represented the predecessor trustee. Because the first amended complaint alleged the predecessor trustee resigned on March 22, 2013, ending defendants’ representation of her as trustee, and because plaintiff’s complaint was filed on February 27, 2014, the action was not time-barred as a matter of law. (C.A. 4th, January 11, 2016.)

Real Property (Foreclosure) Majd v. Bank of America, N.A. (2015) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2015 WL 9304536: The Court of Appeal overruled in part, and affirmed in part, the trial court’s ruling sustaining a demurrer without leave to amend in a case alleging wrongful foreclosure. The Court of Appeal agreed with plaintiff’s contention that the foreclosure was wrongful because it occurred while the loan servicer was reviewing plaintiff’s loan for a modification under the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), finding that plaintiff had stated a cause of action against the loan servicer for violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq. The Court of Appeal

IS YOUR LAW FIRM MAKING THE BEST IMPRESSION?

We’ll help you put your best foot forward. From logos and brochures to websites, strategy, writing and beyond, we’ve got you covered! Jenny Strauss, Partner (215) 460-0835 jenny@skidmutro.com

View our portfolio at skidmutro.com Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

Mediator Arbitrator Special Master Discovery Referee

Experience Counts 50 years as an Active Trial Lawyer 20 years in Alternative Dispute Resolution Personal Injury | Products Liability | Professional Malpractice Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith | Securities | Aviation Business/Commercial Matters | Real Property To schedule, please contact one of Mr. Sharkey’s case administrators at Judicate West. (619) 814-1966 Judicate West | 402 West Broadway, Suite 2000 | San Diego, CA 92101

Torts (Wrongful Death) Burgueno v. The Regents of the University of California (2015) _ Cal. App.4th _ , 2015 WL 9700324: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order granting summary judgment to defendant, based upon the recreational trail immunity in Government Code section 831.4, in a wrongful death action arising from the death of a student riding a bike on Great Meadow Bikeway on the campus of the University of California, Santa Cruz. The trial court properly ruled that defendant had absolute immunity from claims arising from the accident on the Great Meadow Bikeway pursuant to the recreational trail immunity provided by section 831.4. (C.A. 6th, filed December 15, 2015, published January 13, 2016.)

Trusts and Estates Gray v. Jewish Federation of Palm Springs and Desert Area (2016) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2016 WL 104651: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s judgment for defendant and against plaintiff (the sole net income beneficiary of the trust, and a former trustee). The Court of Appeal concluded that Probate Code section 16373 provides that, if an amount is to be distributed from income, such as a broker’s commission on a new lease, but there is not enough income to pay for the item and maintain disbursements to the income beneficiary, the trustee can pay for the items out of the principal. However, the trustee must pay back the principal over time for the use of principal to pay income expenses if it did not set up a reserve to pay for the items. The trial court’s judgment properly concluded that plaintiff was owed $47,913.58 in underpaid income but the principal had been overcharged $61,749.01, so plaintiff should pay the difference out of income. Plaintiff was also properly ordered to pay $28,000 in attorney’s fees to defendant for bad faith and unreasonable objections to accountings. Plaintiff was properly ordered to pay $12,709.45 to defendant for the objections and her appeal regarding a petition she had filed, and was properly ordered to reimburse the trust $12,608 for her trustee fees. (C.A. 4th, January 6, 2016.) n 10

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

©Bauman Photographers

THOMAS E. SHARKEY

also reversed some of the orders denying leave to amend. It found that plaintiff had stated a cause of action for wrongful foreclosure, provided the party conducting the foreclosure sale was an agent of the loan servicer, and held that plaintiff should be given leave to amend to allege the agency relationship, if true. The Court of Appeal also concluded that plaintiff had stated a cause of action for cancellation of the trustee’s deed upon sale, but had failed to join the foreclosing trust deed beneficiary, an indispensable party, as a defendant. Provided the property was still owned of record by the foreclosing beneficiary, and not by a bona fide purchaser for value, the Court of Appeal ruled that plaintiff should be given leave to amend to add the foreclosing beneficiary as a party to the cause of action for cancellation of instruments. (C.A. 4th, filed December 21, 2015, published January 14, 2016.)

COMMUNITY news n Fish & Richardson announced today that five of its principals, including Juanita Brooks were named intellectual property (IP) “Life Science Stars” for 2015 in the fourth annual edition of LMG Life Sciences. The firm’s Life Sciences practice also received top rankings, with the publication noting “Fish & Richardson is JUANITA BROOKS consistently praised for their expertise in all matters of IP representation.” Brooks is based in the firm’s San Diego office. Fish was “Highly Recommended” for Patent Prosecution, Patent Strategy and Management, and General Patent Litigation and “Recommended” for Hatch-Waxman Patent Litigation (Branded). Fish also was named a finalist in the LMG Life Sciences Awards 2015 for General Patent Litigation Firm of the Year, Patent Strategy and Management Team of the Year, and Intellectual Property Firm of the Year. The annual awards recognize the leading attorneys, law firms, and in-house counsel teams that have played a significant role in the life sciences industry over the last 12 months. According to LMG Life Sciences, one of Fish’s clients noted that the firm “provides timely, high-quality legal advice,” while an in-house attorney at a global pharmaceutical company praised Fish for its “expertise, creativity, and legal experience with the technology and portfolio of interest.” n The San Diego-based law firm of Seltzer Caplan McMahon Vitek is pleased to announce that James Dooley has joined the firm as an associate in the firm’s family law practice. “We are pleased to welcome James to Seltzer Caplan,” says Gerald McMahon, chairman of the board and head of the family JAMES DOOLEY law practice at Seltzer Caplan. “His experience in family law matters will serve our firm and clients well.” Dooley is a certified specialist in family law by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization. His practice focuses on a personal counsel that guides clients to rewarding and cost-effective solutions. Dooley also has extensive family law litigation experience. He was named a Super Lawyers’ “Rising Star” in 2009-2011. Prior to joining Seltzer Caplan, Dooley was an associate at Kolodny Law Group in Beverly Hills. He is also a U.S. Navy veteran. Dooley received his J.D. from Southwestern University School of Law in 2003 and his B.A. from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas in 2001.

