LEGALEASE WINS MENTION IN BUSINESSWEEK

ARTICLE ON OUTSOURCING
Employing 25 people who serve over 50 clients from the US, UK and Canada, LegaEase has built an impressive repertoire of legal services that are made available to law-firms, big and small, legal departments and legal counsel, quickly, with efficiency and affordably.

According to NASSCOM, there is a huge potential in this estimated US$ 250 billion legal services market. Resisting the temptation of taking on high volume low-end back office legal work that would guarantee faster growth in terms of company size and revenues, they have developed an expertise in high-end sophisticated research. Says Tariq Akbar, “We don’t want to build a big company, we want to build a great company.”

It is probably this drive to excel in the field that has earned the company a favorable reputation in legal circles that led to it being the only legal outsourcing company to be mentioned in an article on outsourcing in a leading business magazine, BusinessWeek.

Law is another developing hot spot for offshoring. While large law firms have been slow to shift work to India, corporations and smaller firms are taking the plunge. LegalEase Solutions, a Detroit outsourcing business with 50 clients in the U.S., shows how it's done. The firm's 20 Indian lawyers handle everything from researching legal precedents to writing drafts of briefs.

The service lessens the need for LegalEase clients to hire associates to do legal grunt work. The past year has also witnessed LegalEase entering a partnership with Legalbill.com LLC a major legal services provider who specializes in legal spend management, analysis and auditing serving North America, Western Europe and Asia. This Legalbill/LegalEase partnership offers corporate law departments and law firms a full suite of services ranging from legal cost analysis, auditing, and identification of areas of critical legal spend to offshoring solutions tailored to the same.

Legalbill services companies by analyzing exactly how much they are spending on legal costs and which areas of legal work this money is being spent on. The partnership has created a one-stop shop for legal spend management directed at making things more cost-effective.

If market forecasts and media hype are anything to go by, then the legal offshoring market makes for very exciting study. The inroads outsourcing has made into the fairly traditional and conservative legal circles have proved beyond doubt that its economic viability has forced lawyers and legal department to consider it as an alternative.

-
Shazia Akbar
Staff Writer, LegalEase Solutions LLC

How To Keep Your Job Onshore

An ever-wider variety of white-collar jobs is being sent offshore. Here's how to make sure yours isn't one of them

How do you keep from being Bangalored? Or Shanghaied? That's the question Valparaiso University freshman Matt Cavin asked himself two years ago when he was in China on a summer study program. Young Chinese were intently studying English, science, and math. One day, when he was sitting by a lake reading Thomas L. Friedman's The World is Flat, a Chinese student approached, wanting to practice his English. As they talked, Cavin mulled Friedman's message about U.S. jobs moving to low-cost countries such as India and China, and he had an epiphany: "I started thinking about what it means to be in active competition with kids overseas. I realized I had to set myself apart."

When he returned to the U.S., Cavin mapped out an ambitious self-improvement program. Gone was his theology major. In its place, when he graduates next spring, he'll have no fewer than three bachelor's degrees: international business, economics, and Mandarin. Cavin, 21, sees plenty of opportunities. He isn't running scared. But he's running.

Read full article in www.businessweek.com

“ The above article has been reprinted from www.businessweek.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”

Ethics Opinions Allow Foreign Legal Outsourcing

Lawyers and clients must weigh cost savings, quality, duty to supervise

Bar committees in New York City, San Diego County, and Los Angeles County have ruled, expressly or implicitly, that lawyers may contract with foreign lawyers not admitted to practice in any jurisdiction in the United States, or with nonlawyers outside the United States, to perform legal work for U.S. clients. These authorities hold that foreign legal outsourcing does not constitute aiding the unauthorized practice of law. NYCBA Formal Op. 2006-3; SDCBA Formal Legal Ethics Op. 2007-1; LACBA Ethics Op. 518.

Outsourcing ‘will expand exponentially because of discovery costs.’

The New York City bar opinion notes that outsourcing overseas “has begun to command attention in the legal profession, as corporate legal departments and law firms endeavor to reduce costs and manage operations more efficiently.” Some market research firms project that tens of thousands of U.S. legal jobs soon will be outsourced to low-cost countries, with the majority of jobs going to India.

Read full article in American Bar Association

“ The above article has been reprinted from www.abanet.org and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”

ValueNotes releases 'Offshoring Legal Services to India'

(openPR) - The Indian legal services outsourcing space has changed remarkably over the last two years. Newer services have been added to the offshored list, many new vendors have emerged and several existing vendors have developed greater capabilities.

There is no doubt that the established brand value of India in the global BPO space has been a growth propeller for the legal services outsourcing industry. A recently released report by ValueNotes estimates that the current Indian revenues from legal services offshoring are slated to grow from $146 million for the calendar year 2006 to reach $640 million by end 2010. The industry employed around 7,500 people in the legal offshoring space in India as of end 2006. The Legal services outsourcing industry has grown at 50% CARG through 2005-06. This growth has been achieved primarily due to increasing demand, vendor maturity and capability of vendors to offer higher value services.

Read full article in www.openpr.com

“ The above article has been reprinted from www.openpr.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”

The next level - legal outsourcing

Technology has shrunk the world to a global village; outsourcing is now the buzzword that is changing the job markets globally. Voice is the first level of offshoring, which is now moved up to knowledge-based jobs.

Since outsourcing has significant savings for companies, this concept is gaining favour across a spectrum of industries.

Certainly, as mounting legal costs create a cause for concern, outsourcing litigation support activity is being seen as a viable option, especially since firms can get their work done for one third of the cost incurred on their home turf.

Read full article in jamaica-gleaner.com

“ The above article has been reprinted from jamaica-gleaner.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”

Businessworld piece on LPO

A decade after legal work began to be outsourced to India, the industry has grown to reach an annual turnover of $60 million(Rs 246 crore). But despite the hype over how legal outsourcing and other such value-added services would alter the global economy by moving high value, white collar jobs out of western economies and into India, the fact is that this is not happening.

$60 million sounds like a reasonable estimate. I don't think the day will ever come when even theoretically every Western lawyer will be replacable by an Indian lawyer. In India, law doesn't seem to be a career of choice for many and it doesn't seem things will change vastly anytime soon. This, of course, affects how many of legal graduates being churned out by law schools across India are suitably deployed for doing offshored legal work.

