{"id":489,"date":"2007-01-23T14:56:15","date_gmt":"2007-01-23T18:56:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/shlep\/2007\/01\/23\/legalzoom-and-the-future-of-lawyering\/"},"modified":"2007-01-31T22:40:52","modified_gmt":"2007-02-01T02:40:52","slug":"legalzoom-and-the-future-of-lawyering","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/shlep\/2007\/01\/23\/legalzoom-and-the-future-of-lawyering\/","title":{"rendered":"LegalZoom and the future of lawyering"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"LegalZoomLogo\"\u00a0Rick Georges, a member of Team Shlep, had an interesting posting last week at his Future Lawyer<\/em> weblog<\/a>\u00a0about LegalZoom Online<\/strong><\/a>, which calls itself a “Legal Documentation Service.”\u00a0\u00a0 Saying “We can help you take care of common legal matters – without an attorney,” LegalZoom<\/em> explains that you can\u00a0“Save time and money on common legal matters! . . . [and] create reliable legal documents from your home or office. Simply answer a few questions online, and your documents will be prepared within 48 hours.* We even review your answers and guarantee your satisfaction.”\u00a0 (via Oregon Legal Research<\/em><\/a>, Jan. 17, 2007)<\/p>\n

After taking a look at LegalZoom<\/em>, Rick says “lawyers who don’t use technology will not be able to compete.”\u00a0 He explains:<\/p>\n

“We need to offer legal advice AND document drafting at a competitive price, or we will not have to worry about law practice anymore. It will be gone. There is no subsitute for a competent lawyer’s advice. However, we need to give the public value, or they will go elsewhere.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Many publications have written about LegalZoom<\/em>, but Rick’s nudge got me to spend some time at the website over the weekend.\u00a0\u00a0 It is an impressive enterprise, offering\u00a0document creation services in the following areas:\u00a0Copyright, DBA, Divorce, Immigration, Incorporation Services, Limited Partnership, Living Trust, Living Will, LLC, Name Change, Patent, Power of Attorney, Pre-nuptial Agreement, Real Estate Leases, Small Claims, Trademarks, Will.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"LegalZoomN\"\u00a0Furthermore, the advantages<\/a> that they boast about — reviewing your answers for correctness and completeness; having\u00a0assistance available at a tollfree number;\u00a0using\u00a0advanced provisions that are not found in simple \u201cdo-it-yourself\u201d kits or manuals; printing out the documents themselves on good paper stock; “per project” and “lawyer-free”\u00a0pricing<\/a> that is far below what a lawyer might charge using hourly fees (they say up to 85% and give an estimate of the savings for each service); and a 100% Satisfaction Guarantee — would surely\u00a0appeal (if only they knew about it) to many legal consumers who want to\u00a0save money and\u00a0keep control of the project, but are wary of,\u00a0or don’t have time for, acting on their own.<\/p>\n

LegalZoom<\/em> also has an Education Center\/Library<\/a>,\u00a0that “allows you to access the information you need to research your legal questions and make informed decisions” (e.g., FAQs, Legal Topic articles, Glossary, and Non-Legal Resources).\u00a0 For example, see the Prenuptial Library<\/a>.\u00a0 The materials are available to anyone and seem like helpful introductions to the many topics covered.\u00a0 In addition, you can fill out the LegalZoom <\/em>questionnaire for each procedure for free and “At the end, you may decide whether or not you wish to purchase.”\u00a0\u00a0 That\u00a0process may help many consumers decide whether they can go it on their own — using\u00a0forms and information prepared by a court or\u00a0by a self-help publisher — and\/or need\u00a0the direct advice or (unbundled) services of a lawyer.<\/p>\n

I can’t endorse LegalZoom<\/em> as a product, but I can say that it appears to be worth considering by consumers who need lawyering services.\u00a0 The apparent success to date of LegalZoom<\/em> is, I believe, an important milestone in the market for legal services.\u00a0 Americans like to use a product or service that they have heard about and that has a track record; and entrepeneurs are much more likely to enter the market with competiing services (perhaps focused on a particular state or legal subject) if they see a model that works.\u00a0\u00a0 As Rick Georges suggests, lawyers — especially those serving the everyday, common legal needs of the average consumer or small business — may find themselves at a great disadvantage if they do not figure out a way to offer comparable value to their clients (in service, results and<\/em> price).\u00a0 Document-creation technology will surely be a part of that\u00a0value package, allowing fees to be lowered because far less time will be spent with each client.<\/p>\n

