ILNews

Hebenstreit: Too Many Clients?

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

IBA-hebenstreitDo you have too many clients? If so, you can probably skip this article; but, if not please read on.

For many years, the IndyBar has been in the lawyer referral business. Each year, the staff fields more than 40,000 calls from the general public and those calls result in new business for the members who take advantage of the Lawyer Referral Service. For the nominal fee of $250 per year, any member can participate. Our members can also determine if they want to participate in the Modest Means service and/or the Legal Advice Hotline at no additional expense.

Attorneys designate what practice areas in which they are interested in receiving calls. There is no limit of practice areas, but most participants try to only accept calls in the areas in which they feel comfortable. The Modest Means panel is designed to assist lower income clients engage an attorney for a reduced fee. Finally the Legal Advice Hotline is a product that allows a client to speak with an attorney over the telephone. The call is limited to 20 minutes. It is popular because it allows a prospective client to determine if they even have a legal problem or one that can be resolved quickly. Both the Modest Means and Legal Advice Hotline are great additional options for newer lawyers trying to build a basic practice.

All calls are routed through the IndyBar staff who are trained to pre screen the calls to determine if they have merit and what areas of the law are involved. Approximately 16,000 referrals are made each year. Calls are forwarded on a rotating basis to the LRS participants who are interested in cases in the area of interest to the caller. The callers are also able to request referrals to an attorney in a given geographical area if they choose to do so. In addition to the annual fee, the participating lawyers self report fees they earn on LRS cases and pay a modest percentage of those fees back to the IndyBar. More than $2.37 million was earned by the panelists between January 2010 and August 2011. That is an average return of over $2700 per case which is more that a 10% return on the investment of the annual fee.In case there is any question whether or not the expense if worthwhile, the average panelist earned over $11,500 in 2010 with 2 panelists earning over $120,000 and one attorney who earned $300,000 on a referred case. The success of the program is attributed to a number of factors, but generally, who should the public better rely on in seeking a legal referral than the IndyBar.

For over a year, the Legal Services Advisory Committee under the leadership of Jeff Meunier has been fine-tuning a new and additional referral service. Although many clients prefer to call for a referral, many are now using the Internet to search for legal referrals. The Indy LawyerFinder is the answer. This web based product will feature IndyBar lawyers who are interested in showcasing their areas of practice. We have engaged a web developer to create the platform. Although there will be a general template of information each participating attorney will feature, the program will allow creativity for the attorneys. In addition to allowing the attorney to promote their individual expertise, a good deal of time and money is being invested in order to achieve search engine optimization so our site will attract a large number of hits. We want the clients to find our product before looking for others. The Lawyer Referral Service will continue to work exactly the way it has in the past, but the Indy LawyerFinder will be yet another service for our members.

We are hopeful that the Indy Lawyer Finder will be launched and fully operational before the end of the year. Its success will depend on the number of qualified attorneys who participate. Chris Hickey is leading the team soliciting our members to participate. If she calls you, please take the time to listen—unless you have more clients than you want.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Ah ha, so the architect of the ISC Commission to advance racial preferences and gender warfare, a commission that has no place at the inn for any suffering religious discrimination, see details http://www.theindianalawyer.com/nominees-selected-for-us-attorney-in-indiana/PARAMS/article/44263 ..... this grand architect of that institutionalized 14th amendment violation just cannot bring himself to utter the word religious discrimination, now can he: "Shepard noted two questions rise immediately from the decision. The first is how will trial courts handle allegations of racism during jury deliberations? The second is does this exception apply only to race? Shepard believes the exception to Rule 606 could also be applied to sexual orientation and gender." Thus barks the Shepard: "Race, gender, sexual orientation". But not religion, oh no, not that. YET CONSIDER ... http://www.pewforum.org/topics/restrictions-on-religion/ Of course the old dog's inability to see this post modern phenomena, but to instead myopically focus on the sexual orientation issues, again betrays one of his pet protects, see here http://www.in.gov/judiciary/admin/files/fair-pubs-summit-agenda.pdf Does such preference also reveal the mind of an anti-religious bigot? There can be no doubt that those on the front lines of the orientation battle often believe religion their enemy. That certainly could explain why the ISC kicked me in the face and down the proverbial crevice when I documented religious discrimination in its antechambers in 2009 .... years before the current turnover began that ended with a whole new court (hallelujah!) in 2017. Details on the kick to my face here http://www.wnd.com/2011/08/329933/ Friends and countrymen, harbor no doubt about it .... anti-religious bias is strong with this old dog, it is. One can only wonder what Hoosier WW2 hero and great jurist Justice Alfred Pivarnik would have made of all of this? Take this comment home for us, Gary Welsh (RIP): http://advanceindiana.blogspot.com/2005/05/sex-lies-and-supreme-court-justices.html

  2. my sister hit a horse that ran in the highway the horse belonged to an amish man she is now in a nurseing home for life. The family the horse belonged to has paid some but more needs to be paid she also has kids still at home...can we sue in the state f Indiana

  3. Or does the study merely wish they fade away? “It just hasn’t risen substantially in decades,” Joan Williams, director of the Center for WorkLife Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law told Law360. “What we should be looking for is progress, and that’s not what we’re seeing.” PROGRESS = less white males in leadership. Thus the heading and honest questions here ....

  4. One need not wonder why we are importing sex slaves into North America. Perhaps these hapless victims of human trafficking were being imported for a book of play with the Royal Order of Jesters? https://medium.com/@HeapingHelping/who-are-the-royal-order-of-jesters-55ffe6f6acea Indianapolis hosts these major pervs in a big way .... https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Royal-Order-of-Jesters-National-Office/163360597025389 I wonder what affect they exert on Hoosier politics? And its judiciary? A very interesting program on their history and preferences here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtgBdUtw26c

  5. Joseph Buser, Montgomery County Chief Prosecutor, has been involved in both representing the State of Indiana as Prosecutor while filing as Representing Attorney on behalf of himself and the State of Indiana in Civil Proceedings for seized cash and merchandise using a Verified Complaint For Forfeiture of Motor Vehicle, Us Currency And Reimbursement Of Costs, as is evident in Montgomery County Circuit Court Case Number 54C01-1401-MI-000018, CCS below, seen before Judge Harry Siamas, and filed on 01/13/2014. Sheriff Mark Castille is also named. All three defendants named by summons have prior convictions under Mr. Buser, which as the Indiana Supreme Court, in the opinion of The Matter of Mark R. McKinney, No. 18S00-0905-DI-220, stated that McKinney created a conflict of interest by simultaneously prosecuting drug offender cases while pocketing assets seized from defendants in those cases. All moneys that come from forfeitures MUST go to the COMMON SCHOOL FUND.

ADVERTISEMENT