Read full article in legallyours.blogspot.com

“ The above article has been reprinted from legallyours.blogspot.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”

Now, For Some LPO Action

Now, for some LPO action
SACHIN MALHAN
Career prospects are tremendous in the Legal Process Outsourcing industry

The argument that off-shoring, as a practice, can create tremendous employment opportunities is now largely uncontested. It has been validated time and time again, and India is a shining example, arguably the best example.
The Indian BPO industry, which currently employs 6.5 million people, has become the stuff of stories and legends. People have made their careers not just in the industry but even ‘on’ the industry, through bestsellers and big-screen blockbusters!
The benefits of off-shoring have been felt in numerous industry verticals, including health care, research, media and, more recently, the legal industry. The significance of ‘off-shoring’ in the Indian economy is continuously increasing, and many believe that these are the ‘early days’ of offshoring, not just in terms of volume of work but also in terms of variety.
For the legal industry this is a period of tremendous learning and development, and the shape that Legal Process Outsourcing has taken raises incredible possibilities for legal professionals and industry alike.
The Indian higher education machine, and it’s a big one, turns out close to 80,000 law graduates every year.
Of this lot, only a handful, mostly from the top 12-15 law schools (a number not exceeding five per cent of the total graduates), join the law firms and legal departments, or apprentice under good counsel (senior lawyers) at the various courts and tribunals.
A sizeable percentage of the rest pursue other options including the civil services while the remaining majority struggle to succeed in the courts. Diverse work
LPO opportunities can transform that five per cent to something closer to 40 per cent, by drawing law graduates into work that’s not just large in volume but tremendously diverse.
Rising legal costs in the U.S., and more recently in the EU, are amongst a variety of other factors that are driving a diverse portfolio of legal work to India. There is now offshoring work at almost every level of expertise and this is what makes the curry very spicy and appealing to a wide range of legal professionals.
For a young legal professional, a career with an LPO is attractive for several reasons: it is a sunrise industry which should see a boom in the next 3-5 years; there is a tremendous variety of work at all levels of expertise; high-end opportunities for graduates of top law schools; attractive remuneration and future management prospects; an opportunity to work in a corporate structure that straddles borders; a learning opportunity for those considering legal and paralegal careers in the U.K. or the U.S.
Forrester Research estimates that there could be a demand for as many as 79,000 LPO professionals in the next 7-8 years.
According to Russell Smith of SDD Global Solutions, the offshoring arm of a leading U.S. law firm, the figure is based on an assumption that only 10 per cent of law firm work can be outsourced while with an increase in global confidence in Indian legal services that percentage could be much larger.
Already 155 of the top 200 U.S. law firms outsource some portion of their work.
Some critics have remarked that most of the work will be high volume but low value.
But several leading LPOs including Quislex, Jurimatrix and Bodhi Global have created business models leveraging high-volume high-value opportunities which they strongly believe are out there for everyone to see. Research, Transaction Support, Case Analysis are good examples of high-value work that’s also coming across in large volumes. Skills
So what does one have to do to be, and excel as, an LPO professional. Currently, 77 per cent of all LPO work emanates from the U.S. Therefore proficiency in American English, drafting and research methodology are essential skills. Comfort with work place technology is another important pre-requisite as all product creation and delivery is done using computer applications.
Only a tiny percentage of graduating lawyers are equipped with all the skills needed for the LPO industry. Capacity building and re-orientation to U.S. legal systems and methodologies will be the key in ensuring success.
Interestingly there is a healthy chunk of work that can be done, or in some cases required to be done, by non-lawyers. For instance, there is a tremendous demand for engineers in the intellectual property work space.
The work involves analysing scientific and technological inventions for the purposes of crafting legal protection for the same. This work needs to be done by those with technological skills and hence the opportunities.
One message that’s writ large – professionals who enter the industry now, at this strategic phase, will be best positioned to benefit when it booms in the months to come.

US norms won't hit legal outsourcing

The ethical guidelines proposed by three US bar associations for their attorneys will not have any adverse impact on the legal outsourcing services industry in India.

In fact, the opinions delivered by the associations legitimise the outsourcing of legal services to other countries and will lead to the market in India getting larger, according to Ram Vasudevan, president of SQ Global Solutions.

New York-based SQ Global Solutions is a joint venture between Strategic Legal Solutions, a 12-year-old US domestic legal staffing company and Quislex, a provider of offshore legal services in India. The company employs around 300 professionals, of which about 150 work out of India.

It may be recalled that three US bar associations -- New York, California and Los Angeles -- had in 2006 and early 2007 delivered opinions stating that offshoring of legal support work by lawyers in the US to other countries was ethical provided certain conditions are met.

"The guidelines state that US lawyers who are contemplating outsourcing legal services to other countries should inform their client that the work is being outsourced, besides protecting the client's confidences. The US law firm should also be closely involved in the supervision of the outsourced work. In addition, the entity performing the work must perform conflict checks to avoid any unpleasant surprises," said Vasudevan.

"Companies in India directly deal with the legal departments of US corporations and law firms for outsourcing work to avoid any issues of unauthorised practice and usually have several quality control metrics in place," he said. For instance, SQ follows the Six Sigma process.

At present, there are around 15 companies in India that provide legal outsourcing services, with the prominent among them being SQ Global Solutions, Pangea and Mindcrest.

Though not mandatory, many US law firms and attorneys have been adopting the ethical guidelines and client demand too has been picking up.

This is expected to accelerate the growth of the legal outsourcing services industry in India in the years to come. The Indian legal outsourcing industry is currently pegged at $130 million, and is expected to touch the $4-billion mark by 2015, according to Forrester Research, he added.

Currently, there are around 1,000 such professionals, both lawyers and non-lawyers, delivering high-end legal outsourcing services in India.

- K Rajani Kanth in Hyderabad

“ The above article has been reprinted from http://inhome.rediff.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”

What You Should Look in a LPO/KPO/BPO Provider

Legal BPO/KPO/LPO Services are gaining attention of many traditional as well as non-traditional “Legal Outsourcing Service Providers” (LOSPs). Being on the forefront of providing Legal BPO/KPO/LPO Services, India is witnessing growing number of Companies and Firms entering into this unexplored arena. The same may be tolerable and acceptable when it comes to Legal BPO in India as non-traditional and non-legal Companies and Firms can manage them to some extent. But when it comes to “Specialised”, “Expert”, and “Domain Specific Legal Services” these Companies and Firms cannot provide these services effectively by merely hiring few law students as their workforce. Thus, the Persons, Firms, Companies etc that “assign” various outsourced services must be wary about these Companies and Firms which may be “Financially Sound” but “Knowledgably Bankrupt”. In this work Perry4Law is providing its insight and recommendations to various “Legal Outsourcing Services Seekers” so that they can choose the most “Appropriate” and “Expert” LOSPs in India. These suggestions and recommendations are the mirror image of the “Practice Followed” and “Expertise Possessed” by Perry4Law.

India is a favourite destination for various outsourcing related matters. The same is going to increase further in future. These outsourcing services also require a dedicated and legal framework complaint service providing base. It includes a compliance with the Cyber Law of India, adherence to the protection and enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) in India (IPRs in India), etc. These requirements also apply to the following services:

(a) Legal Business Process Outsourcing in India (Legal BPO in India),
(b) Legal Knowledge Process Outsourcing in India (Legal KPO in India),
(c) Legal Process Outsourcing in India (LPO in India),
(d) Other Outsourcing Services in India, etc.

There are certain “Pre-requisites” for a “Successful” Legal BPO, Legal KPO and LPO base in India. These pre-requisites are easy to mention but difficult to achieve. Perry4Law is committed to provide “High Quality” and “Globally Renowned” Techno-Legal, Managerial, Financial services in association with its National and International Associates and Partners. It recommends the following “Parameters” that LOSPs must possess:

(a) Capacity: The Legal Outsourcing Service Provider (LOSP) must be “Capable” of providing the Services claimed to be within its competency. This is more so vis-à-vis LPO and Legal KPO Services.

