ILNews

New partnerships require a shared vision, bit of nerve

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Lawyers who’ve teamed up to start firms as partnerships say putting their professional names and reputations on the line together takes mutual trust, respect, a shared vision, and a fair amount of nerve.

Where will clients come from? How will the bills get paid? What if things don’t work out?

“Definitely, those thoughts are there before you take the leap, when you take the leap, and after you take the leap,” said Bob Johnson, who with Travis Jensen formed the personal injury firm of Johnson Jensen LLP in Indianapolis about four years ago.

Johnson said he felt reassured, though, when a veteran lawyer confided in him, “I’m 75 years old, and I still worry about that.”

“Insecurity is always there,” Johnson said. “But you just kind of bear down and put it aside.”

Johnson-Jensen-6-15col.jpg Founders of Indianapolis personal injury firm Johnson Jensen LLP Travis Jensen, left, and Robert Johnson, right, were friends and colleagues who had talked for years about forming a partnership before doing so about four years ago. “I can anticipate what Bob’s going to do,” Jensen said. “And I know he’s going to have my back.” (IL Photo/Eric Learned)

Jensen and Johnson, both Lafayette natives, had worked together at larger firms at different points during their careers – Johnson began practicing in 1993 and Jensen in 1998 – before they realized they had similar ideas for the kind of firm they wanted.

“We really tried to build a practice by trying to utilize technology and go with less mass advertising,” Jensen said. The firm’s website puts a focus on current clients, and the partnership,

which handles personal injury, medical negligence, medical malpractice and other plaintiff injury matters, also was launched on a contingency-fee basis.

“Oftentimes counsel in a relatively new firm will have to finance a case that could take several years to come to conclusion,” he said. “It creates an interesting dynamic.”

But Jensen said results can be measured by the response the firm has received. “The vast majority of new work comes from referrals from attorneys or clients.”

Jensen and Johnson had talked occasionally for years about forming a firm before their plans materialized. “Bob and I both had a lot of choices as to who to partner with,” Jensen said. “I’ve never been more proud to be partnered with somebody than with Bob.”

Straight out of school

Brandon Tate and Kevin Bowen were students at Indiana University McKinney School of Law when they began talking seriously during their second year about starting a firm in Indianapolis upon graduation. Tate & Bowen LLP will mark its first anniversary this fall.

Bowen said both he and Tate passed up good opportunities in order to pursue a common vision. “We both had that entrepreneurial spirit, and we knew this was a worthwhile cause and we could be successful,” Bowen said.

“We started outlining what we wanted in a law firm,” Tate said. “We didn’t want to be a two-attorney office forever.”

Bowen said he used a third-year course on law firm management to develop a business blueprint and budgets complete with how much money he and Tate would have to invest, keeping overhead as low as possible at the start.

The firm’s niche would be family and criminal law for lower-income people who don’t qualify for public defenders or legal assistance. From there, the plan was to grow into a more general practice, Tate said.

“We actually got calls the first day,” Bowen said. “There hasn’t been a whole lot of down time.”

Tate and Bowen said the first year has shattered the expectations of their business plan. With Tate’s experience in contract matters and Bowen’s background in family and criminal law, Tate said the partnership is fielding an increasingly diverse portfolio of clients.

“We can almost double-team the law and learn and teach each other as we learn it,” Tate said.

What matters most

TateBowen-2-15col.jpg Brandon Tate, left, and Kevin Bowen, right, developed a business plan during their third year of law school and opened Tate & Bowen LLP in Indianapolis after passing the bar. The focus was family law and criminal defense for low- to moderate-income people who were just above the threshold for public assistance. “We actually got calls the first day,” Bowen said. (IL Photo/Eric Learned)

Law firm partners agree there’s one overriding quality for a successful partnership.

“Reliability. Period,” Jensen said. “You have to know in this business where things are thrown at you every day that you can’t anticipate you have to have somebody you know you can rely on.

“I can anticipate what Bob’s going to do,” he said. “And I know he’s going to have my back.”

“We figured out we wanted the same thing as far as a law firm,” Johnson said. “We wanted equal responsibility, we wanted to leverage the amazing technology that’s out there to be able to compete with the larger defense firms on cases, and we wanted to practice law the way we wanted to and know we have each other’s backs.”

Johnson said he and Jensen also wanted an environment where communication was open and honest. “I’ve always said the practice of law is hard enough, and if you have issues in the office between partners, it’s almost impossible to practice in a way that’s pleasant or successful.”

Bowen and Tate, meanwhile, agree the differences in their personalities are helpful.

“He’s more reserved while I complemented him on being very outspoken,” Bowen said, and Tate agreed. “He’s more attentive to detail while I’m more ‘big-picture’ oriented.

“We’re friends first and we’ve tried not to let that get in the way of professionalism,” Bowen said. “We do put in the hours, and I trust he’s going to put in as much work as I do.

Tate said law partners need to be able to disagree, argue and come to resolution amicably on issues in cases or on whether to take on a client, for example. “You’re not the sole decision-maker,” he said. “It’s pretty important to know you’ll be able to solve problems with that person.”

Long-term success

James A. Schafer, an attorney for 42 years, has been affiliated with Muncie partnerships since 1981 and currently is in the partnership of Painter & Schafer. He wanted a practice in a smaller city after working for years in Indianapolis.

“You have to get along personally, and your have to have similar thoughts in terms of how to practice,” Schafer said. Like others, he observed that a legal partnership is like a marriage, though he quipped that in law firms, “opposites do not attract.”

Schafer said younger attorneys who are thinking about starting a partnership owe it to themselves to gain some practical experience. He urges young lawyers to take a case to trial to gain experience and not to rely too much on email and social media, which he believes can foster incivility. “Get out and meet people,” he advised. “You’ll get more done.”

Even agreements between unofficial partners need to see things the same way, said Fort Wayne attorney Dan Roby. Unlike formal partnerships, Roby has shared office space and expenses with attorneys over the years, first as Roby & Hood and currently with Tom Manges as Roby & Manges.

“We have no written partnership agreement whatsoever,” Roby said, though attorneys in the office do share liabilities under common malpractice coverage. It’s an amicable arrangement where case-sharing duties and expectations are clear from the beginning, he said. Roby believes more attorneys should consider such arrangements.

“Even sharing office space is a marriage of a sort, and you’ve got to be compatible partners,” Roby said. “You’ve got to be confident that your fellow so-called partner is competent and responsible enough that he or she is not going to get you into trouble.”

Johnson said people embarking on a partnership also have to be prepared to share personal and financial information with their perspective partners. “Let them know where you are in life so you both know where you’re trying to go,” he said.

Tate and Bowen, meanwhile, already have returned to McKinney to share their experience with students and let them know that with a plan, they will be in a position to shape their futures. Tate said it’s a message that resonates in a weak legal job market.

“More people should do it and shouldn’t be afraid to try it,” he said.•
 

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  2. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

  3. The story that you have shared is quite interesting and also the information is very helpful. Thanks for sharing the article. For more info: http://www.treasurecoastbailbonds.com/

  4. I grew up on a farm and live in the county and it's interesting that the big industrial farmers like Jeff Shoaf don't live next to their industrial operations...

  5. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

ADVERTISEMENT