Legal ROI - Know 3 Things BEFORE Filing Collection Case

Every legal project must intend to meet a business objective that adds value to the client’s enterprise and provides a positive return on investment. For example, in most routine collection cases, the lawsuit should only be filed after meeting three conditions.

(1) The client and the law firm know how they will prove and calculate the amount of the client’s damages;

(2) The client and the law firm have verified to the extent possible that the debtor can pay the judgment or settlement; and

(3) The client has obtained a budget from counsel to ensure the legal fees and costs do not cannibalize the amount collected.

A damages expert I know tells the story of a law firm that filed suit and proved that the defendant breached the contract, but could not prove any damages. The collecting client spent tens of thousands of dollars chasing an empty pot. You can imagine their satisfaction level with their law firm.

Proving the breach is only 10% of the battle; collection case clients must be prepared to prove the amount of damages. Doing this homework upfront will save thousands of dollars in legal fees, and if the client cannot prove its damages, it’s far better to know this before filing the lawsuit.

Steps should also be taken to attempt to determine as best you can that the debtor has the ability to pay a judgment or settlement. Check with Dunn and Bradstreet, or talk to other creditors of the potential debtor defendant. If everyone is not getting paid, its a sign that the debtor might be in serious trouble and have no ability to pay a judgment or settlement.

It is also a good practice to require a budget from counsel. Law firms often balk and will usually attempt to run away from their estimates and budgets, but clients should resist this practice. Clients should require their law firm to provide a hard budget with high and low ranges for their legal work, and clients should use this budget as an important benchmark tool to evaluate the firm’s delivery of value and ROI.

There will cases where the budget ends up being off; however, there should be a justifiable explanation for busting the budget, and the explanation should not be something that could have been factored into the budget prior to filing the lawsuit.

Free Electronics Recycling - AtWork!

This is a great service from a fantastic organization, AtWork!

AtWork!'s recycle center is now an authorized free drop-off station for recycling computers, CPUs (towers), laptops, monitors and televisions. January 2009 AtWork! was named the Issaquah Drop-off site for E-Cycle, a program in partnership with E-Cycle Washington.

The recycling center, located at 970 7th Avenue NW, in Issaquah, is open for electronic recycling Monday through Friday, from 8:00AM-4:00PM. The recycle center cannot accept keyboards, mice, copiers, scanners, printers, or any other electrical device, including appliances.

E-Cycle Washington is a program that provides responsible recycling of. Electronic manufacturers in Washington are taking responsibility for the cost of recycling these products. For consumers, small businesses, school districts, small governments, special purpose districts and charities, recycling is provided free of charge at authorized collection points. If a device still works, it may be re-used through resale or donation. Recycled items are processed according to the state's Preferred Processing Standards.

As a part of our agreement, AtWork! and E-cycle Washington are not responsible for the security of remaining data that may remain on computers or laptops. Consumers are encouraged to clear all drives on the devices before recycling.

To contact AtWork!'s Recycle Center call (425) 274-4021 or visit: http://www.atworkwa.org/recycling.php

To learn more about E-Cycle Washington call 1-800-RECYCLE or visit:
http://www.ecyclewashington.org

Womenonomics - Video Summary

Here is a book for anyone interested in Family Caregiver Discrimination and the power of working women.

Womenonomics, by Claire Shipman and Katty Kay.

Check out the authors' video summary of the book here:
http://bit.ly/Tan0Q

Los Angeles Employment Law Blog Discusses Caregiver Discrimination

"While there is no CA law specifically governing the role of caregivers in the CA workplace, this does not mean your rights are not protected. A caregiver is a person who is responsible for the health of another, such as a aging parent or sick child. While caregivers are not a recognized ‘protected class’ under federal or California law, caregivers often are subjected to behavior which does run afoul of existing laws barring discrimination, harassment, or retaliation on the basis of gender, race, disability, or other protected groups."

Read the full post here - http://bit.ly/x1eq4

Secretary Clinton's Townhall Meeting in India Toches on Family Caregiver Discrimination

Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, spoke at a town hall meeting in New Delhi, India, on July 20, 2009. During this speech, she touched on Family Caregiver Discrimination:

"we have new forms of discrimination - some of the problems that women face when they enter the workforce or when they try to balance the most important responsibility of being a mother and trying to make a living."

Read the full speech here: http://bit.ly/w2HOe

The Northwest Indiana Times Discusses Title VII and stereotyping

Another great article on family caregiver responsiblity was published recently in The Northwest Indiana Times. The following is a few excerpts:

Title VII provides that women have the right to participate in the workplace without the burden of stereotypes regarding whether they can fulfill work related responsibilities.

Consider these facts. A female employee sought a job promotion. Her performance reviews had been excellent and as it later turned out, were considerably better than the ones of the other person selected for the promotion.

The employee had an 11-year-old child and 6-year-old triplets. There was no evidence that raising four children had interfered with her job performance.

To the contrary, the employee's husband was a "stay-at-home" father and was the principal caregiver to the children.

During the interview process, the decision makers made reference to the four children. After the promotion was given to someone else, the employee was told that with "the kids and all", she had "too much on her plate."

The employee sued for gender discrimination and prevailed. There was no evidence that the employee was denied the position due to her job performance.

This case teaches an important lesson. An employer is free to uniformly discipline, fail to promote or fire an employee whose performance suffers, regardless of the reason, without necessarily incurring liability under Title VII. However, an employer is not free to assume that a woman -- simply because she is a woman -- will be a less productive worker simply because of family responsibilities. To do so can lead to legal liability under Title VII.

Read the full article: http://tinyurl.com/l2w33t

Great Family Responsibilitiy Discrimination Resource - Center for WorkLife Law

The Center for WorkLife Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law is a great resource for individuals, businesses and attorneys to learn more about discrimination based on family responsibilities.

Here is a link to a paper that describes this legal theory and provides easy to understand examples in plain English.

www.uchastings.edu/site_files/WLL/IssueBriefFRD.pdf