(b) Legal Potential: If possible, the service seekers must “Choose” and “Prefer” the Companies and Firms that are “actually dealing in Legal matters”. The trend of hiring few law graduates and opening of a Legal BPO Department by Traditional and Non-Legal Companies and Firms may not be very effective when it comes to KPO and LPO matters. It is always preferable to hire the services of those who are “Exclusively Specialising” in the Services provided.

(c) Domain Specific Services: Legal KPO and LPO are “Domain Specific Services” and the service seekers must make it sure that the persons ultimately handling the matter are “Experts” or “Well-Qualified” to manage the work. For instance, Legal BPO may be taken care of by simple law graduate from any law University but when it comes to Legal KPO and LPO, a “Master Degree” in Law from the “Premier Law Institution” is an “Additional Safeguard”.

(d) Security Measures: The growing use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in India (ICT in India) has its adverse ramifications as well. Thus, the LOSPs must ensure a “Safe” and “Secure” ICT Infrastructure that must be capable of providing an “Uninterrupted”, “Safe” and “Secure” online support. For instance, Perry4Law’s ICT and Cyber Security initiative titled as PTLB TM/SM is managing various Techno-Legal issues associated with the ICT and Cyber Security including protection of “Critical ICT Infrastructure in India”. This has provided Perry4Law the additional advantage of acquiring and possessing “Expertise” in “Techno-Legal Matters that are bound to arise in the near future.

(e) Data Protection and Privacy Preservation: Data Protection and Privacy Preservation are essential for a “Safe” and “Secure” Legal BPO/KPO/LPO platform. For instance, at Perry4Law every possible care is taken to protect and preserve the “Database” and “Details” of our “Clients” in the best possible manner.

(f) Credentials: The service seekers must always check the “Credentials” of the LOSPs before assigning any work to them. The use of search engines is a good option to have an “Idea” about various LOSPs.

(g) Research acumen: The search engines are also very useful to ascertain the “Research Acumen” of various LOSPs that lies at the heart of various Legal BPO/KPO/LPO services.

(h) National and International Recognition: The National and International recognition of the LOSP is a very crucial factor while outsourcing legal work. A LOSP possessing National and International “Reputation” is a much “Safer Bet” than “Self-Claimed Experts”.

These are some of the “Factors/Parameters” that may be considered by service seekers while outsourcing Legal BPO/KPO/LPO assignments to LOSPs. They are neither “Exhaustive” nor “Conclusive” but are illustrative and suggestive only. There may be other factors as well that may play a “Conclusive Role” in the Legal BPO/KPO/LPO game. Besides, “Personal Preferences” and “Relationships” may be there that suit the requirements of a particular service seeker. These “Parameters” only reflect the “Domain Specific” and “Extensive” Knowledge and Research Capabilities of Companies and Firms like Perry4Law. With more and more International and National Partners, Perry4Law is “Confident” that it will go a long way in making India a “Favourite”, “Safe”, “Secure” and “Reliable” business destination in general and Legal BPO/KPO/LPO Provider in particular. We also hope that various initiatives of Perry4Law would go a long way in providing a sound “Techno-Legal Support” to India so that it can match the International Standards and Norms. At the same time, these initiatives aptly ensure that the “Data Protection and Privacy Requirements” are duly met so that Legal BPO in India, Legal KPO in India and LPO in India can thrive to their level best.

© Praveen Dalal. All rights reserved with the author.
* Advocate, Arbitrator and Consultant, Supreme Court of India.
Managing Partner-Perry4Law (First Techno-Legal and ICT Firm, New Delhi, India).
LL.M, Ph.D –Cyber Forensics (Pursuing).
Contact at: perry4law@yahoo.com , pd37@rediffmail.com

“ The above article has been reprinted from http://reclaiming-india.blogspot.com/ and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”

Much Ado About Nothing

In the past few weeks, India was witnessing a new form of censorship. The works of a fine arts student of Maharaja Sayajirao University of Vadodara were vandalized by communal activists on the ground that student has negatively portrayed the deities and there by hurt the religious sentiments of the community. While the artists are making a hue and cry over the “trespass” over their creative domain, the so-called moral watch dogs are agitated about the “attack” on their personal beliefs. On which side, does the truth lie? Obviously, this standoff between creativity and intolerance is nothing new to our country. Being a pluralistic society, we have always been open to diverse interpretations of art and culture and eloquently debated the metes and bounds of artistic freedom. However, the frequency and decibels of such dissenting voices has gone up in recent times and the way the protests were carried out defies the democratic ethos and reasonable restraint expected from a secular pluralistic society. The erstwhile land of diversity, brotherhood and tolerance has suddenly become the abode of some temperamental touch-me-nots whose religious sensitivities are hurt at the drop of a hat!
The Bizarre Paradox
India, as a melting pot of cultures is home to a vivid and versatile artistic tradition, which is subjected to all sorts of experimentations. Every artistic work bears the indelible imprimatur of the artist’s passions, choices, predilections and prejudices, and it is the manifestation of his/her wildest dreams and fantasies. We cannot expect them to be realistic and conforming all the time. If he/she is asked to get in to the straight jackets of contemporary morality, it is like asking a sculptor to chisel the statue to fit in to a particular mould, a shape agreed to by every one. But then is the notion of contemporary morality reflects such unanimous choice or a collective conscience of the connoisseurs of art? How can it be for such a diverse and distinct society? Artists draw flak whenever they stray away from the trodden path and try to revisit the settled notions and beliefs. We cannot insist that an art form should neatly fit in to some pigeonholes of contemporary notions of religion and individual beliefs. The society should criticize, debate and discuss an artistic work and should very well decide to accept or reject it. But it should stop there.
The Buck Stops Here
Once again, religious iconography has become a burning issue. When individual beliefs feels threatened by the divergent voices and need reassurances, it is setting a different precedent for India’s age-old virtue of tolerance. It seems the pluralistic state is on the verge of an identity crisis. However, this is not the dead end of tolerance in a democracy. We should clearly give space to divergent opinions as long as we have the freedom to accept or reject it. The constitution clearly stipulates how much noise we can make by defining the freedom of expression and the reasonable restrictions. When voice of dissent relegates into irrational noises of intolerance with preachy overtones, the constitutional guarantees are jeopardized. Moreover, we have penal laws to check whether artistic freedom relegates to licentiousness. The law contemplates such transgression only when there is deliberate and malicious intention for out raging the religious feelings. In Vadodara, the exhibition was not meant for the public and it was more a part of internal assessment, conducted with in the precincts of the University. The activists have no locus standi to question the internal matters of a University.
And finally, we should do a reality check as to how much these moral brigade were able to achieve. Remember the hullabaloo over the dress code imposed by Anna University, smoking in films has all failed to achieve the desired results. Even films which break away from stereo types are not spared. For instance, the film Nishabd which tells the story of a 60 year old man falls for his daughter’s friend was accused of sending the wrong signals. Is the average Indian waiting to be strayed into prohibited territories at the drop of a hat? What do we achieve by making there irrational noises? Of course, freedom of expression is an easy escape route to the artist. But it is a true test of tolerance to the society. Nevertheless, if we insist that artists should exercise restraint ignoring the compulsions of creativity, what would be the end product like? Living in a democratic secular society, the compulsions we face are quite different as the demarcations are too close and any mix up will trigger a controversy. For the same reason, what happened in Vadodara cannot be written off as one odd incident. Political forces are brewing a deadly concoction by mixing religion and politics in poisonous proportions. To determine what is objectionable and what is not by defining contemporary mortality is too dangerous a task to be left to the discretion of communal forces that holds a jaundiced view of religion. Culture offers a shared platform where every one has their due. Obviously, this is the most prized feature of a democracy, that every one has an opinion. And it has the flip side too- that every one has got a veto power. True democracy lies in the reconciliation of these conflicting notions. And unfortunately, we have forgotten the best means of squaring off the differences. Universities are laboratories of experimentation and academic discussions and debates as part of the curriculum should be left alone. Now the scenario is cluttered by too many voices, and it needs time for the heat and dust to set in. After all, why do we need to join some opinionated bandwagons to determine the metes and bounds of artistic creativity? Much ado about nothing. Art transcends religion, culture and other human barriers. If one’s belief is genuine and convictions are strong, it cannot be shaken by a different portrayal by an artist.

