JD Scoop

One of the things I like most about  my work at JD Supra is that I get to meet so many interesting people - and read things I never took the time to read when I was practicing law. Last week, I had the opportunity to meet Ari Kaplan (who recently wrote an article about JD Supra for Legal Tech) in person and get a copy of his book, The Opportunity Maker. 

Well, Ari is a pretty impressive guy - but The Opportunity Maker is equally so. It is the book I wish I had read in law school or, better yet, in college. Though the book's title includes "Inspiring Your Legal Career Through Creative Networking and Business Development" the principles and techniques discussed apply to every career, not just the law. 

In his book, Ari Kaplan shares many of the concrete actions that lead to successful business development - including specific advice about finding mentors; networking effectively; getting published; being asked to present; and leveraging the opportunities you have created to extract their greatest benefit.

As I read through this book, I knew I would want to write about it, and kept an eye out for good quotes to share. I quickly gave up as there was more than one line worthy of quote on every single page. But, if I had to pick one lesson to highlight, it would be this:

The relationship between self-promotion and rainmaking is simple: those who can genuinely engage with others tend to be more satisfied, more excited about their work and more fulfilled in how they live. Those qualities attract opportunities, which are often converted into professional success. We want to believe that it is more complicated than that to explain why so few people master the art. The truth is: They master the art because they concern themselves with the journey rather than the destination.

This is a recurring theme throughout:  To be an effective rainmaker, you absolutely must be authentic in all your efforts - networking, speaking, publishing - and understand that these activities are a long-term investment. 

These days I often overhear people, particularly in legal marketing, speak about "ROI." (For example: "what is the ROI of participating on LinkedIn?") Trying to measure the value of time spent participating online against the likelihood this will result in client acquisition and, ultimately, revenue.  

What does the book say about this kind of thinking? "People often wonder what the direct correlation is between organically promoting yourself and client generation. Those who do the wondering tend to fail before they start."   Why? If you don't already know, you should definitely read the book, which is available here. The cost: $18.95. The ROI for those who follow its advice: infinite.

We all understand, to some degree or another, the value of sharing useful information online to reach new prospects and clients. Do we also recognize the importance of situation in this marketing transaction?

Recently the folks at Search Engine Guide published the first post in a new series titled Seven Building Blocks of a Destination Website.  The #1 building block of a destination website? Expert information. To whit:

If you can't be considered as an expert on your subject, what reason is there for someone to [engage you or your service]? For most people, they want to find people who are confident and know their information inside and out. If I'm not confident that you'll be able to answer my questions intelligently, I'll move on to someone who can.

Author and SEO expert Stoney deGeyter mainly approaches this in the context of giving away information on your own website (with a focus on retail sales; his real-world example: buying a television set). Yet, deGeyter's points about sharing information are valuable to anyone working to establish authority and expertise online, no matter the context:

• You can't exactly sell yourself as an expert unless you have the content to back it up.
• If your visitors feel that they can trust the information you're providing ... you'll be able to make a connection with them that other[s] don't.
• Content for the sake of content is pointless.
• By focusing on providing expert information, you're letting your visitors know that you are knowledgeable about what you are doing.

Less obvious is what happens when you consider the sharing of expert information in other situations, other contexts (beyond the obvious example of product reviews on your own site to drive retail sales).

Take, for example, the situation created by JD Supra. As a legal professional you could publish the documents you write on a daily basis directly to your website (and, in fact, you should). But something shifts when you take those very same documents and, along with peers and colleagues, share them in the service of free legal information, in a larger collection of other work, on a third-party site, under the umbrella of an entirely different brand: online research.

Same expert information, different situation - your own website vs. a user-generated research tool. As a consequence, the way in which the work is received changes.

Another example: from childhood. Once a year, when I was a young schoolboy in South Africa, the Coca-Cola company drove their trucks to our school and every kid lined up to receive a free bottle of ice-cold Coke. Of course, as children we didn't think of this as marketing. And, more importantly, given that this happened before soft drinks and child obesity became red flag issues, parents didn't think of it as marketing, either. It was just a treat.

I wonder how our parents would've responded if we'd been bussed to the Coke factory annually and given a bottle there? Maybe most wouldn't have cared either, but I'm guessing a fair number would've thought twice about it because the situation - the details surrounding the freebie - had shifted. No longer a cold soft drink on a school playground, now the creation of a more blatant marketing opportunity. A free coke during a school break vs. a bus ride to a factory.