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

n Hecht Solberg Robinson Goldberg & Bagley LLP (HechtSolberg) has been honored as a Tier 1 San Diego law firm in the areas of real estate law and land use and zoning law in the U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers 2016 rankings. The firm was also designated a Tier 2 law firm for San Diego in the area DAVID W. BAGLEY II of corporate law. Firms included in the 2016 “Best Law Firms” list are recognized for professional excellence through consistently impressive ratings from clients and peers. Achieving a tiered ranking signals a unique combination of skill, integrity and qualifications. To be eligible for a ranking in a particular practice area and metro region, a law firm must have at least one lawyer who is included in Best Lawyers in that particular practice area and metro. Earlier this year, HechtSolberg attorney Paul E. Robinson was named the 2016 San Diego Land Use and Zoning Law “Lawyer of the Year.” Other HechtSolberg attorneys honored on the 2016 Best Lawyers ranking are Darryl O. Solberg for Business Organizations, Corporate Law and Real Estate Law and David W. Bagley II for Real Estate Law. “We are particularly proud of being ranked among San Diego’s best law firms because this ranking is generated by a rigorous evaluation process based heavily on peer and client reviews,” said Mickey Maher, managing partner at HechtSolberg. “This designation reflects the high level of respect we have earned from our clients and the San Diego legal community during the firm’s more than 40 years of leadership in the real estate and business industry.” n Sullivan Hill is pleased to announce that Associate Kathryn Millerick will be serving as a Director on the San Diego Bankruptcy Forum Board of Directors for a three year term commencing January 1, 2016. Millerick concentrates her practice in the firm’s insolvency and commercial bankruptcy KATHRYN MILLERICK practice group. She represents a variety of debtors, debtors in possession, creditors, and trustees in commercial bankruptcy cases. The San Diego Bankruptcy Forum is a non-profit organization of professionals working in the areas of bankruptcy and insolvency. Membership includes attorneys, accountants, trustees, bankers, real estate professionals, auctioneers, appraisers, consultants and others involved in the bankruptcy and insolvency process.

COMMUNITY news n Craig W. DuFord, Mallory Holt, and Corey C. Garrard have joined Wingert Grebing Brubaker & Juskie, LLP as associate attorneys. “The firm is incredibly excited to welcome Craig, Malory and Corey,” said Stephen Grebing, Wingert Grebing’s managing partner. “Each of the new associates brings CRAIG W. DUFORD their own unique experience and background to our diverse practice groups. We are also very happy to continue our tradition of hiring from California Western School of Law.” DuFord, who has practiced law in Nevada since 2012, was admitted to the California Bar in December and brings extensive experience representing clients in the areas of personal injury MALLORY HOLT defense, insurance bad faith, and professional malpractice. Holt, graduated magna cum laude from California Western in 2015 and was admitted to the California Bar in December. During law school, Holt gained experience working as a judicial extern with the United States District Court for the Southern District of California and as an intern for several San Diego law firms and public agencies. COREY C. GARRARD Garrard, also graduated magna cum laude from California Western and was admitted to the California Bar in December. As a member of California Western’s mock trial team, Garrard was a recipient of the Distinguished Advocate Award and the Dennis P. Mahoney Interschool Competition Award.

Have a Press Release you would like to submit for our Community News? Email it to PR@AttorneyJournal.us

Law firm with too much space? Attorney in need of an office? DowntownSublease.com A FREE sublease listing service brought to you by Hughes Marino, voted San Diego’s BEST commercial real estate company five years in a row by Union Tribune readers.

PRI M E O FFI CE SU IT E S FOR RENT

Up to seven executive offices available with secretarial space and full access to facilities, including receptionist. One America Plaza, 12th Floor For more information contact Stephen C. Grebing: 619-232-8151, sgrebing@wingertlaw.com

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

Where Do Attorneys Waste the Most Money in Their Marketing Efforts? by J.R. Oakes

AS WE SETTLE INTO 2016, we wanted to ask a few legal marketing experts where they saw attorneys wasting the most money in their marketing efforts. All of the experts have direct—and deep—experience with legal marketing, so this should help to refine your efforts for 2016. We asked each of the experts below, “Where do you think attorneys waste the most money in their marketing efforts?” The order of the responses is exactly as we received them. Thank you to all the law firm SEO experts for weighing in. If you are on Twitter, this would also serve as an excellent list of several of the best minds in the industry to follow.

LARRY BODINE Editor in Chief—The National Trial Lawyers and PersonalInjuiry.com | Website | Twitter: @larrybodine

Answer: Pay Per Click. Attorneys are constantly bidding up broad PPC keywords like “plaintiff personal injury” in competition with other lawyers. The term is so overused. A better move is to bid for injury-specific keywords like “brain injury” or “a-fibrillation.”

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

GRANT BROTT Lead Marketing Consultant at Consultwebs | Website | Twitter: @grantbrott

Answer: A lot of money is wasted on local media websites for online ads that don’t drive any actual client leads, just traffic. Unless they are leveraging retargeting lists, then it is just a paid banner that does nothing for the firm. Running these can be effective if there is tie-in to a recent recall or product issue. Normally, though, they are just branded banners with no target. There is not enough thought put into audience and tracking, which leads to a complete waste of money on the tactic. BILL SLAWSKI President of SEO by the Sea and Director of Search Marketing for Go Fish Digital | Website | Twitter: @bill_slawski

Answer: Many attorneys seem to want to target too large or broad of a set of terms, rather than creating content and pages and campaigns for the people who are most likely to choose to become their clients, within the jurisdictions they operate within.