-
Seema Sarathkumar
Staff Attorney of legalEase Solutions LLC

Outsourcing craze sees Indian firms take over jobs in finance, law and health

By Sumeet Chatterjee


Chennai - In an office in the southern port of Chennai, Indian analysts pore over stock market data for a London fund company, searching for investment opportunities.

Some 1900km away in Gurgaon, on the outskirts of Delhi, Indian lawyers have taken over research and patent filing for several Western technology and healthcare companies.

These are examples of knowledge process outsourcing, or KPO, a new fad where Indian companies are trying to move up the value chain and away from call centres staffed by young people tutored in American accents.

As well as examining financial data and drafting patents, firms in India are managing payrolls and accounts for Western companies and doing market research and other high-value tasks.

The knowledge process market in India is worth US$2.5 billion ($3.4 billion) to US$3 billion a year, and is likely to grow to US$10 billion to US$12 billion by 2012, says Ashish Gupta, chief operating officer of Evalueserve, a knowledge process firm with 1500 employees in India, China and Chile.

Driving this boom are huge cost savings for Western companies and bigger fees for Indian companies than they can earn from call centres. Although salaries in India are rising, they are way below Western wages.

Patent research can be done in India at US$50 to US$80 an hour, compared with US$150 to US$350 in the United States, says R. Sivadas, chief executive of Scope e-Knowledge Centre in Chennai, which has clients in publishing, healthcare, and engineering.

Average billing rates in the knowledge process sector are 40 to 50 per cent higher than those in the call centres, says Sivadas, whose company employs 485 people, 95 per cent of them engineers and medical doctors.

"We have just touched the tip of the iceberg. In the next six to eight years, KPO is definitely going to be a growth story," says Sivadas, whose firm will increase staff to 680 by March 2008.


Another such firm is Sundaram Finance, which set up a back-office subsidiary six years ago to provide research services to local financial firms and now has 23 clients from Britain, Australia, Singapore and the Middle East who have outsourced jobs like market and data research.

In January, India's Hinduja TMT and British business consulting and outsourcing firm Centric Consulting entered into a joint venture with law firm Fox Mandal Little to provide legal outsourcing services.

Indian software majors Infosys Technologies and Wipro are also vying for a bigger share of the outsourcing business.

Infosys made US$147.52 million in profit from all business process outsourcing in its most recent fiscal year, 8 per cent of it from these high-value, knowledge tasks.

The growth in knowledge process outsourcing has come on the back of India's pool of English-speaking talent and its lower wages, but there is a looming shortage in graduates in business management, engineering, financial research, law, accounting and medicine.

"There are two issues in terms of manpower - in quantity, there is no problem, but in terms of quality there is definitely an issue," Sivadas says.

India produces about half a million technically trained graduates, 300,000 postgraduates and doctoral candidates and 20,000 lawyers every year, but many are unsuitable.

"A lot of time, money and effort are spent in finding right candidates," Sivadas says. "It's not as easy as the numbers make it out to be. You just can't pick people off the street."

“ The above article has been reprinted from www.nzherald.co.nz and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”

Outsourcing and the Globalizing Legal Profession

JAYANTH K. KRISHNAN

Abstract:

The issue of outsourcing jobs abroad stirs great emotion among Americans. Economic free-traders fiercely defend outsourcing as a positive for the U.S. economy while critics contend that corporate desire for low wages solely drives this practice. In this study I focus on a specific type of outsourcing, one which has received scant scholarly attention to date - legal outsourcing. Indeed because the work is often paralegal in nature, many see the outsourcing of legal jobs overseas as no different from other types of outsourcing. But by using as my case studies both the United States and India, the latter which is receiving an ever-increasing amount of outsourced American legal work today, I describe how there are many forms to the legal outsourcing model and how this practice can entail a range of legal services.

This article, however, moves beyond providing a descriptive account of legal outsourcing. Legal outsourcing to India is occurring against the backdrop of an Indian legal system in crisis. For those who are fortunate to benefit from legal outsourcing, the pay-offs are indeed rewarding. But most Indians of course are not participants in - nor beneficiaries of - this practice. In fact, in everyday parlance the word "legal" itself in India is associated with a process that is delay-ridden, backlogged, and unduly expensive. On its face it might seem that legal outsourcing is unconnected to the problems that have long plagued India's legal system. Yet as I will argue, in addition to having an ethical obligation to provide assistance to the legal environment upon which they draw, those engaging in legal outsourcing also have an economic incentive to ensure that India has a better-operating legal system. Thus, as a means of raising much needed revenue to fund its legal reform efforts, India, as I propose, might levy a minimal fee on U.S. legal outsourcers, and as I explain, because strengthening the rule of law is ultimately in their financial interest, these American investors may well accept shouldering such a cost.

Keywords: legal, outsourcing, india, litigation, comparative law, intellecutal property, corporate social responsibility

Contact Information for JAYANTH K. KRISHNAN (Contact Author)

Email address for JAYANTH K. KRISHNAN
William Mitchell College of Law
875 Summit Ave
St. Paul , MN 55105-3076
United States
651-290-7504 (Phone)

“ The above article has been reprinted from SSRN and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”

Recent Case Shows Dangers of Electronic Discovery Mishaps

With practitioners struggling to apply new amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure dealing with electronically stored information, the recent opinion in In Re NTL, Inc., illustrates the dangers of missteps in electronic discovery. Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Peck administered the harsh sanction of an adverse inference instruction for spoliation of electronic evidence.

The problems began in 2002 when Plaintiffs filed a class-action suit against NTL (Old NTL) for securities violations. Attorneys issued “hold memos,” instructing employees not to destroy documents that could be relevant to litigation. NTL went through a bankruptcy, after which it emerged as two distinct organizations: NTL Europe, the successor to Old NTL and a continuing defendant in the litigation, and NTL, Inc. (New NTL). When Plaintiffs requested discovery, NTL Europe responded by denying it had any responsive documents because they were all in the hands of New NTL. Therefore, Plaintiffs went through the process of obtaining, at their own expense, non-party discovery from New NTL. Even so, a large percentage of emails and electronic documents from key officers were missing.

A series of discovery missteps was revealed by depositions. First, there was an access agreement, established as part of the bankruptcy demerger, that allowed NTL Europe to freely obtain documents from New NTL for use in complying with its legal obligations. In addition to being angry that counsel did not reveal the agreement at an earlier stage, Magistrate Judge Peck held that the access agreement gave NTL Europe control over the documents, regardless of the physical dislocation. NTL Europe therefore had a responsibility to turn them over in discovery, rather than force Plaintiffs to go through the expensive process of obtaining informal, non-party discovery.