Situation influences the value of what you are sharing.

The lesson? Share expert information (including on your own website or blog), but be sure to share it in all of the right places.

JD Supra and a free soft drink at school are my examples. Can you think of other situations that influence the value of what's being shared? Share them (no pun intended) with us here, please.

JD Supra contributor, Izard Nobel is a class action law firm that represents investors, employees, consumers, businesses and others hurt by corporate wrongdoing. Its practice is focused on four areas:

• Investor protection, such as stock fraud, mismanagement, excessive compensation and broker policies;
  
• Retirement plans, including losses in retirement, 401(k) and health plans;
  
• Consumer protection, such as stock fraud, mismanagement, excessive compensation and broker policies; and
  
• Anti-trust/unfair business, including unfair trade and competition, price fixing and monopolization.

Izard Nobel has shared a multitude of court filings and decisions from its class action practice that unequivocally demonstrate its expertise and success in litigating each of these kinds of actions.  Among others, the filings and decisions from the AOL Time Warner Securities and ERISA class action litigation in which it (along with co-lead counsel) achieved a $100 million settlement for the class members.

And, Izard Nobel's latest Hot Docs - two decisions in favor of its class plaintiffs - are no exception:

• A 9th Circuit decision in the case of Berson v. Applied Signal Technology, holding that the plaintiffs stated a claim of securities fraud where the defendant allegedly included work for which the government had issued "stop work orders" in its calculation of anticipated revenue from "backlog" work orders. The underlying legal arguments Izard Nobel presented, which lead to this success, is also available here. (Where else but in the practice of law could there be an arguable question of whether a representation regarding the existence of backlog work orders is a "forward looking" statement?)
  
• A California district court decision in In Re First American Corp. ERISA litigation, denying the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint on behalf of employees of First American Corp. whose 401(k) Plans declined sharply in value due to investment in First American stock. Izard Nobel participated with co-counsel in this briefing in which the Court found plaintiffs had adequately stated a claim under ERISA by alleging (1) that defendants were fiduciaries of the Plan; (2) that the price of First American's stock had become artificially inflated through false or misleading information provided by company executives; (3) that it was a breach of fiduciary duty for the fiduciaries to purchase or maintain imprudent investments in artificially inflated stock; and (4) that defendants had a duty to provide true and accurate information about investments to Plan Participants.
  

Here's a roundup some of the newest members sharing their work on JD Supra - we're thrilled to have them on board:

	Richard Means - represents candidates, political organizations, governmental entities, unions, and business organizations in election law matters and public interest litigation.
	Lipton, Weinberger & Husick - a firm focused on intellectual property and technology law, located in the western suburbs of Philadelphia. The firm has eight affiliated attorneys and is involved in both prosecution and litigation.
	Ira Raab - professor of Criminal Justice at Keiser University in West Palm Beach, Florida; Chair of the Criminal Justice Advisory Committee for the City of West  Palm Beach; and Vice Chair of the City Green Task Force. Also, a member of the National Arbitration and Mediation panel and the American Judges Association.
	William Wooton of Jackson, Shields, Yeiser, and Holt  - practicing in the areas of general corporate law, contract development and negotiations, business and tax transactions, intellectual property, entrepreneurial law, and landlord/tenant disputes.
	Joshua Gilliland - conducts seminars on the new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, e-Discovery, and other growing trends in litigation. Josh has done over 60 e-Discovery seminars, covering all of North America from Miami to Anchorage and Canada. He is the blogger on e-Discovery, highlighting issues of text message authentication, YouTube deposition exhibits, and MP3 Players as the cause of class action lawsuits.
	Tom French - partner at DLA Piper (US). Speciaizes in representing technology and life science startup companies. He is based in Silicon Valley, with clients mainly in Silicon Valley, although some are located in China and Israel.
	Brad Lehrman - partner, Lomman Abdo, PA, practicing in the corporate finance and entrepreneurial venture group. Also the founder and President of Portage Capital, Inc., a business and venture capital consulting firm serving a select number of emerging companies with business management and investor relation services.
	Wyker Legal Services, LLC - providing legal counsel, advice, and representation to entrepeneurs regarding business formation, changes and transitions in ownership and type of entity, establishing and administering employee benefit plans and workplace policies and procedures, and general legal matters affecting small businesses and their owners.. Robert L. Abell - principally representing individuals in personal injury and tort cases, including complex tort cases, insurance claims matters, employment law matters and workers compensation.
	Teller Levit Silvertrust, PC -  A premier collection law firm in the Midwest that combines a tradition of service with the most advanced technology to satisfy the needs and demands of sophisticated users of legal services facing the challenges of the global economy in the 21st Century

This new Consolidated Complaint of all actions against AT&T is a great resource for those following the numerous lawsuits against the telecommunications giant for giving the National Security Agency (NSA) access to customer information, records, and wiretapping.

