Kreg Allison

The future of court reporting is here! Learn how leading CRAs are using AI to: 🧠 Work smarter, not harder 📈 Scale their services ⚡️ Future-proof their business Get our free whitepaper to learn how your CRA can thrive in the digital age: https://lnkd.in/gDfpCWTs

10

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, after surviving its existential challenge, expect: (1) the obvious: renewed and more enforcement, (2) defense focus on “major questions” doctrine to attack any overstepping, and (3) revived rulemaking on payday lending and so-called “junk” fees. Nice discussion in Law360 for those that subscribe. #cfpb #enforcement #consumerfinance #consumerprotection #junkfees #majorquestions

3

If you use outside counsel, I GUARANTEE* that at least one of these conversations has taken place at every firm† that you use: 🤑 "Our new client requires that we give them a 10% discount on our hourly rates. So starting today, everyone's hourly rate for our new client is 15% higher than normal." 🤑 "Effective immediately, Bob is the only partner in the firm who provides audit response letters. Also effective immediately, Bob's hourly rate has doubled and he has a minimum billing increment of 1 hour." 🤑 "Just write down your time and we'll figure out how to bill it to the client later." 🤑 "The client didn't complain about this showing up on their last bill, let's keep doing it." 🤑 "The client still isn't complaining, bill 20% more for it on this invoice and see what happens." 🤑 "It's totally OK to estimate the number of hours that you spent in the office on a given day and divide all that time up among the clients you did work for that day." 🤑 "Record your time even though it took you too long. I'll write it down on the bill. [Maybe. If I remember.]" 🤑 "Don't ever record a billing entry of .1. It doesn't look like you did any real work. Putting down at least .2 looks better." Alternate version: "I'm going to write off all of the entries of .1 and then use that to justify not writing down all the entries that are excessive." 🤑 "Maybe it did take too long for us to complete this brief because we put it off until the last possible moment, but that's just the way the practice of law works." *Not an actual guarantee, just a figure of speech. †Of course not THAT firm. They are totally great. #BillableHourGames #LawFirmLingo #ClientCostCutting #LegalComedyGold #NotSoLegalEagles

40

44 Comments

What happens *after* probate in Wisconsin? ➡️ Probate is the legal process of distributing a person’s estate after their death. Wisconsin statutes define probate as “the court-supervised process for the orderly transfer of a decedent’s assets to those who are entitled to receive them.” If the person had a will, probate will establish that it is valid. If a will designates a personal representative or administrator, the court will generally appoint that person. If there is no named executor, the court will appoint one. Generally, the probate process takes six to 12 months to complete if there are no objections. ➡️ Wisconsin law requires probate anytime there is an estate with a value of $50,000 or more, and there is a will. The will has to be authenticated to ensure that it is authentic. The basic requirements for a will in Wisconsin are set forth by law. The law states that a will must be made in writing, signed by the person making the will (the testator), and signed by two witnesses. A will can be self-proved by affidavit, and it is automatically considered authentic, and the process will thus be simplified. ➡️ There are many tasks that the executor must complete as part of the probate process. They must determine and inventory assets, gather documents including the will, life insurance policies, deeds, and death certificate, identify beneficiaries, notify creditors, pay debts, manage finances, and work with the courts throughout the process. The law typically requires that the probate process is complete within 18 months. However, if there are complications, the court may allow an extension. An experienced probate attorney is helpful in assisting with probate in Wisconsin. ➡️ After the administrator identifies assets and pays debts and taxes, the remaining property and assets can be distributed to the heirs. The administrator must complete the probate process and make sure that the debts are paid. Once probate is complete, the executor closes the estate. There is a waiting period of time that must be observed after probate is complete before the property can be distributed. This provides time to allow creditors and heirs to review probate paperwork. In the event that additional assets are discovered, the administrator must notify the court. An heir may challenge the process if they believe mistakes were made. The heir must have grounds to challenge probate, such as they believe the administrator breached their fiduciary duty, documents were not valid, or documents were not properly interpreted. If there is a challenge, it can extend the time to distribute assets from the estate. Finally, the administrator can distribute the property and assets to the rightful heirs once probate is complete and there are no further objections. The probate process can be complex, so it may be helpful to seek legal guidance. To learn more, contact us at 📞 (608) 784-8310 or online to request a consultation.

1

Predictive Justice: AI algorithms can analyze legal cases and predict outcomes with surprising accuracy, helping lawyers strategize better.

1

Ever feel like there just aren't enough hours in the day to get everything done? For lawyers, keeping track of billable hours can be a constant source of stress. But what if you could wave goodbye to time tracking headaches forever? This guide is here to help you regain control of your schedule and massively reduce stress. Stop letting time control you. Download your FREE guide today and take back your schedule! Get your copy now: 👉 https://hubs.ly/Q02v02xy0

1

American Privacy Rights Act (APRA) Update  Lawmakers released a revised version of the American Privacy Rights Act (APRA), moving it out of subcommittee unanimously to the full Energy and Commerce Committee on May 23.  APRA aims to establish federal data privacy laws but includes preemption provisions that override stronger state protections like those in California.  Average Internet use is nearly seven hours daily, generating significant amounts of data and underscoring the need for robust privacy legislation.  APRA revisions expanded from 53 to 174 pages, yet concerns remain about preemption, sensitive information, profiling, and government service provider protections. Key Changes: Ø Targeted Advertising : The bill allows broader data collection for targeted ads, raising concerns about potential loopholes. Ø Child Protections : Elements of COPPA 2.0 were included, but protections for minors are seen as insufficient. Ø Data Deletion : Adds a mechanism for deleting data not directly collected by brokers, akin to California's “Delete Act.” § Despite improvements, APRA’s preemption clause could limit states' abilities to enforce stronger privacy laws, reducing the authority of state agencies and attorneys general. § The journey for APRA is ongoing, with further legislative hurdles before potential presidential approval. Stay informed on developments. Source: https://lnkd.in/gC7TBaXR