The second misstep was NTL’s failure to preserve electronically-stored information. As soon as NTL reasonably anticipated litigation, it had a duty to preserve relevant documents by suspending its normal document destruction policies and implementing a litigation hold. The two hold memos issued were insufficient. Many employees did not receive them, and others ignored them. Neither NTL company reminded its employees to preserve relevant documents and electronically-stored information. New NTL outsourced its IT systems to IBM without communicating any litigation-hold instructions. Moreover, New NTL replaced its computers, donating the old ones to charity, without any regard for saving the emails on the computers. As a result of all this, responsive e-mails and documents from key players involved in the litigation were lost. Magistrate Judge Peck held that the conduct constituted gross negligence, a culpable state of mind. Because NTL had control over relevant documents, and with a culpable state of mind failed in its duty to preserve those documents, a negative inference instruction was warranted.

There are several lessons to be learned from the case. In the global, electronic business environment, control is an expansive concept unlimited by physical geography. It is essential for counsel to get a handle on the client’s information system and know exactly what information the client actually controls. It is not sufficient to passively issue litigation hold memos. Counsel must take active steps to ensure compliance with the litigation hold and to prevent destruction of electronically stored information. This requires a working familiarity with client’s technology, and technological policies. As illustrated in the case, allowing business to proceed as usual can be extremely costly.

Legal Freelancing??

25 March 2007
Ashish

What the heck..Is it possible?? How do you do it? Well it is a tough question to answer, specially when you are in India and your clients are in US or Europe. There are tools and technologies to help you out, but the field is too traditional to handle. The current scenario is that legal outsourcing firms are spreading their businesses and getting more and more clients. But then, you are a freelancer, working alone, with limited resources and handful of knowledge. Can you go ahead with it or it is just too cumbersome to find a client?

Right now the scenario is that the outsourced legal jobs are mainly in IPR, contract drafting, document reviews or legal research. Well, the clients are abroad and you are going to approach them...how?

Get in touch with freelance website: These websites have a handful of projects listed (Elance being the best provider). But, the problem is that there are big players waiting for it, and you have tough time convincing the buyers. The lawyers from US have a benefit of being easily accessible to the client, being able to understand them and having years of experience. What to do now..Again the cost is the key...how much you bid and what portfolio you show. Be patient, it will take some time for you to get your first project and hopefully by then, impatient will not wait (reducing competition)!

Get in touch with law firms: These law firms (in India and abroad) often look for freelancers to carry out there jobs cheaply. The Indian law firms are in the phase of transition from serving traditional Indian clients to handling foreign clients. So they so called half established business, which are either looking for a VC to invest or striving to be self sustainable in due time.

The path to freelance in legal area is foggy though I believe its worth pursuing.

“ The above article has been reprinted from ashiish.blogspot.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”

Let us begin our day with a smile....:)

After going through Doug's article on legalese, I thought this is an apt metaphor:

A Contract Law professor asked one of his students, "If you were to give someone an orange, how would you go about it?"
The student replied, "Here is an orange"
The professor was outraged. "No! No! Think like a lawyer!"
Finally the professor replied, "Okay, I tell you.
"I hereby give and convey to you all and singular, my estate and interests, rights, title, claim and advantages of and in, a fruit, popularly known as orange, together with all its rind, juice, pulp, and seeds, and all rights and advantages with full power to bite, cut, freeze and otherwise eat, the same, or give the same away with and without the pulp, juice, rind and seeds, notwithstanding anything contained herein before or hereinafter or in any other deed, deeds or instruments of whatever nature or kind to the contrary."

Turning Legalese Into LegalEASE

Comes now, the author of this article who, pursuant to said article, for the reasons set forth herein, prays inter alia, for relief from the antiquated expressions, needless Latinisms, and convoluted legalese that plagues most legal writing. Stubbornly clinging to language that they would never use in any other context, many legal writers have an irrational aversion to expressing themselves in plain English. But is it really necessary to “pray” for relief rather than ask for it? Is it more convincing to argue that the client is entitled to relief “pursuant” to Section 4.16 rather than merely “under” Section 4.16? And, is the Plaintiff really coming now? The general consensus is that the answer to all three questions is a resounding “no,” and that legal writing is, in fact, much more effective without the legalese.

The Plain-English Movement

Over the past two decades, the movement away from legalese and toward legalEASE has been palpable and heartening. In his book, “the Winning Brief,” legal writing guru Bryan Garner includes chapters on such tips as “eliminate the jargon known as legalese,” “strike pursuant to from your vocabulary,” and “don’t use such as a pronoun.” The University of Virginia School of Law alumni page touts its legal research and writing program as helping students “win the battle against legalese.” A UCLA professor publishes an online page entitled “eschew, evade, and/or eradicate legalease.” We are bombarded by advertisements for CLE writing seminars that promise to teach us to how to write clearly, in plain English. Yet, many attorneys continue to cling to their legalese.

Resistance to Abandoning Legalese

It seems evident that confusing jargon is the enemy of clarity and persuasiveness, but the fact that we need to attend seminars or read books to teach us how to write in simple English is a testament to how deeply engrained this strange lawyerly language has become. Why the resistance? One explanation may be that aspiring attorneys spend three years in law school reading cases—decisions that are often centuries old—and assume that 21st century lawyers should write like 19th century judges. They continue to write in this style out of habit, or a misguided sense of tradition. Other lawyers are convinced that legalese is more precise. However in most cases the opposite is true: legalese is less precise, redundant (“cease and desist,” “by and through counsel”), and unwieldy (hereinafter, “unwieldy”).
Underlying the resistance may be a vague, insecure sense that lawyers need to write in legalease in order to sound lawyerly and separate themselves from the rest of the population. After all, can’t any person of average intelligence draft a contract or an appellate brief in plain English? The answer, of course, is no. Replacing the “parties hereto” with “Jones and Smith” devalues the importance of attorneys no more than calling a megapixel a “millionth of a screen” would render computer technicians obsolete. Lawyers aren’t paid for their ability to wield incomprehensible jargon. Rather a unique ability to reason like a lawyer, to weave persuasive arguments from facts and precedent, and to pay exacting attention to detail, separates legal writers from the rest of the population. Of course, there will always be a unique legal lexicon, filled with such terms of art as “fee simple,” and “res judicata.” Every profession has its jargon. But the legal profession is the only one that has felt the need to have its own pronouns, unique to the English language, and to use same to alter said language.
In Conclusion

WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth herein, we respectfully request that this honorable reader abandon legalese and start making clear arguments in plain English.

--Doug Groene, Esq., Staff Attorney

New York City Bar Weighs in On Overseas Legal Outsourcing

The exponential growth of overseas legal outsourcing in recent years has benefited the legal profession in many ways, not the least of which is to level the playing field, allowing smaller firms or sole practitioners affordable access to the type of resources previously enjoyed only by large firms with the capacity to throw an army of lawyers, paralegals, and legal assistants at a given project. But the practice has also raised ethical considerations, as attorneys struggle to apply traditional rules of professional responsibility to an increasingly global legal industry.