The Consolidated Complaint walks through all of the key coverage and events, describes each class involved, and identifies all of the laws AT&T is alleged to have violated, including quotes of the relevant portions of the applicable statutes.

According to the complaint, "This case challenges the legality of Defendants’ participation in a secret and illegal government program to intercept and analyze vast quantities of Americans’ telephone communications and records, surveillance done without any statutorily authorized permission, customers’ knowledge or consent, or the authorization of a court, and in violation of federal electronic surveillance and telecommunications statutes, as well as the First and Fourth Amendments to the United States Constitution."
                                              *   *   *

On the subject of federal surveillance, also of interest is this court order In Re National Security Agency Telecommunications Records Litigation, dismissing the complaint of the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation and its lawyers with leave to amend. The complaint had alleged that the NSA illegally targeted the Islamic charity for warrantless electronic surveillance of communications between the charity and its lawyers.

In its ruling granting the plaintiffs leave to amend, the court noted that:

Of special relevance to the court’s present inquiry, Congress included in the FISA bill a declaration that the FISA regime, together with the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 codified at chapter 119 of Title 18 of the United States Code, 18 USC §§ 2510-22 (“Title III”), were to be the “exclusive means” by which domestic electronic surveillance for national security purposes could be conducted. . . .This provision [ 18 USC § 2511(2)(f)] and its legislative history left no doubt that Congress intended to displace entirely the various warrantless wiretapping and surveillance programs undertaken by the executive branch and to leave no room for the president to undertake warrantless surveillance in the domestic sphere in the future.

But: "FISA makes little provision for notice to surveilled individuals except when the government chooses to disclose surveillance materials and the provisions that exist are easy for the government to avoid . . . In consequence, the cases are few and far between in which an individual ever learns of having been subject to electronic surveillance within FISA's purview and therefore possibly having standing as an aggrieved party."

The Al-Haramain case is unique as the plaintiffs discovered the surveillance as a result of  "a small tear in the thick veil of secrecy behind which the government had been conducting its electronic surveillance activities" - an inadvertent disclosure by the government.

However, under the law, the plaintiffs are not allowed to use this document as evidence to establish their standing under FISA. The court is, nevertheless, giving the plaintiffs an opportunity to adequately allege their standing in an amended pleading.

One can only wonder - could the plaintiffs use the information obtained in the AT&T case to do so?

Thanksgiving has always been my favorite holiday - because it asks us to turn our attention to all that we are grateful for, and, in my family anyway, to express this thanks verbally - and we can't help but recognize, as we are sit around a table laden with more delicious food than we can eat,  just how lucky we truly are.

On this Fourth of July, I would like to bring in a little thanksgiving and express how grateful I am, as a first generation American, to be a part of this Country, which was founded on the rule of law; to have been able play a part in our incredible legal system, and, most of all, to now have the opportunity to create a venue that celebrates the work of the law connected to the people behind it.

To me, this is a critical mission, for a the rule of law on which our country is founded has no meaning without the practitioners whose work effectuates and defines it. 

The Declaration of Independence pronounces that "all men are created equal" and, to support that belief, Congress passed the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, providing that "no state shall . . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." But, these are just words on paper (or parchment).

It is the work of attorneys, like Fred Gray (most well-known for representing Rosa Parks), who give these words meaning, effect, life - and it is through their written work that we can see the intersection of the human story and the law; and it is this work that memorializes the attorney's role in maintaining and evolving our rule of law.

Though the daily work of the law may not be as glamorous or groundbreaking as the Rosa Parks case, every case tells a human story - not only of the parties, but the advocates who, through their work, maintain and shape our rule of law for everyone's benefit, and I am proud to be a part of a country where this work flourishes and to be a part of a venue that brings this connection to the forefront.

I hope that you all have a wonderful Fourth of July!

