LegalMatch Logo
Winter 2006 Attorney Newsletter
Welcome to the Winter 2006 issue of The Legal Chamber, LegalMatch's official Attorney Member newsletter. At LegalMatch, connecting the right attorney with the right client is our greatest concern. Over the last few months, we've made some remarkable upgrades to our service creating new and exciting ways to match you with more well-informed clients. You can read about these upgrades and other interesting subjects here in The Legal Chamber.

First, a bit of trivia.

Landmark Cases in Supreme Court History
Name the U.S. Supreme Court Case that held: the Constitution bars a state from interfering with an employee's right to contract with an employer.
(Read the newsletter and find the answer at the end.)

In this issue:
LegalMatch System Changes

LegalMatch's highest priority is to offer the latest and most sophisticated automated matching system available anywhere. Like a well-oiled machine, our system benefits both clients and attorneys alike. With new innovations occurring regularly, LegalMatch continues to lead the industry.


Harnessing the Power of the Internet

What you need to know: We've modified our intake process aimed at delivering to you a more informed client.

Focusing on enhancing case quality, we have modified our intake system. As of mid-January, clients are given more information about the potential costs of attorney services. This information is delivered to them during the intake process.

The new client intake page gives the client:
  • an estimated hourly price quote range for attorneys in the area specified (state, experience level, & area of law), and
  • asks the client how they anticipate they will pay for legal services if they ultimately hire an attorney.
"By giving clients the range of what to expect from attorneys, we cushion the sticker shock some clients feel when they ultimately get a rate quote from an attorney. The always important and often awkward discussion of billable rates is presented upfront and in a safe and non-threatening way to the clients," says Ken LaMance, LegalMatch's manager of Client Services and practicing attorney. "The more information clients understand prior to first contact with an attorney, the better off they both are," continues Ken. By discouraging those looking for free legal advice and by having clients visualize how they will pay for an attorney if they decide to hire one, LegalMatch's new intake system gives you, the attorney, a better sense of how a client will pay for your services. According to LaMance, "Monitoring expectations is a key element in the LegalMatch system and is something that the Yellow Pages or even TV ads can't broach."


More Eyes on the Prize

What you need to know: You now have the ability to flag false cases and add new categories.

Beginning back on February 6, we added something new to the interface of your potential case list. We did this in response to the number of false or incorrectly categorized cases that are posted into the LegalMatch system. The new interface is designed to rid our system of these costly and time-consuming mistakes. You now have the ability to flag sham cases for our review and you can add categories to cases that you deem more applicable to the matter described. We hope you take advantage of the system; doing so will help the entire system work more efficiently, saving everyone time.

To learn more about these system upgrades, please contact your LegalMatch Marketing Manager.


LegalMatch Attorneys of Year Announced
Alicia Henning – LAWYER OF THE YEAR, Greater Salt Lake area

Photo of Legalmatch Attorney of the Year, Alicia HenningFamily Law attorney Alicia Henning puts the interests of her clients at the forefront in her law practice. Because she received such high ratings by dozens of clients, engaged through LegalMatch, she was the obvious choice for our highest honor.

Additional honors went to:
Marc Levine, Employment Lawyer of the Year
Denise Nalley, Criminal Lawyer of the Year
Mazyar Hedayat, Bankruptcy Lawyer of the Year
Richard Kolomejec, Immigration Lawyer of the Year

Congratulations, one and all!


More People are Looking for Lawyers

What you need to know: We received a record numbers of cases in January.

Due to our improved intake system and targeted marketing efforts, a record number of cases continue to flow into the LegalMatch system. From year to year, we continue to attract more and more potential clients. In fact, our users have increased more than 34% in just 24 months. In real numbers, this means that in January 2006 alone, nearly 250,000 people seeking legal services logged on to our system, a new record.


Something to Think About

According to an April 2002 survey conducted by L.J. Shapiro & Associates, and prepared on behalf of the American Bar Association, almost 7 in 10 households had some occasion during the past year that might have led them to hire a lawyer, but over half of those who might need a lawyer say they do not plan to hire one.

(Source: Public Perception of Lawyers Consumer Research Findings, April 2002, LJS & Associates)


Pinpointing Talent

Welcome to our newest Case Study attorney, Rebecca P.:

"LegalMatch has been a real shot in the arm!" says Boulder, Colorado Family law Attorney Rebecca P.. Almost immediately after joining LegalMatch, she received twenty potential cases to review. "Some were only seeking information," she says, "But I picked up three new, paying clients in my first couple of weeks as a LegalMatch member." And that was only the start of a new business surge.

Read Rebecca's entire case study.


No Client Left Behind

What you need to know: MembershipPlus allows you to reach a wider range of clients.

LegalMatch has tested a new program, MembershipPlus, aimed at addressing clients' and attorneys' special needs. Now, we're launching it nationwide. Beginning March 1, 2006, this premium program assists potential clients who are currently not being served, while giving you, the Member Attorneys, a unique opportunity to increase the number of cases that come across your desk.

Here's how and why MembershipPlus works:
In some areas, LegalMatch has clients with good cases but has no allocated attorneys. This occurs when the population is relatively small and doesn't generate enough cases within a particular legal specialty, or, in some instances, LegalMatch just hasn't found the right attorney for the allocation. As we are committed to matching all consumers with the right attorney, we knew we had to do something to fill this void.

Problem solved: LegalMatch MembershipPlus.

This program works to help you in three ways:
1. MembershipPlus increases the quality cases in your practice area within your entire state.
2. It expands your practice faster.
3. It raises the level of awareness of your firm.

According to Don Keane, Vice President of Marketing, "We constantly monitor the needs of our clients and the needs of our attorneys. With MembershipPlus, we find cases that meet a legal specialty but are unassigned and unmatched because of their location, being situated where there are no existing Member Attorneys. MembershipPlus then matches these clients with attorneys from a wider geographic range. This way, we serve the client's needs without affecting existing Member Attorney allocations." Every Member Attorney can view the cases available in MembershipPlus from their home page but only those MembershipPlus subscribers can respond to these cases. So login to your LegalMatch home page and see for yourself why you should join MembershipPlus.

To take advantage of the introductory rate of $99/month, please contact MembershipPlus Representative Jeff Sacramento at or 415-946-0834. If you prefer, simply call your Marketing Manager.


And now... the answer to:

Landmark Cases in Supreme Court History

Lochner v. New York, 1905
The above reasoning led to the "Lochner Era" — thirty-two years of wrangling between the court and legislatures. Lochner's bakery violated a New York labor law. The court struck down the law, saying that the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause barred states from regulating commerce in this manner. This clause, the Court said, implied that individuals have a fundamental right to contract with employers, and states cannot interfere with that right.

Look for more trivia and more LegalMatch news in the Spring issue of The Legal Chamber.

LegalMatch: The Benchmark for Attorney / Client Matching Services