Having said that, I am not at all\u00a0certain that the change — a revolution\u00a0that brings true price and service compeition to the lawyering marketplace, and creates more viable choices\u00a0for consumers\u00a0— will benefit\u00a0a large percentage of consumers any time soon.\u00a0 Under the fold, I have excerpted a posting from my weblog f\/k\/a<\/em>,\u00a0“Internet Lawsites Encounter the Profession\u2019s Guild Mentality<\/a>”\u00a0(Sept. 16, 2003) that discusses\u00a0why the legal profession’s “guild mentality”\u00a0has kept if from adopting new techology and responding to competitive forces, as lawyers try to hold on to income, control, and status, in the face of a new breed of consumer. \"ComplaintBill\"\u00a0 Excerpts from “Internet Lawsites Encounter the Profession\u2019s Guild Mentality<\/a>,” Sept. 16, 2003, at the\u00a0ethicalEsq<\/em>-f\/k\/a weblog:<\/p>\n

. . . [M]y experience looking at learned professions from the competition-consumer perspective tells me that the real culprit [in the failure of websites offering legal services] is the historic \u201cguild\u201d mentality, which fears and opposes virtually every type of innovation in services or marketing.\u00a0 This is especially true if most guild members see themselves as threatened with the loss of business and income, the need to become more efficient, or the pressure to engage in price or quality competition.\u00a0 In addition, in the last few decades, doctors and lawyers have been most reluctant to cede their position of unquestioned authority to mere consumers.\u00a0\u00a0 (see our posting<\/a> on Sept. 4, 2003, discussing the new breed of client and unbundling) . . . .<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"sharkS\"\u00a0I\u2019m not saying that there will never be a financially viable format for delivering legal services online.\u00a0 I am say, however, that expecting a broad and significant amount of interest from the bar or its members is unrealistic.\u00a0\u00a0 Most likely, individuals or small groups of lawyer-entrepeneurs will have to carve out target markets of consumers and attract them to their sites.\u00a0 Piggy-backing on the self-help services of courts \u2014 by offering complementary unblundled services \u2014 might be a good place to start.\u00a0 Just remember: the guild won\u2019t make the efforts easy. . . . .<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

P.S. Sherry Fowler (a\/k\/a Scheherazade) at Civil Procedure<\/strike> Stay of Execution<\/a> . . . left a Comment worth sharing here on the Home Page:<\/p>\n

There are so many circumstances in which a sensible, practical, reasonably priced solution to a client\u2019s problem needn\u2019t involve a lawyer, or needn\u2019t involve a lawyer for long. Why on earth should acknowledging that be so antithetical to so many lawyers? It\u2019s absurd.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Editor\u2019s Reply<\/em>: I don\u2019t know if this was a rhetorical question.\u00a0 If not, my pithiest answer would be: fear of losing dollars, control, prestige.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

More expansively, it seems that most lawyers expected a very good lifestyle to come automatically with their J.D., along with high social status.\u00a0 They are angry and worried that the marketplace doesn\u2019t value their services as highly as they had expected, and they are bewildered that society doesn\u2019t give them the anticipated respect.\u00a0\u00a0 Good intentions of any one individual lawyer can be readily overwhelmed by the demands of partners (at work and home) to keep the income stream flowing.\u00a0\u00a0 The result, as individuals and as a group, is resistance to any change that threatens to further undermine their financial and social position.\u00a0\u00a0 As stated with refreshing candor in a recent bar association publication, \u201cthe top concerns of the practicing bar are the economics of the practice and the image of the profession.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 (Illinois State Bar Association Bar News<\/a><\/em>, June 16, 2003)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u00a0Rick Georges, a member of Team Shlep, had an interesting posting last week at his Future Lawyer weblog\u00a0about LegalZoom Online, which calls itself a “Legal Documentation Service.”\u00a0\u00a0 Saying “We can help you take care of common legal matters – without an attorney,” LegalZoom explains that you can\u00a0“Save time and money on common legal matters! . […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":437,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[896],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-489","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-resources-consumer"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/shlep\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/489","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/shlep\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/shlep\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/shlep\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/437"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/shlep\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=489"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/shlep\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/489\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/shlep\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=489"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/shlep\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=489"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/shlep\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=489"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}