Here's a look at some of the top subject-area searches (and their results) for June on JD Supra:

1. Contract - top results come from Morrison & Foerster, yours truly,  Liang Yongwen, Christopher Hill, and Kalow & Springut.
2. Trademark - leading the results are  Morrison & Foerster, Kalow & Springut, Cantor Colburn, EFF, Jim Bowman, and PCT Law Group PLLC.
   
3. Divorce - top docs from Hodes, Pessin & Katz; Michael Hamden; James W. Hart; Jimmy L. Verner; Daniel Janich; and VIctoria Pynchon.
4. Immigration - top results from Morley Law Office; Mintz Levin's immigration group; Amy Becerra; International Legal Counsel; Edward Reisman; and Tindall & Foster, P.C.
5. CPLR -top contributors include Gary E. Rosenberg; Ezratty, Ezratty & Levine; Robert Stein, Esq.; and Kenneth Fink.
6. Real Estate - leading the results are Mintz Levin's real estate practice group, Clark Wilson, Lane Powell, Morrison & Foerster, and Ellyn Law.
7. Patent - leading the results are Cantor Colburn, Morrison & Foerster, G. Christopher Ritter, Mintz Levin's Intellectual Property practice group, and Kalow & Springut.
   
8. Antitrust -tops on the results are Schatz, Nobel, Izard, PC; EPIC; Mitchell J. Kassoff; John Pentz; and Morrison & Foerster.
   
9. Bankruptcy - docs on top from Alicia Butler; Schatz, Nobel & Izard, PC; Victoria Pynchon; Marc Stern; R. Scott Gardner; Mitchell J. Kassoff; and Mitchell Matorin.
10. Disability - top results from Mark Bove;  Law Offices of Matthew S. Mansfield, P.C.; Lane Powell; Richard L. Shea; Helene Wasserman; Brown, Brown & Brown, P.C.; and  Doug Cornelius.

Not surprisingly, contributors are coming up tops for searches within their areas of specialty. 

The results also reflect just how our Google-powered search engine works: the more documents you upload, the more related documents you upload, and the more often you upload documents, the greater weight the search engine gives your work in the search results.

The lesson? Should be obvious.

Further to our post yesterday about making meaningful connections via your written work, see Mack Collier's piece last week at Search Engine Guide ("Why is Social Media So Hard for Businesses"). Collier uses the following language to get a handle on what "social media" might mean, exactly:

... a group of tools and sites that let you easily create and share content online.

"Blogs, social networks, and podcasts are the common forms of social media that most of us are at least somewhat familiar with," Collier continues. (JD Supra fits the model, too: here, legal professionals are provided an opportunity to share content that they've already created.)

Collier's piece is about the importance of that single verb: to share.

He argues that businesses have trouble understanding the true value of these new online tools and platforms (and consequently how to effectively use them) because they still approach the online landscape in terms of one-way communication, not sharing. His point:

... sharing implies interaction. Publishing and distributing implies one-way channels.

What does this mean on a repository of legal information freely shared by the people who are generating the information?

You understand the sharing part, that's done by JD Supra contributors in the form of newsletters, articles, alerts, and numerous court filings, decisions, briefs, legal documents, and so forth.

What about the interaction part? Luckily, depending on the user, that can take many forms, including:

• Peers and colleagues (other lawyers): using your filings to see the application of law to a set of specific facts;
• Business leaders and in-house counsel: using your articles, alerts, and newsletters to keep abreast of the latest industry-specific legislation and legal news;
• Peers and colleagues (other lawyers): using your profile and body of work to assess expertise and experience;
• Members of the media: using your newsworthy Hot Docs as a source for fresh stories (and connecting via profiles with legal experts for substantive and authoritative analysis);
• Legal consumers: using your documents as a basis for learning more about their legal issues, for determining your relevant expertise, for making the determination whether you are the lawyer or law firm that they need.
  

That's the start of it; the list continues, as you can imagine.

We've raised the idea before in posts about our favorite catch-all phrase: content marketing. The days of Yellow Pages are over; this is a model of outreach (to new clients, colleagues, the press, anyone from whom you want attention) that begins with a seemingly counter-intuitive notion. As Collier puts it:  "use these tools and sites to create more value than you receive. "

That's another way of saying: when you participate online today, start by offering something truly useful and you'll vastly increase your chances of being noticed and rewarded for it. Borrowing Steve Matthews' comment on yesterday's post, sharing useful information is one of the most effective ways to frame the portrait of your practice.

From Collier again:

The more value you can create for others with social media, the more value you will receive back as a result.

What do you include in your definition of social media? Please share it below, in the comments.