Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site.... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyse the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customised advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyse the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.


Arbitration award calls policies into question

Boston Globe Article
By Casey Ross – original article

$540,000 overcharge sheds light on law firm bills

An arbitrator has found the law firm Goodwin Procter overcharged a real estate client by more than $540,000 in a rare showdown over the billing procedures used by many of Boston’s largest and most prominent legal practices.

The arbitrator, Jeffrey Martin, ruled Goodwin submitted “vague’’ invoices to Northland Investment Corp., failed to provide a promised discount, and used too many of its attorneys to bill for the same legal tasks.

As a result, Martin ordered Goodwin to cut its $1.1 million invoice by 55 percent.
The case is unusual both for the amount of money involved and because it is playing out in public, with the parties disputing financial matters and other issues that law firms typically handle in private.

Although the matter is still being contested — Northland has asked a court to reduce its bill still further, to zero — the arbitrator’s finding calls into question the business model Goodwin and many other large law firms have relied on for decades: Deploying huge legal teams to pursue clients’ cases, often assigning more than a dozen lawyers to compile research, conduct depositions, and draft motions.

The promise of such treatment is part of what attracts clients to large firms, but it can also leave them shocked when they get bills for work by a multitude of lawyers, each costing upward of $250 an hour, and some much more.

“Firms simply throw bodies at cases, and that allows them to bill and bill and bill,’’ said Alan Fanger, a Newton lawyer who specializes in fee disputes with law firms and legal malpractice cases.

“Until fairly recently,’’ he said, “most corporate clients just paid the bill and didn’t ask any questions.’’

But the economic downturn has caused many corporate clients to more closely scrutinize their legal bills and challenge fees they deem unreasonable. Moreover, increased competition between law firms is prompting some to consider alternative billing arrangements, such as flat fees instead of hourly billing.

Fee disputes between law firms and their clients are not unusual, with more than 130 cases a year in the state coming before an arbitration board run by the Massachusetts Bar Association. But legal analysts said disputes typically involve less than $10,000, many resolved before the arbitrator even rules.

Despite the size of the overbilling found by the arbitrator, Goodwin said, the firm does not see Martin’s decision as a repudiation of its practices.

If anything, the firm said in a statement, Martin’s decision affirms its position that Northland still owes it money — now around $560,000 plus other disbursements — rather than backing the client’s assertion it doesn’t owe Goodwin anything.

Read the entire article on Boston.com

[shareaholic app="share_buttons" id="21332620"]
Super Lawyers
ABA
MABA
MATA
Avvo