Last summer, the Association of the Bar of the City of New York Committee on Professional and Judicial Ethics weighed in on the ethics of overseas outsourcing in a formal opinion, published online at http://www.nycbar.org/.

Attorney Supervision is Key

Like almost every other ethics opinion from various jurisdictions that have considered the issue, the New York City Bar Association affirmed that there is nothing inherently unethical about outsourcing legal support services to overseas attorneys or laypersons. Lawyers within firms have routinely delegated tasks to clerks, secretaries, and other laypersons, and delegating research, brief writing, or similar tasks to overseas firms is analytically no different. In both cases the key is supervision over the non-lawyer.

The outsourcing attorney must, at all times, shoulder complete responsibility for the work. This entails setting the appropriate scope for the project, and vetting the non-lawyer’s work to ensure its quality. The opinion suggests that, in order to ensure proper supervision, the hiring attorney should obtain background information on the overseas firm and the non-lawyer working on the project, conduct reference checks, interview the non-lawyer in advance, and maintain communication during the project.

Client Consent May Be Necessary

The opinion also considers the thorny issue of protecting client confidences. It is often necessary to reveal confidences to the overseas lawyers in order for them to properly complete a project. But many overseas jurisdictions have less stringent rules of confidentiality. The ethical solution, according to the opinion, is for the hiring attorney to obtain the client's informed consent in advance. The client should be told which confidences will be shared, and the extent to which the rules of confidentiality in the foreign jurisdiction may offer less protection.
Like the New York State Bar Association, the New York City Bar concluded that attorneys do not need to reflexively inform clients every time work is to be outsourced overseas to a non-lawyer. However, the hiring attorney does have a duty to disclose the outsourcing when non-lawyers will play a significant role in the matter, when client confidences are to be shared, when the client expects that only the law firm and its personnel will be working on the matter, or when non-lawyers are to be billed to clients on a basis other than cost. In fact, absent a specific agreement with the client, a New York attorney should charge no more than the direct cost of the outsourcing and a reasonable allocation of direct overhead expenses from the outsourcing.

The New York City Bar opinion concluded that a lawyer may ethically outsource legal support work overseas provided the hiring attorney rigorously supervises the non-lawyers, takes measures to protect client confidences and avoid conflicts of interest, obtains client consent when necessary, and bills appropriately.

--Doug Groene, Esq., Staff Attorney

'A Modest Proposal' on How to Make Your Billables

The Snark
Fulton County Daily Report
January 29, 2007

According to rumor and legend, there was a time when lawyers, including Big Firm lawyers, did not have to bill a minimum number of hours each year. Apparently, they were merely required to get their work done. Madness.
Luckily, some managing partner figured out that Big Firms could make more money off of their Associate Cogs (and even their Partners) by requiring them to bill clients for a minimum number of hours each year.
As the "market" demands that Cogs get larger and larger paychecks, many Big Firms pay for these raises by steadily increasing the number of hours an associate must bill each year. The fact that the number of hours in a day never changes does not seem to deter firms from increasing the number of those hours an associate is expected to spend billing. In 1958, the American Bar Association suggested a full-time attorney could bill 1,300 hours per year. No kidding. By the mid-'90s -- some 40 years later -- many firms thought 1,800 or 1,900 were reasonable targets. Now? Try 2,100, baby.
Many of you Big Firm Cogs complain and wonder how you can possibly bill more hours in a day when the length of a day remains a constant. You whine about not having time for silly things like walking your dogs or feeding your children.
I have a few simple solutions to this dilemma.
MOVE TO THE CITY
This one is a given. If you bought a house in the 'burbs so that you could afford a bigger lawn, more bedrooms and easy access to Barnes & Noble and Williams-Sonoma, you might want to do the math. The commute is the obvious part, of course, (about 1.5 hours a day, round-trip). But don't forget the valuable time you spend pruning your bushes, edging around your custom landscaping and mowing your 1.2-acre lawn -- about four hours per month -- and chasing your kids around the living room (about 1.5 hours per week). Sure, you can outsource such things to others (as many Big Firm attorneys do), but don't forget the time you spend playing golf at the club, walking up and down your three flights of stairs and sipping tea on your front porch.
You can bill at least an additional 200 hours a year by moving to a condo across from your office. Surely, there is one being built or available right now! This goes for you in-town homeowners as well. Forget about the yard and driving to work. You'll spend far less time on home maintenance when you trade your 4,500-square-foot suburban manse on one and a half acres for your lawnless, 1,200-square-foot loft in a trendy rehabbed warehouse. And the lack of walls (and floor space) is almost guaranteed to bring your family closer together (in the limited time you're not billing hours and are actually at home, that is).
Speaking of family, let's just be honest here: Children are a real time-suck. You've got to play with them; listen to them; ferry them back and forth to school, soccer and ballet; clean up their messes; and plan for their college educations. You'd save a lot of time -- maybe as much as 2,000 hours a year -- if you didn't have those kids. And that time could be spent billing. I know some of you may bristle at this advice, but if you take a moment (an unbillable moment, granted) to think about it, you'll see that I'm right. I'd also suggest getting rid of your spouse as another time-saving device, but so many of you appear already to have considered this option that I didn't want to be redundant.
For you young and single Cogs, don't waste time on homeownership or renting. Just find a vacant office at the Firm, place an "Under Construction" sign on the door and move in! You'll have all the amenities you need: a full kitchen, free coffee, bathrooms, fine art plus central air and heat! All for free! Why waste your time driving to some "home" where you only sleep? Just get a nice mattress and you're set!
STOP EATING
As a Big Firm attorney, you live a sedentary existence in front of your computer or at your desk. You just don't really need that many calories to fuel such minimal activity. A simple Campbell's drink-a-cup-of-soup will do for lunch. Chewing takes unnecessary time and doesn't burn enough calories to count as exercise. You can still read a noncompete agreement while sipping that tomato-basil goodness -- without sacrificing 1.1 billable hours consumed by heading out with your co-workers to eat a burger.
And with the calories you save by opting for a liquid lunch, you don't have to waste another 1.2 hours walking on a treadmill, lifting weights or kickboxing. Besides, your heart rate will be elevated every day for one billable reason or another: when the partner you are working with screams at you because the mailroom misplaced the box he shipped himself from the conference in Detroit or when you realize you accidentally e-mailed the draft partnership agreement to opposing counsel instead of to your client.
If you insist on actually exercising, you can squeeze it in by simply taking the stairs instead of the elevator or jumping in place during conference calls.
SHAVE YOUR HEAD
Seriously. With a once-a-month buzz of the old clippers, you can save at least 15 minutes each morning by not having to wash, blow-dry or apply styling product to your mop. That gives you an additional 91.25 hours of available billing time each year! As an added bonus, you will not have to take the time to drive to a barber and sit in the chair and chat with the locals about the latest movies every few weeks -- that's another 20 hours a year. (By the way, if you are still wasting valuable time watching movies, download some 20-minute podcasts to fill your entertainment cravings.)
Some of you ladies may not have the full shave as an option. Many Big Firms frown on such nontraditional looks in their female attorneys. You may have to opt for keeping your hair long to avoid frequent visits to the salon. Just slick it back and put it in a ponytail. Every day. Curling and straightening are out. Highlights are out. No way do you have time to waste for that hours-long process plus touching up your roots. And forget about any waxing, tanning, micro-dermabrasion or other such self-indulgent and time-consuming activities. That goes for the men too.
With these simple and timesaving solutions, nothing but your own laziness can stop you from billing 2,800 hours a year!
As long as firms continue to link raises and/or bonuses to increased billable-hour requirements, we are all going to have to think long and hard about how much sleep we really need to function and whether Depends diapers are really just for the incontinent. Bathroom breaks can really cut into billable time!