GYI TSAKALAKIS Founder AttorneySync: Online Legal Marketing | Website | Twitter: @gyitsakalakis

Answer: In terms of total dollars, I suspect offline advertising (e.g. television, billboards, print, etc.). It’s not that these channels are wasteful per se, but that most attorneys aren’t measuring the return on ad spend from these expenditures. After those, probably via the AdWords legal bid war. In other words, uninformed campaigns designed to “be in the number one position for all relevant keywords regardless of their performance to generate a fee.” CONRAD SAAM Founder of Mockingbird Marketing | Website | Twitter: @conradsaam

Answer: This is hard to pick just one—I’d say most attorneys don’t have a clue how effective their marketing is by individual marketing channel, so there is lots of wasted money. Having said that, the industry as a whole blows the most money trying to “win” AdWords, followed closely by the thinly veiled regurgitation of news stories as blog posts. Sadly, there are still some attorneys who are still investing time and money building the raw count of Facebook likes and Twitter followers and Pinterest…. PAUL JULIUS SEM Lead at Consultwebs | Website | Twitter: @pj_julius 2015 Fragomen SD Attorney Journal - 1st Proof.pdf 1 10/6/2015

7:45:44 PM

Answer: Using any SEM/PPC management company that does not specialize in legal

advertising is a very bad investment. This is one of the most competitive and expensive verticals for AdWords, and you can’t leave that up to people who don’t deal with it on a regular basis. What the “one-size-fits-all” companies do may be OK for the local florist or mechanic who aren’t going to be spending thousands of dollars per month, but I’ve seen some bad things happen because many times these companies are focused on getting as many clicks as possible, regardless of how relevant they may be. MIKE RAMSEY President of NiftyMarketing and NiftyLaw | Website | Twitter: @mikeramsey

Answer: It would be really easy to say the biggest marketing waste is done with billboards, newspapers, TV ads, or print yellow pages, but I have come to see that all forms of marketing can bring ROI if done correctly. Some law firms are making old media methods work very well for them. I think the problem is in the tracking and attribution. If people don’t track well, then they can waste a lot of money in Adwords, or online directories, or anywhere else, and end up with a negative return on investment. So, for me, the most money wasted is on anything or anywhere that can’t have some form of measurement or attribution. n J.R. Oakes is in charge of developing and managing our comprehensive approach to search engine optimization for our law firm clients at Consultwebs.com. In this role, J.R. constantly analyzes and adapts our SEO strategy to address the constantly changing factors that go into high search engine rankings. Her can be reached at: 800-872-6590.

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

f o m u S GREATEST TSANhe DIEGO’S Plaintiﬀs’ Parts by Karen Gorden

LAW FIRM

OF THE MONTH

22016 014

Nationwide Public Interest Litigation Firm, Sanford Heisler Kimpel, LLP, Ed Chapin, Jill Sullivan Sanford, and Charles Field Lead New San Diego Office.

Firm Focuses on Discrimination,

Wage and Hour, Financial Abuse and Whistleblower Claims In December 2015, Sanford Heisler Kimpel, a national public interest litigation firm, announced that San Diego based genetic testing giant Pathway Genomics Corporation agreed to settle a whistleblower suit and pay the United States government, 28 states and the District of Columbia $4.1 million. Sanford Heisler Kimpel brought that suit on behalf of a former Pathway sales representative, who had first-hand knowledge of the company’s wrongdoing. At the time of the settlement announcement by the government, David Sanford, Chairman of Sanford Heisler Kimpel, said that the settlement provided affirmation of the key role whistleblowers play in ensuring transparency in government procurement at every level. Sanford said that “every U.S. citizen owes the whistleblower a debt of gratitude for ensuring their hard-earned tax dollars are not squandered on products or services that are tainted by illegal kickbacks and other fraudulent conduct.” In the first half of 2016, David Sanford will argue an appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in a long-running wage and hour dispute against Costco filed in federal court in San Diego. That case involves low-wage hourly workers at Costco warehouses around the country who clock out at the end of the late shift but are required to remain in the warehouse after clocking out for up to 30 minutes without pay. Sanford Heisler is class counsel seeking to represent over 30,000 employees nationwide. And in February 2016, Mr. Sanford will represent over one thousand female employees of Daiichi Pharmaceuticals in 16 Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

urging a federal court in San Francisco to approve a nationwide settlement of a gender discrimination class action. These cases are representative of the types of matters Sanford Heisler routinely brings. Now the firm will bring those cases with the added talent and experience that its new San Diego office brings. Familiar faces of some of San Diego’s most experienced, respected, and reputable litigators and trial attorneys are leading the firm’s new Southern California office.

Growing from Three Attorneys to ThirtyThree Attorneys in Four Cities and has Recovered Over One Billion Dollars for Clients and the United States Government Chairman David Sanford, a 1995 Stanford Law School graduate, has built a firm that has become one of the nation’s premier litigation firms focusing on whistleblower, discrimination, wage and hour, and financial abuse claims. Mr. Sanford was lead counsel in a gender discrimination case against Novartis, which culminated in the largest jury award in a discrimination matter in U.S. history. Mr. Sanford recently represented the former CFO of the international law firm, Proskauer Rose, who worked for Proskauer for more than 18 years. She claimed in her suit that she was marginalized and fired after taking medical leave for breast cancer treatment. She said that Mr. Sanford “is very warm, he’s very smart, he made me feel like I was his only client. We never rushed when we had a conversation. He runs a fantastic office.” Ms. Rosenthal settled her suit after about one year of litigation. The firm’s attorney’s hail from the most highly ranked law schools in the nation. In addition, about half of the firm’s