7

1 Comment

More Spokeo (and Transunion v. Ramirez) influences in the debt collection space....mere confusion resulting from not following the fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) law does not create sufficient standing to bring an action. Folks who are not lawyers or who don't engage in consumer litigation likely wonder why I often reference Spokeo. I am referring to a prior U.S. Supreme Court case that held that even if a party violates the letter of the law, you (as a private litigant) still may be unable to sue them in (federal court) unless you can prove how you were concretely damaged by that violation. In the consumer financial services and privacy law worlds, Congress has created many laws with specific conduct requirements , such as requiring a debt collector to reveal the name of the original creditor in a debt collection communication so the debtor can lookup other details related to the transaction that created the debt. Under the Spokeo doctrine, if these conduct requirements are violated, you still may have no basis to sue unless you can prove some form of concrete damage to you. In the data privacy realm, this sometimes means that those who have had their data improperly leaked (the Leakee ?) have no cause of action against the Leaker unless the Leakee can show he/she was damaged somehow by the violation.

3

Hot off the press from Doug Austin of eDiscovery Today!! The State of the Industry survey is life. Help provide a rich data set and complete the survey. I am excited to see the results for the trend regarding Modern Attachments, Links, and Data (MALD)! https://lnkd.in/eBuBZwj3.

5

1 Comment

Everything you do in a law practice revolves around processes, they’re the structure and predictability that every firm needs to thrive. Without them, you’re wasting time and money. Learn how to get started with SOPs and Process Improvement with this Tip of the Week from Gimbal. https://lnkd.in/eXf6hPQb

4

Your Guide to Jurisdictional Insights Across 13 Critical Areas. Simple. Comparative. Actionable. Legal research shouldn’t be a guessing game. With GRI’s Insights, it’s clear, simple, and effective. Key Features: In-Depth Analysis: Explore jurisdictional insights across 13 critical work areas, presented in an easy-to-digest FAQ format. Compare Across Jurisdictions: Effortlessly compare regulations across different regions to inform your strategies. And as always with GRI: Collaborative Edge: Share insights with a click, keeping your team in the loop. Effortless Organization: Highlight, tag, and organize your research for quick access. Precision Targeting: Find what you need with pinpoint accuracy. Empower your decision-making with GRI’s in-depth insights. See how GRI’s insights can transform your legal strategy. Visit https://lnkd.in/gZmkUPim today. #JurisdictionalInsights #LegalAnalysis #GRI

3

It can be frustrating to see deposition costs skyrocket. That’s why Skribe.ai is focused on providing a transparent and affordable alternative that keeps discovery moving. Skribe takes the guesswork (and sticker shock) out of depositions. #LegalTech #Depositions #NonSteno

2

1 Comment

If you've spent much time managing outside counsel litigators, there's one excuse that I bet you've heard A LOT. That excuse? "I can't do anything about what it costs to litigate. I do everything I can to keep your fees down, but so much is dictated by having to deal with opposing counsel. That's why fees are so high." Now, that's not exactly a lie. But it's definitely not the truth either. Here are some real-life examples of how I've observed litigators helping themselves bill more: ✍ Every time opposing counsel was taking a deposition of one of our witnesses, outside counsel would pick a fight over something inconsequential. Maybe it was a technical violation of a rule. Or maybe it was just something not clearly addressed by the rules. But it always took up at least 15-20 minutes at the start of the depo and another 20-40 minutes during the depo itself. Nothing was resolved, and the client's interests weren't protected. But that time got billed. ✍ Outside counsel was destroying the woefully unprepared plaintiff during a deposition. It was just a constant string of embarrassment. Then, halfway through the depo, he suddenly claimed he "felt ill." He looked fine. He sounded fine. But outside counsel immediately agreed to suspend the deposition and reconvene at a later date—didn't even ask questions on the record about his illness. Outside counsel got to bill a second time for "deposition preparation," even though it obviously prejudiced our case. ✍ Opposing counsel sent a raft of onerous written discovery that was technically within the rules but obviously just meant for harassment. It was a classic situation where a party can ask the judge for relief from abusive discovery. Outside counsel refused to seek any relief from the judge—claiming that it would be "pointless." The motion and a hearing would have taken 3-5 hours. Time billed answering for the offending discovery was about 80 hours (and I spent at least three times that drafting the initial answers). ✍ Outside counsel decided to file a mandamus against a federal magistrate judge based on two sentences in a previous Circuit Court opinion and billed over a hundred hours working on it. Problems: (1) mandamus wasn't an option under the current procedural posture (you had to ask to presiding judge to review the decision first); (2) the two sentences in the Circuit Court decision were great—until you read the rest of the opinion, which didn't support the desired outcome at all; (3) mandamus is always the longest of long shots; (4) the parties were already moving strongly toward settlement; and (5) the mandamus was never filed. I have a lot more examples. These are just some of the worst. I think about them all the time when outside counsel tells me that runaway litigation costs are "out of my control" or "because of opposing counsel." #LitigationManagement #LegalFeesTransparency #OutsideCounsel #CostControl #LegalIndustryInsights

17

43 Comments

The Legal Billable Hour Index has been tracking small firm hourly rates since Clio first published its Legal Trends Report in 2016. (Up, they’re going up.) How does your practice compare? Here’s the rundown on the latest 2024 hourly rate data.

2

1 Comment