“ The above article has been reprinted from www.law.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”

Cobra Legal Solutions enters into Chennai

V HEMAMALINI

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ FRIDAY, JANUARY 05, 2007 12:20:39 PM ]

CHENNAI: If Clarvolex, Paneaga and Intellevate are the top MNCs that are in Noida to tap the legal process outsourcing (LPO) opportunity in India, then the entry of Cobra Legal Solutions (CLS) into Chennai, is expected to mark the rush of many legal firms, vying for a share of the $ 250 billion global LPO pie.

According to industry sources, the market is still in a nascent stage. But by December 2007, several legal majors are slated to enter Chennai, due to its knowledge process outsourcing base and the availability of an exceptional talent pool.

Of the estimated 2,000 people, serving the LPO business in India, there are about 100-120 Indian lawyers, who are well-versed in US laws, sources said, adding CLS is the first MNC in the LPO space to enter south. Initially, CLS would have a medium-sized operation, that would call for recruiting about 500 people. Other smaller players include Office Tiger and Comat.

November last, CLS advertised in a foreign media, for a CEO to head its Chennai operations. The description read "Legal offshoring operation looking for experienced lawyer and/or paralegal with four to six years 'big case' US litigation management experience to direct legal operations in Chennai, India. Two year minimum commitment in Chennai required."

CLS, principally-owned by senior partners in major US law firms, has retained Ma Foi Management Consultants, as recruiters. It is looking for legal specialists (litigation) and legal support professionals. Specialists need to have global client servicing experience and ability to use Lexis/Nexis and Westlaw and other resource databases. Graduates with strong English skills and computer proficiency fit the legal support profile.

Sources said a legal specialist, with two years experience, commands a salary of Rs 40,000-Rs 50,000 a month, while a lawyer to act as a support professional could command a monthly earning of Rs 10,000-Rs 15,000.

Chennai-based law office of Mohan Associates, primarily into patents and trade marks, is also mulling to enter the booming LPO space this calendar year. "It is not a legal input alone. Lawyers and computer operators have to necessarily put in joint efforts," Mr A A Mohan told ET.

Lawyers confined to Indian courts would not be suitable for the LPO work. "Expertise in corporate affairs and intellectual property is needed," he said, pointing to the three stages involved in the LPO business.

Stage one, being the prior art search procedure in respect of patents, which seems to have caught on. Stage two is one of drafting specifications and here too, the huge LPO opportunity is being tapped. "But in stage III, which would mean Indian lawyers answering examination reports by USPTO, we are still in a nascent stage," he noted.

An LPO job, which could fetch $350 an hour in the US, could be done for $50-$75 in India. South has 40% of the country's annual pass out of three lakh law graduates, he added.

“ The above article has been reprinted from http://infotech.indiatimes.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”

International Patchwork of Media Laws Can Be a Minefield for Online Publishing

International Patchwork of Media Laws Can Be a Minefield for Online Publishing
By Charles J. Glasser Jr. and James F. Haggerty
The National Law Journal
01-08-2007
As sports fans around the globe became transfixed last summer by the World Cup, a U.K. libel case featuring Ashley Cole, a top British footballer, captured the attention of many of the world's media lawyers. Cole reached a settlement in a libel suit against two British publications that never actually mentioned him by name: Cole's attorneys argued that readers could easily surmise his identity from Web sites that picked up the story and provided further detail.
Meanwhile, in late August, The New York Times finally came to grips with the conflicting patchwork of laws that allow Internet publication in one country, but may raise liability in others. In reporting about the arrest of Islamic terrorists in London, the Times added facts that, under the United Kingdom's Contempt of Court Act, are considered prejudicial to the fair-trial rights of the accused. In the face of violations of British law, the Times' solution was to prevent U.K.-based Internet addresses from accessing the story. The need for this work-around underscores the deepest philosophical infirmity in U.K. and E.U. law (and, indeed, the laws of most other jurisdictions worldwide): Free press is just not as valued as a foundation of democracy as it is here. While the U.S. First Amendment allows only narrowly tailored restrictions on such speech, in the United Kingdom the public's right to know is often first on the chopping block.
The practical application of this distinction is obvious: In the era when electronic communication can circle the globe instantly, every company that communicates globally can be liable under defamation and privacy law -- and just as liable in the United Kingdom, or in India, or China, as they are in the United States.
That's a daunting prospect for U.S. lawyers representing media companies that maintain Web sites with the potential to reach thousands of readers worldwide. Indeed, those who do business globally might find themselves subject to libel or privacy claims in diverse corners of the world for material on their Web sites, blogs and message boards, or for press materials distributed via e-mail, the Web or commercial newswires.
FAIRNESS AND OTHER FACTORS
What is a lawyer to do when advising as to Web site content and other electronic communications? What is a blogger to do when deciding whether or not to break a story? Lessons drawn from international newsgathering offer a useful guide to operating in the global media environment. Consider fairness, for example. Fairness not only means presenting both sides, but also giving your subject an adequate opportunity to respond. In 2003, The London Daily Telegraph was successfully sued in Britain for publishing an article alleging that a British member of Parliament was a paid agent of Saddam Hussein. Even though the reporter had telephoned the politician the evening before the story went to print, the court ruled that adequate opportunity for comment had not been given.
Also consider whether the story in question is serving the public interest. This is the single most consistent element that protects journalists and publishers around the world in libel cases. What is of interest to the public is not the same thing as what is in the public interest -- which may be news to many a celebrity gossip blogger.
And remember cultural distinctions: A simple word can make the difference between accurate reporting and slander. Seemingly inoffensive language in one country can be a very expensive mistake in another. For example to be "fired" in the United States is not in itself defamatory, but in France or Japan, this word could land you in court. If someone loses his or her job for economic reasons in Japan, where being fired is considered shameful, that person is reported as being "made redundant." Similarly, it's almost impossible to be fired in France, so when that word is used, it is assumed that the subject was in violation of duty.
Finally, in fairness to our global cousins in the United Kingdom, the rest of the European Union and other jurisdictions: There is some value to the higher standards of reporting required. Although it is sacrilegious to say it in the United States, the greatest fear of all media lawyers is to run across that one overworked or burnt-out reporter or editor who believes that because the "public figure" and "actual malice" standards are next to impossible to surmount, careful reporting and clear writing are optional. By requiring a higher degree of care and accuracy, clarity and fairness rise commensurately.
It is clear that the days when only the largest global media companies had to worry about international libel and privacy issues are long gone. Internet publishing makes understanding international libel laws every lawyer's problem. It is often said that there is a reason why our First Amendment is first: that the right to speak freely is the right from which all other freedoms flow. But while this may be a cornerstone of American libel and privacy law, U.S. lawyers cannot let it lull us into a false sense of security when representing clients whose Internet posts are read not just in their hometown, but on computers across the globe.
Charles J. Glasser Jr. is media counsel responsible for media law and newsroom ethics for Bloomberg's global television, book publishing, radio, wire service and desktop-delivery news operations. He is the author of "The International Libel and Privacy Handbook: A Global Reference for Journalists, Publishers, Webmasters, and Lawyers" (Bloomberg Press 2006). James F. Haggerty is an attorney, communications consultant and author of "In the Court of Public Opinion: Winning Your Case With Public Relations" (Wiley 2003).