ÂŠ Bauman Photography

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

Ed Chapin

Jill Sullivan Sanford

attorneys have clerked for judges throughout the United States. Sanford said that “hiring the highest quality and best educated lawyers in the country is certainly one of the keys to the firm’s success. In addition, our lawyers need to have passion and a core belief that we are on the right side of justice.” The firm began with three attorneys in 2004. Since then, it has grown to over thirty attorneys in New York, Washington, D.C., San Francisco and now San Diego: it is now the largest public interest litigation firm in the United States. The firm has recovered over one billion dollars for its clients and for the United States government. Recoveries include a $762 million settlement with Amgen in a whistleblower case concerning allegations that Amgen had engaged in off-label marketing campaigns and kickbacks to physicians; a $253 million jury verdict against Novartis Pharmaceutical Company in the largest employment gender discrimination verdict in U.S. history; a $99 million recovery in a wage & hour class action; a $68.5 million settlement with Office Depot, in a whistleblower case alleging that Office Depot had violated the California False Claims Act by overcharging numerous governmental entities for office and classroom supplies; a $116 million settlement with Omnicare, in a whistleblower case alleging that the long-term care pharmacy engaged in unlawful kickbacks paid to nursing homes to induce drug purchases; and numerous 8-figure recoveries in gender discrimination and wage and hour class actions across the United States. Mr. Sanford noted that, in addition to the talented attorneys and passion required in the litigation of complex matters, he 18

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

expected attorneys to exercise creativity in moving the law in a positive direction for plaintiffs. He said, “The defense bar has capitalized on a conservative and corporate friendly Supreme Court. It is our job to advance the interests of individuals over corporate America by thinking outside of the box and offering lower courts expansive interpretations of the law consistent with precedent.”

A Firm Foundation: Ed Chapin Becomes Managing Partner Ed Chapin, one of San Diego’s most respected trial attorneys and has stood as a beacon of service in the San Diego legal community for decades, heads up the new San Diego office. “No one other than Ed Chapin could serve as the lynchpin for our office in San Diego. I have worked with Ed in trial, have served as co-counsel with him in national litigation matters, and have been privileged to consider him a friend for the past seven years. There is no one who works harder on a case, is more dedicated to his clients, is more effective in the courtroom, and is more passionate about what we do than is Ed.” Chapin needs no introduction to most of the San Diego legal community. He is a veteran civil trial lawyer, who has tried more than 100 cases in federal and state courts. Chapin has been a member of ABOTA for more than 20 years, and he has garnered nearly every legal award under the sun in the San Diego business and legal community. “I am first and foremost a civil trial attorney,” says Chapin. “I take a matter

Charles Field

with the thought it will go to trial. I relish representing the underdog and doing my best to obtain a full measure of justice for my client. Typically, I represent clients who are the victims of discrimination or unfair practices in the workplace, who have been defrauded by unfair business practices, who are the victims of financial elder abuse, or who have been killed or seriously injured in accidents.” Sanford and Chapin have tried cases together and continued to co-counsel on a number of other cases until Ed joined the firm in May 2015. Moreover, Chapin’s former partner, Harvard Law graduate Jill Sullivan, had joined Sanford Heisler in 2012 and married David Sanford, becoming Jill Sullivan Sanford. One night, Chapin recalls he was sitting in a bar in the Bay Area with Sanford following a challenging day in a difficult case, when Sanford jokingly asked what the tenured, experienced, and highly respected Chapin “wanted to do when he grew up.” Without batting an eye, Chapin said, “I want to open the San Diego office of Sanford Heisler Kimpel.” In May of 2015, Chapin did just that.

Jill Sullivan Sanford Joins the Firm Jill Sullivan Sanford has also earned her own stripes in the San Diego legal community, driven by ambition, hard work, and unwillingness to give up on herself or her clients. “I attended Harvard Law School right after I graduated from the University of Kansas. I borrowed every penny I needed to attend. Many, perhaps most, of my classmates had attended prestigious

David Sanford

undergraduate schools. I constantly feared I didn’t belong there and worked very hard to prove otherwise,” she recalls. Sullivan Sanford’s fears did not slow her down. Upon being admitted to the California Bar in 1996, she spent eight years at Latham & Watkins, working under “the tutelage of the late and truly great Jay Wheeler.” “When Jay and Ed Chapin asked me to start a firm with them in February 2005, with the goal of focusing on plaintiff’s side cases, I was honored and thrilled,” she says. After the death and devastating loss of her mentor, Wheeler, she and Chapin continued as partners for many years. Sullivan Sanford was drawn to Sanford Heisler’s social justice mission and began co-counseling with the firm in 2009. As fate would have it, she and Sanford fell in love. “We started dating in August 2011. We were working together so much that it made sense for me to join Sanford Heisler Kimpel in 2012. David and I were married in March 2013.” The fact that Sanford’s firm had such a large practice focusing on discrimination claims appealed to Sullivan Sanford from the start. The firm itself is a mosaic of diversity, with female attorneys in leadership positions, and many partners and attorneys from different ethnicities and sexual orientations working at the firm. Because women and minorities face discrimination so frequently, Sullivan Sanford’s skills, coupled with the fact that some women filing gender discrimination suits feel more comfortable working with a female attorney, make her a perfect complement to the San Diego office. Gender discrimination is not the only form of discrimination on which the firm focuses. Sanford Heisler Kimpel currently Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

represents a former general counsel of Zara, the female clothing chain. Fearing he would soon lose his job because of religious and sexual orientation discrimination by Zara executives, he retained Sanford Heisler. A pre-suit demand letter was drafted offering mediation. Negotiations in mediation ceased at midnight, and a complaint was electronically filed with the court three hours later. The firm also represents the general counsel of Armani, the fashion design clothing chain who was fired while in the hospital being treated for cancer and after discriminatory comments were made about Mexicans. Both cases are in discovery and will be tried in about one year. Cases like these drive Sullivan Sanford, Chapin, and the rest of their team to fight zealously for justice, whether the client is a Fortune 500 Executive, a fellow attorney, or minimum wage hourly workers. “I have represented dozens of executives and attorneys and have also represented classes of employees suing for discrimination or lost wages,” Sullivan Sanford says.

