Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
It is a tendency for law firms ' whether they are single or multi-practice ' to want to be all things to all people. After all, the reasoning goes, if you can target a larger audience of potential clients, then you are also more likely to attract and convert more of them as well.
The problem with this thinking, however, is that it rests on two false premises. First, it fails to take into account that, in order to be moved toward action (i.e., picking up the phone and calling the attorney), a prospect will most often need to be exposed to that firm a threshold number of times. Business development efforts that fall short of such thresholds are literally throwing money away. Second, in trying to be all things to all people, law firms run the risk of failing to distinguish themselves from their competitors. This is no trivial concern because it necessitates spending even more money just to keep up with those who may be dominating the market.
These truths are particularly pertinent to family law practices, which, all too often, perceive themselves as providing basically the same set of legal services as the scores of competitors down the street. While this may have some legitimacy in that most family law practices handle divorces, custody matters, child support, etc., marketing-savvy firms understand the importance (and the potential gold mine) of carving out a specific niche within the family law arena.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.