Re: Would Legal Insurance boost employment?

More | Report Post

I really don't understand the overreliance on paralegals. I
think the idea that paralegals, as a whole, are as competent
as lawyers is based on false assumptions, such as, a paralegal
certificate education is equivalent to that of an attorney
having undergrad and graduate degrees.

I have seen errors made by what were probably paralegals that
lawyers would probably have been less likely to have made. It
had nothing to do with law school education. Just general
knowledge that a person with the inclination to not take the
short cuts in life would acquire through that kind of
experience.

But that is part of political correctness in America.

On 8/19/06, rrr wrote:
> I was never on it, but a friend of mine did some time as a
> Attorney for Hyatt. She never had anything good to say
about
> it, and eventually quit doing it over a Will dispute. She
had
> written a will and the client kept wanting revisions. She
> wanted a separate payment for eact revision, Hyatt wanted
her
> to to do all the revisions for the same one Will price. I
> think her biggest complaints were 1) you don't get paid
until
> after the work is done, 2) the clients expected Platinum
> Service for Tinfoil Prices. I did did take a look at the Fee
> Schedule, and it was truly minimal. I think that universal
> Legal Insurance would hurt lawyers (reduce the profitablity
> of going to law school), but benefit the paralegals
(increase
> the need for trained paralegals), since I think the only way
> to do it cheaply enough is to use non-lawyer staff. The
> business of law is trending to that anyways. 1-2 Lawyers
> supervising a room full of paralegals churning paper. Thats
> what Legal Insurance would lead to.
>
> Is that good or bad for society? I don't know. I don't think
> it does much for those of us who invested in Law School.