Fighting the Good Fight Against Financial Abuse: Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Matters; Securities and Investment Issues; Consumer Financial Fraud Cases; ERISA; and Financial Elder Abuse In order to provide complete civil liberty services to clients in all socioeconomic classes, Sanford knew that the burgeoning Southern California office needed an experienced and trustworthy attorney to lead the firm’s financial abuse practice area in San Diego. Sanford found precisely this in San Diego attorney Charles Field. With nearly thirty years of experience practicing in the securities law arena, Field spent many years as General Counsel of Nicholas-Applegate Capital Management and its successor, Allianz Global Investors Capital. He also held industry roles including Chief Compliance Officer, FINRA General Securities Principal, and General Municipal Securities Principal. Having worked for so many years on the sell-side with investment advisers, broker-dealers, and commodity trading advisers, he now puts his experience to work for plaintiffs in order to assess cases in which sellers have breached legal obligations and advise investors on the best strategies for recovering damages. In short, he now uses his expertise to work with the people, not those who hold the power. “I began following Sanford Heisler Kimpel in 2011 when I was the General Counsel at Allianz Global Investors Capital and David Sanford was threatening to sue us for gender discrimination. I learned Sanford Heisler Kimpel handled big, important cases, but it was the firm’s frankness, obvious determination and above all, direct action and methods that impressed me. Sanford’s tone at the top sets the approach for the firm. He has the respect of his peers, including the defense bar.” “We are committed to offering a broad array of both transactional and litigation services to participants in the financial services area. With 14 lawyers within the financial 20

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

services practice group, we have handled securities and investment cases, Dodd-Frank whistleblower cases, and consumer financial fraud cases for victims who have been swindled by fraudulent actors in the financial world. In October 2015, we settled a financial elder abuse case against a nationally known securities broker-dealer. We have undertaken investigations of large scale front-running schemes, while at the same time are counsel to a Chinese investment group seeking to participate in the U.S. securities markets as a broker-dealer and investment advisory.” Field’s tenure on the ‘other side’ is now also used to the benefit of employees who wish to challenge the handling of 401 (k) plans under ERISA laws. He also represents elders who are often targeted and victimized for financial abuse, under the California Elder Abuse Law.

Same Faces, New Name Fighting for Justice Chapin, Sullivan Sanford, and Field have all been involved in the San Diego legal community for years. It is the coming together of these preeminent attorneys, backed by a firm with a track record of success in fighting for victims in every socioeconomic class, which has Chairman David Sanford excited about the firm’s future in San Diego. “We will continue our firm’s focus on diverse sectors of the economy in Southern California, as a nearly 100% contingency fee firm fighting for social justice representing plaintiffs in discrimination, wage and hour disputes, and financial abuses including qui tam/false claims, said Sanford” Sullivan Sanford is looking forward to the challenges that her position in the relatively newly established San Diego office will bring. “My dad is a lawyer and he has always loved practicing law. In fact, he was most passionate when he was working out difficult situations-he liked being the person who could resolve tough issues. His example of a happy and intellectually challenging life in law led me to my own happy and intellectually challenging life in law,” she says. Finally, Chapin sums up his vision for Sanford Heisler Kimpel in San Diego by saying, “Our firm is unique in the United States: small yet practicing at the level of many behemoth firms. While we are located in four offices, we practice as one firm; the resources of all our offices can be brought to bear on a case in a given locale. Collaboration is a key to our success.” n Contact Ed Chapin 501 West Broadway Suite 515 San Diego, CA 92101 619 577 4253 echapin@sanfordheisler.com www.sanfordheisler.com

What Does the Pace of Law Firm Mergers Mean? by Mike O’Horo

For 20 years, Mike O’Horo has been known by lawyers everywhere as The Coach. He has trained more than 7,000 of them, generating $1.5 billion in new business. Mike can be reached at mikeohoro@ rainmakervt.com

ccording to a recent ABA Journal article, Law Firm Mergers Continue at Record Pace, the first nine months of 2015 saw the highest number of law firm mergers since Altman Weil began tracking them, and all were acquisitions of firms with fewer than 35 lawyers. In late December, Law360 reported that 2015 set a record for law firm mergers, again citing large firms acquiring smaller ones to fill in holes in geography or service areas. What does all this mean? In a word, “consolidation,” which signals market maturity, which in turn is defined as an absence of significant growth, and a lack of innovation. Whether you’re a large firm doing the acquiring, or a smaller one subject to being acquired, you’d be well served to understand the lessons of The Consolidation Curve, which explains how,

Industry Concentration CR31 100%

STAGE 1 Opening

once an industry is formed or deregulated, it moves through four stages of consolidation. I put law firms in the newly deregulated category because, for them, The Great Recession was really the Great Reset. While they weren’t formally protected by regulation, law firms were insulated from meaningful competition by years of unprecedented and steady increase in demand, driven by the growth of business complexity, and producing what The American Lawyer called the “Golden Age of law firms.” In 2008, forces that had been bubbling below the surface, long suppressed by the 25-year bull market for legal service, emerged to accelerate fundamental change akin to those that follow deregulation, most notably, out-of-category competition, such as law firms are seeing from legal-tech startups, “offshoring,” and other consultancies, and a decline in pricing power.

