4 ms·

Fees and info get shared with non-lawyers all the time. As long as the right contracts are in place, there's nothing problematic about it. If Atrium LTS structu

Fees and info get shared with non-lawyers all the time. As long as the right contracts are in place, there's nothing problematic about it. If Atrium LTS structures the decisionmaking so that Atrium LLP is giving the legal advice for the purposes of the law, then there's nothing shaky here. At some point this will all get hashed out in court a few dozen times, but there's nothing about this that looks insoluble.

bdowling 7y ago
Yes, lawyers pay non-lawyers for services all time. I’m thinking of profit-sharing. We don’t know how close to profit-sharing their arrangement is, because we don’t know the details of the contract between them. I’m sure their lawyers have good arguments that their business is free of conflicts of interest. However, that they appear to intentionally blur the line between the company and the firm is suspicious.
- sjy 7y ago
  What do you find suspicious about it? You've acknowledged that they're presumably taking care to comply with the letter of the law. As long as legal advice is being provided by lawyers whose ethical duties override their personal interests (eg. share holdings in a closely-related non-law company), what's the problem? Other jurisdictions have relaxed the rule against profit-sharing and I don't think there have been any major ethical problems as a result.
- woah 7y ago
  The big 4 accounting firms do a huge amount of legal work for clients. It’s done by people who have passed the bar but are “not practicing attorneys” at the firm.
- Matticus_Rex 7y ago
  There's an entire industry devoted to the idea of that profit-sharing (legal/litigation financing), and many large firms are financed by what is essentially a litigation investment company. Very little of this is new ground.
  - bdowling 7y ago
    As far as I know, litigation finance is just a high-interest, non-recourse loan secured solely by a future recovery from a lawsuit. It is used by plaintiffs to pay for personal expenses during a lawsuit. Plaintiffs just promise to repay the principal amount plus interest in case of a recovery, it's not an assignment of all or a portion of their interest in the recovery. So, maybe I misunderstand this. Are law firms actually selling a percentage of their fee in contingent cases to these companies? Or is it structured as a high-interest loan like the loans to plaintiffs?

bdowling 7y ago

Yes, lawyers pay non-lawyers for services all time. I’m thinking of profit-sharing. We don’t know how close to profit-sharing their arrangement is, because we don’t know the details of the contract between them. I’m sure their lawyers have good arguments that their business is free of conflicts of interest. However, that they appear to intentionally blur the line between the company and the firm is suspicious.

sjy 7y ago
What do you find suspicious about it? You've acknowledged that they're presumably taking care to comply with the letter of the law. As long as legal advice is being provided by lawyers whose ethical duties override their personal interests (eg. share holdings in a closely-related non-law company), what's the problem? Other jurisdictions have relaxed the rule against profit-sharing and I don't think there have been any major ethical problems as a result.
woah 7y ago
The big 4 accounting firms do a huge amount of legal work for clients. It’s done by people who have passed the bar but are “not practicing attorneys” at the firm.
Matticus_Rex 7y ago
There's an entire industry devoted to the idea of that profit-sharing (legal/litigation financing), and many large firms are financed by what is essentially a litigation investment company. Very little of this is new ground.
- bdowling 7y ago
  As far as I know, litigation finance is just a high-interest, non-recourse loan secured solely by a future recovery from a lawsuit. It is used by plaintiffs to pay for personal expenses during a lawsuit. Plaintiffs just promise to repay the principal amount plus interest in case of a recovery, it's not an assignment of all or a portion of their interest in the recovery. So, maybe I misunderstand this. Are law firms actually selling a percentage of their fee in contingent cases to these companies? Or is it structured as a high-interest loan like the loans to plaintiffs?