Lawyers, Fun & Money

LAWYERS, FUN & MONEY
By SAIRA RAO

December 31, 2006 -- The city's largest, most prestigious law firms are suffering from serious brain drain.

Young, Gen-X lawyers in their third to fifth year in the business are walking away from their $200,000-a-year positions in record numbers - at times without another job in view.

The reason? They are unhappy with their Blackberry lifestyle - being tethered to the job 24/7 and having to rush back to the office at a moment's notice when e-mail orders pop up on the ubiquitous PDA.

The exodus of law firm associates is unprecedented, according to the National Association of Law Placement, or NALP, which found that 37 percent of associates leave large firms within the first three years.

A whopping 77 percent of associates leave within five years, according to NALP's latest survey.

That is up sharply from recent years, and the resulting brain drain is wrecking havoc on law firms.

"There's a significant drain on your potential as a firm if you can't mitigate it," Mike, a partner at a 400-plus lawyer Big Apple firm, said of the young legal eagle exodus.

Mike, like many lawyers interviewed for this story, spoke only if neither they or their firm were identified, fearing client losses.

While increased attrition is a typical effect of a relatively healthy economy, Mike claimed, "It'd be a mistake to say it's all driven by the economics."

The big-firm brain drain is also giving partners a major case of agita - forcing them to do the yeoman grunt work usually assigned to associates. In addition, the firms are being forced to scramble to fill the mid-level talent void. Some are even doing the previously unheard of - hiring from second-tier law schools.

John, a fifth year associate at a prominent Wall Street firm, is, like many young lawyers, walking out the door. He is leaving for a coveted in-house position at an investment bank. "I'm just waiting for my bonus," the 31-year-old says.

In fact, the next major wave of legal brain drain will occur over the next few weeks as young lawyers jump ship after collecting their bonus checks.

"It's the mid-levels, the third through fifth years that are leaving, so you're losing people you've spent lots of money on training, and just as they start to run things, they leave, and firms become less profitable," Mike, the partner, adds.


John, the associate ready to leave, notices the effect of the mid-level brain drain at his own firm. Gone, he said, is the traditional pyramid of power, from the numerous first-year associates up to select first-year partners.

"It's gone from a pyramid to a strange hourglass shape," John says. "It's bizarre. Now you'll see deal teams with a partner and a first-year associate, with nobody in the middle."


"You should see the partners," John says. "They're doing the work of mid-levels to pick up the slack. And even though they make over $1 million, they never see their family. There's little reward in that for me."

Tagg Grant, 31, couldn't agree more. The self-described "recovering lawyer" removed himself from firm life last year, as a third-year corporate associate. "I didn't want to sleep on my office floor anymore or wonder if I had a change of underwear somewhere in my file cabinet."

That these Gen-Xers are choosing quality of life over a paycheck doesn't surprise Janelle Wilson, a sociology professor at the University of Minnesota.

"Generation Xers don't measure success or happiness by traditional measures, namely occupational prestige, power and income," she notes. Eva Wisnik, a time-management expert, has been hired by some firms to help associates deal with the lack of free time.

For example, if the partner you are working for doesn't get in until 10, "then go to the gym first thing in the morning," she advises.

SAIRA RAO, a lawyer and writer, recently left a large city law firm. Her debut novel, "Chambermaid," will be published by Grove Press in July.

THIS BLOG POST TAKEN FROM THE NEW YORK POST.

Outsourced legal work offers advantages

ILLINOIS: Paralegals group appeals to Chicago firms to buck trend

BY MOUSHUMI ANAND
Medill News Service

This story ran on nwitimes.com on Tuesday, December 5, 2006 12:47 AM CST

Ruby Prasad's legal research and briefs regularly find their way into courts across the United States despite the fact she has never stepped foot in a U.S. courtroom or anywhere else in the country.

In fact, her workstation is located 8,000 miles away in India.

Prasad is among the 200 lawyers working for Chicago-based Mindcrest Inc., which has an outsourcing facility in Mumbai.

Her company, along with other legal outsourcing firms, is experiencing explosive growth. From just 20 lawyers two years ago, Mindcrest now is 10 times its original size.

According to George Hefferan, the company's vice president and general counsel, Mindcrest plans to add 200 more employees by the end of 2007.

Atlas Legal Research, another legal outsourcing company with offices in Bangalore, India, and Fort Worth, Texas, also grew tenfold in the last two years. The company employed three attorneys in India in 2004. Today, it has 30.

Legal outsourcing companies provide services to legal departments of corporations and law firms from their foreign facilities. The companies, based in India and elsewhere, conduct legal research, document review, due diligence reports on mergers and acquisitions, and administrative work, as well as draft legal documents.

"During my association with an Indian law firm at the start of my career, I realized that I was more interested in doing work relating to legal research and drafting than practicing law," said the 28-year-old Prasad.

India's legal and educational systems help make the country a preferred destination from which to outsource work.

"India has a common law system with similar torts and level of complexity, and that kind of training is sufficient for the work the legal associates do," said Paul Bernstein, president of the Chicago Bar Association's law office technology committee.

He added that the time difference between India and the Unites States -- 11 1/2 hours -- is another advantage for outsourcing jobs. As lawyers finish their work in the United States, a new work day begins for legal associates in India.

According to Bernstein, that enables the associates to get the research ready for attorneys in the United States before they return to work the next morning.

But the outsourcing sector has caused some concern for the Illinois Paralegal Association. The 1,500-member organization's board of directors distributed a letter to 300 Chicago area companies asking them to use paralegals rather than outsourcing.

The letter said work done by paralegals is quality controlled and cost efficient. The letter added that experienced paralegals perform high-level substantive work under direct supervision of an attorney at lower billing rates than attorneys.

But despite the worries, Bernstein said the trend is here to stay. And as for Prasad, she said it was a good career move.

"I visualizes a bright and promising future for those associated with legal process outsourcing services," she said.

“ The above article has been reprinted from www.nwitimes.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”

Virtual Workers Cut Overhead at Law Firms

A recent article featured in Law Technology News (accessed at www.law.com) profiled a small law firm in Traverse City Michigan which is using virtual workers to cut overhead costs for the firm. The virtual workers are all based in the United States. The article discusses how talented lawyers and paralegals looking to work in non-traditional roles are plentiful. Many graduates of top law firms do not want to work the traditional 60-80 hours a week at a law firm, and virtual employmnet is a viable option. Moreover the Michigan based firm bills its clients 2-3 times the hourly wage paid to these virtual lawyers/legal assistants, resulting in significant bottom line profits for the firm.

The article discusses some of the obstacles or areas of concern involved with hiring virtual workers, including confidentiality and conflict checking--all of which are do able with the help of technology and contractual agreements.