STAGE 2 Scale

STAGE 3 Focus

90%

Industry Consolidation Life Cycle Once an industry forms or is deregulated, it will move through four stages of consolidation – or disappear. CR3 – The combined market share of the three largest companies in an industry (based on A.T. Kearney’s ValueBuilding Growth database of 25,000 companies.) 1

STAGE 4 Balance and Alliance

Tobacco

80% Distillers Shipbuilding

70%

Aircraft OEMs Aerospace suppliers Truck builders

60% 50% Food

40% 30%

Breweries

Railway Telecom

20% 10%

Defense

Automatic controls

Utilities

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

Chemicals Airlines Services Drugs

Insurance

Toys Rubber & tire producers Automotive OEMs Steelmakers

Restaurants & fast food Pulp & paper Automotive suppliers

Banks

Time

Shoes Soft drinks

The Harvard Business Review graph and article (above) suggests that law firms are in Stage 1. They’re advised to “build scale, create a global footprint, and establish barriers to entry by protecting proprietary technology or ideas.” While the previous spate of mergers and acquisitions that combined so many of the larger firms was often in pursuit of a global footprint, few law firms have proprietary technology or ideas to protect. This makes them vulnerable to innovators, whether from law boutiques or technology startups. Yet, despite the risk of obsolescence argued by the New York Times, inexplicably, law firms remain resistant to embracing the changes necessitated by their circumstances. The HBR model further urges firms to “focus more on revenue than profit, working to amass market share, and begin perfecting their acquisition skills.” Law firms have long been focused on profit, and it seems they’re trying to pursue both goals, i.e., revenue and profit. The inherent conflict may at least partially explain their struggle to formulate and apply a cohesive strategy. Most of the challenges derive from firms’ failure to recognize, or outright denial about, the fundamental shift in 2008 from a longstanding Seller’s Market to the Buyer’s

Market that is a permanent element of the law industry’s future. This Seller’s-Market-to-Buyer’s-Market shift is the most fundamental in business. It obsoletes virtually every strategy, operational philosophy, and business model that has characterized the business for the entirety of its existence.

Nothing that worked in a Seller’s Market will work in a Buyer’s Market. Nothing. In a Seller’s Market, everyone is a product company. In a Buyer’s Market, everyone must be a marketing and sales company. Whether an AmLaw 100 firm, a solo practice, or something between, the law business has been as far removed from marketing-centric as is possible. That has to change, and perhaps the biggest mindset shift is to accept that Sales is too missioncritical a function to trust to luck. It must be professionalized.

It doesn’t matter whether you hire a professional sales force or train your lawyers to sell professionally, it’s time for law firms to take Sales seriously, and stop hoping that a part-time, volunteer, occasional sales effort will somehow succeed. It simply can’t. n

LUDWIG LAW CENTER, INC. The Small Firm Making a Big Difference! • Domestic violence

• Modifications

• Mediation services

• Custody visitation

• Dissolutions

• Restraining orders

• Property settlements

• Paternity action

• Guardianship

• Pre-marital and postmarital agreements • Business Litigation

Ludwig Law Center offers a variety of family law services to all courts in Orange County, San Diego County, Los Angeles County, Riverside County and San Bernardino County. Using our knowledge and experience, we work hard for your referrals. We are committed to seeing our cases through to their final resolution. LudwigLawCenter.com | 714-283-1023 | LudwigLawCenter@Hotmail.com | Referrals Paid

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

From day one of your

Reporting

deposition to the last day

Videography

of your trial, Peterson Reporting

Trial Presentation

is an indispensable member of your trial team. Proven professionalism and proficiency

ELG Brightens Severance Packages

Peterson Reporting. Providing nationwide service since 1986.

Free Conference Rooms Live Streaming Services Video Conferencing Services

for more than 25 years. Locally owned, globally known.

Global Reach

The Preferred Referral for Executives and Professionals!

Complex Cases Accurate, Fast

ELG

® ✓Severance

Executive Law Group®

Legal Services for Executives and Professionals in

530 B Street, Suite 350 San Diego, CA 92101

619 260 1069

Transition

Packages

✓Employment Contracts ✓Crisis Counseling ✓Litigation

Since 1986 petersonreporting.com

Refer executives and professionals to execlaw.com or contact us toll-free for a free pre-consultation.

Call to request green delivery of your transcripts and receive a discount.

888.920.EXEC (3932)

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

Peterson AttJrnl HPV.indd 1

7/12/13 5:04 PM

R. Craig Scott, Esq. Founder and Managing Partner “AV Preeminent® ” Rated

Law firm with too much space? Attorney in need of an office? MEET MELISSA DELEON

DowntownSublease.com A FREE sublease listing service brought to you by Hughes Marino, voted San Diego’s BEST commercial real estate company five years in a row by Union Tribune readers.

Melissa Deleon represents victims of personal injuries and wrongful death. She is the past president of Filipino American Lawyers of San Diego, affiliate leader to the National Chair to San Diego County Bar Association’s Ethnic Relations and Diversity Committee, and a current board member of the Filipino American Chamber of Commerce. She has been named one of San Diego’s “Top Young Attorneys,” “Top Young Influentials,” “Best of the Bar” for personal injury litigation and a Super Lawyers “Rising Star.” REFERRALS PAID

110 Laurel Street • San Diego, CA 92101 • 619-238-1811 • caseygerry.com ESOP_AD_2015.PDF

1/23/15

1:31 PM

FOCUSED ON EMPLOYEE BENEFITS Butterfield Schechter LLP is one of Southern California’s largest law firms dealing primarily with ERISA and Employee Benefit Law matters. Our practice areas include:

CMY

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

Tired of Paying Referral Fees? Seek Alternative Case Drivers

by Tanner Jones

alk to most contingency-fee lawyers, and they will tell you how critical referrals are to their business. Then, ask them how much they enjoy writing referral checks once their client’s case is resolved. The truth is, most firms continue to rely heavily on referrals, yet despise paying the fees associated with getting their cases. Take a moment to add up how much you paid out in referral fees this year. Compare that to the total number of referred cases that you settled or won at trial. What is your total cost per referred case? If your average cost per referred case is over $1,500, you should certainly consider some other avenues that would drive cases to your firm for less money. From my experience, there are three types of referrals for contingency fee-based lawyers: 1. Client Referrals 2. Attorney Referrals 3. Networking Referrals This article relates mostly to attorney referrals, but could also apply to networking referrals where you pay out a referral fee. Consider how those referring attorneys are getting the original leads. Where are they advertising? What is their messaging? What type of clients are they attracting? Evaluating their source of leads and the method they are using to attract them will give you tremendous insight into reevaluating your own marketing and advertising efforts. It will also help you identify opportunities for less-expensive ways to get new clients.

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

The average firm that is sending out the bulk of referrals for personal injury cases is almost always a heavy advertiser. They have established processes for high-volume intake, strong closing skills, and (usually) a meticulous follow-up system. They also often have a set methodology for communicating with the firms they refer cases to, in order to track pending referral fees. In other words, they are making a killing off of you—all because you have yet to master a successful marketing plan for yourself. Before we jump into the solution, consider the pros and cons of attorney referrals.

Pros of Depending on Referrals: • There is little risk to accepting a referral. If you don’t win,

you don’t pay (other than your time involved and anything else you put into the case). • You are able to keep your overhead down significantly, primarily by avoiding marketing expenses. • You are able to avoid being labeled as an “ambulance chaser” by limiting your advertising. • Because of the above, you are seen as more credible and trustworthy by your peers, clients, judges and quite possibly future jury members.

Cons of Depending on Referrals: • If the referrals dry up, so does your entire business. You are completely dependent upon others for your livelihood.

• You end up paying out significantly more than you would have if you originated the client yourself.

• You fatten the advertisers’ pocket

so they can invest even more into advertising—and further outpace you in your own marketing efforts. • It’s very difficult to control the type of clients to which you get access (beggars can’t be choosers, right?).

Figure 2. Professional Services’ Planned Marketing Initiatives in 2015 Try to generate more referrals

61.9% 57.9%

Increase the brand visibility of your firm Updating/upgrading your website

54.9%

Increase the visibility of your experts

54.5%

If you are cringing nearly every time Make existing clients more aware 53.5% you write a referral check, you probably of the services you offer have already considered these pros and Develop a more compelling message 53.2% to potential clients cons. Regardless, they should be valuable reminders to you. A content marketing program 47.2% The truth is, in today’s digital marketing Develop a marketing strategy/plan 45.5% world, you have just as much direct access to your prospective clients as the highA lead generation program 42.5% advertising-budget referral mill down the Finding a stronger competitive street. Ken Hardison from PILMMA said 40.8% advantage that referrals are much less valuable to Conducting research on your target 33.8% attorneys today, unless you are depending market primarily on high-end, boutique, seven29.9% Training in business development skills figure cases. TJ Saye, COO of Salvi Schostok & Conducting client satisfaction research 22.7% Pritchard, said “attorney referrals are not Rebranding your firm 18.7% nearly as important today” for their business. “Fifteen years ago they represented 75% of Other 1.7% our business. Today, with the onset of digital 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 marketing and our ability to reach the mass public, I’d put it at closer to 40% with a large Source: www.hingemarketing.com/blog/story/new-research-on-2015-professional-services-marketing-priorities percentage coming from internet, branding You also have the ability to better control your expenses as work, past clients, and friends of the firm.” compared to depending on referrals in any given year. Imagine TJ went on to say that he would rate his firm’s dependence signing a high-value case where you did not have to pay out a on attorney referrals at a 6 (on a scale from 1 to 10, with 1 hefty referral fee. What opportunities would that create for your being not at all and 10 being the cornerstone to their success). firm? Where could you reinvest that additional revenue? How He felt as though it should be a part of their overall mix—a would that help further separate you from your competition? good safety net when other strategies slow down, but not While we certainly would never encourage you to give up on primarily relied upon. referrals altogether, you should always consider ways to reduce Going Against the Grain your expenses and grow your revenue. Start by performing a selfWhile this advice may seem like common sense to you, assessment of your own website and see for yourself what work needs dependence on attorney referrals across the country is still to be done to be a little less dependent on referrals next year. n widespread. A recent Hinge Marketing study found that the top-rated marketing plan for professionals was still: “Try to Tanner Jones serves as the Marketing Director for generate more referrals.” Consultwebs.com, the premier provider of innovative online The same study also suggested that over 80% of the people legal marketing to ethical U.S. law firms seeking growth who are referred to you will go to your website to review your and profit. Consultwebs fosters professional, long-term firm before taking action to call or contact you. relationships built on trust, integrity, high quality and results. If you are seeking ways to cut down your referral fee Often the first contact clients have with Consultwebs, Tanner expenses while simultaneously growing your caseload, you helps law firms develop their marketing strategies, including have to establish a sound marketing plan. With the growth and search marketing campaigns, responsive website design, social unparalleled use of the Internet, starting with your website and media and pay-per-click advertising. Tanner has spoken and overall Web presence is a must. Marketing your firm on the presented at legal marketing seminars throughout the country Internet offers highly targeted avenues for getting your name in including the PILMMA and M&L Legal Marketing conferences. front of the right prospective clients—often, prospective clients www.consultwebs.com. who are actively seeking legal representation. Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

Law Offices of Anna R. Yum Former Prosecutor and Award-Winning Trial Attorney National TV Legal Analyst Avvo Client’s Choice Award for Criminal Defense Attorneys in 2013, 2014, and 2015 DUI Drug Offense Domestic Violence Sex Crimes And many more Perfect 10.0 Rating on Avvo Super Lawyers Rising Star in 2015 The National Trial Lawyers: Top 100 Trial Lawyers Referrals Paid 619-233-4433 annayumlaw.com 501 West Broadway #700. San Diego, CA 92101

FORENSIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC. We are a Southern California-based forensics firm offering a full-service mobile and Mac device forensics lab. We employ certified examiners with proven track records. Specializing in: · Cellular Phones and Tablets (Over 15,000 Models Supported) · Mac Computers · Assistance with Court Order Language for Obtaining Call Detail Records · Cell Tower and Geolocation Mapping Services · Joint Test Action Group, (JTAG) Procedures for Recovering Information from “Dead” or “Locked” Phones and Devices

9434 Chesapeake Drive Suite 1210 San Diego, CA 92123

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

619-235-6691 csr@ftforensics.com

What Makes a SUPER LAWYER Can Also Make a SUPER WEBSITE by Helen Gulgun Bukulmez

As an attorney, you know that the legal marketplace is already crowded with competition. Every year, tens of thousands more budding lawyers graduate from law schools. In a single recent year, the American Bar Association reported that 46,000 people were awarded Juris Doctor or LL.M. degrees by U.S. law schools. Only about half of these graduates are able to find jobs in the legal field. Even experienced attorneys find themselves in a competitive market having to prove to their prospective clients that they are better than the next attorney in a given practice area. How can you make yourself stand out from the crowd? Perhaps the fierce competition is one of the reasons for some of the catchy TV advertisements, such as depictions of a tiger in human form or an out-of-control motorcyclist rampaging through a dark room and ultimately saving a sad, helpless individual. With TV and cable giving way to the Web, the competition and their resources are now moving into online legal advertising. Examples include a website, a YouTube channel for the firm’s practice or a social media account all working harmoniously to attract the next client. It is no secret that the more compassion an attorney’s online legal marketing is able to show, the better. If the online resources are used well and if they tell a story about why an attorney’s knowledge, experience and strategy are relevant to a specific client, it attracts attention and provides excellent return on investment for the attorney. Content on an attorney’s website is the key to such success. One of the most important content opportunities is to display any legal associations the attorney belongs to and any acknowledgements an attorney has achieved in his or her legal career. Nomination, selection and recognition of attorneys by Super Lawyers, for example, is a great opportunity for an attorney to feature such a selection on his or her website and other online legal marketing platforms. For most seasoned attorneys, the nomination and selection to Super Lawyers is a rather easy process. When I spoke with Mike Dyer and Doug Mann, personal injury attorneys in Dayton, Ohio, they said they did not even know who had nominated them to be considered for selection as Super Lawyers. For younger and less experienced attorneys, it can be a challenge to even be nominated. The organization has a detailed outline of the process that explains how an attorney can be nominated, reviewed and 30

Attorney Journal San Diego | Volume 150, 2016

selected to be a Super Lawyer in a given practice area. Although a happy client can certainly contact the organization and recommend your superior services as an attorney, the most effective nominations seem to come from your peers and the independent recruiting and research efforts of the organization itself. It appears that your partner or supervising attorney can nominate you as a candidate, but the nomination should be reinforced by a source outside the firm. In what appears to be an objective process, a nomination goes through independent research by the organization, which looks at the nominee’s number of clients, verdicts and settlements, bar association and pro bono activities, as well as community involvement to make its decision. Information about the same criteria can make a firm’s website successful and deliver the desired return on investment. If you seek a nomination to Super Lawyers, the process provides an opportunity to improve your practice through successful outcomes, client outreach and community service. An attorney who understands and appreciates the value of a well-designed and strategically planned website and proper investment in an online legal marketing campaign will know that the Super Lawyers nomination and selection process can complement efforts to build a great brand and boost the number and quality of cases from the firm’s online legal marketing investment. The process is also a testament not only the attorney’s ability to connect with and serve his or her clients well, but also his or her ability to build meaningful and mutually beneficial relationships with the local bar and the legal community. After all, practice of law is more than one’s ability to negotiate settlements and draft the necessary pleadings to carry a case into litigation. It is also the skill and investment in our social environment, which is comprised not only of prospective clients, but also our colleagues. n

Who will nominate you to Super Lawyers? Helen Gulgun Bukulmez, Esq. brings unique skills and insights she has gained as a practicing attorney and successful entrepreneur to her role as a Client Liaison with Consultwebs and frequently participates in and presents at legal seminars, conventions and continuing legal education programs, helping to raise legal professionals’ awareness of the most effective and ethical online marketing methods.

“Rick is one of the best lawyers in the country. I call him every time I have any issue in Nevada and would not hesitate to refer him any type of case of any size. We recently settled a significant case in Nevada after two days of mediation. Rick was masterful in dealing with the retired judge mediator, the defense team, and our clients, and he maximized the recovery. Whenever I need anything in Nevada, the Richard Harris Law Firm is there for me.” ~ C. Michael Alder, Esq., Alder Law

CAALA Past President and Trial Lawyer of the Year 2004 Los Angeles, California

“I recently co-counseled a serious Las Vegas injury case with Rick Harris and his law firm. Rick’s advocacy and skills are extraordinary, and were instrumental in resolving and maximizing our client’s sizable recovery. The case was expertly worked up, litigated, and masterfully mediated. Everyone I worked with on Rick’s team was outstanding. For either a referral or a co-counsel arrangement, I wholeheartedly recommend Rick and the Richard Harris Law Firm for any Nevada case.” ~ Carl Wolf, Esq., Callaway & Wolf Northern California Super Lawyer 2010 San Francisco, California

PRSRT STD U.S. POSTAGE

PAID

Post Falls, ID PERMIT NO. 32

UNRIVALED JURY VERDICTS SET T L EM E N TS PERSONAL SERVICE REFERRAL FEES

PANISH SHEA & BOYLE is happy to discuss how

we may assist you in your case. Please contact

the Honorable Judge Peter Polos (Ret.) for more information at polos@psblaw.com.

WWW.PSBLAW.COM

310.477.1700

1.877.800.1700