Friday, March 7, 2008

What Is A Solo Practitioner?

Over at Susan Cartier Liebel's Build a Solo Practice she puts out a couple of statistics I hadn't seen before:

Solos comprise more than 50% of all private practice attorneys in the country. In some states, like New York, they are as high as 81%.

With such a huge predominance of BigLaw in the news, I never realized that I was actually in the majority, not the minority.

But the stats lead to different questions, starting with this: What, exactly, is the definition of a solo?

Does this mean one lawyer, and one lawyer only (along with support staff)?

Or does solo mean that there may be a few associates, but 100% of the equity (and responsibility and liability) of the firm sits with one person?

What definitions are used to create these stats, and what definition should be used?

I'm not going to pretend I know what the "right" answer is, though I think that the element of 100% of the risk is more important than 100% of the work. This is especially true given that many solos may outsource some work when times get busy, creating a vast gray area of per diem, "of counsel," and part-time lawyers that make precise definitions difficult. I just don't know how any of this is factored in when statistics are compiled.

And I am more than a bit curious as to what others think, and with that, here is a shout out to:

• SoloBlawg (Ben Cowgill);
• Home Office Warrior (Grant Griffiths)
• Solo in Chicago (Peter Olson)
• The Inspired Solo (Cheryl Sisk Schelin)
• Legal Research and Writing Pro (Lisa Solomon)
  
• The Greatest American Lawyer (Enrico Schaefer);
• Chuck Newton Rides The Third Wave (Chuck Newton);
  
• And, of course, Carolyn Elefant, author of Solo by Choice.

I hope to hear back on other blogs and in the comments here.

Update - Responses:

• See What's a solo? (Carolyn Elefant)
• Eric Turkewitz asks, "What is a Solo?" (Susan Cartier Liebel)
• What Is A Solo Practitioner? (Chuck Newton)
  

Labels: Law Practice

posted by Eric Turkewitz
Permanent Link

Comments:

Eric,

It is a good question. I'm not sure of the answer. One principal attorney functioning alone, functioing with non-JD support staff of indeterminate number, sourcing out to contract attorneys on a case-by-case basis while maintaining 100% equity position in the firm makes sense to me.

One or more partners with JDs, even without support staff is not so there is an equity component as well as a 'shared work' component.

Therefore, does a 100% equity owner with 'associates' on the payroll who function as attorneys still qualify as a solo?

100% equity and sole attorney status within their firm would appear to be the equation...but I leave it up to finer minds to debate.

# posted by  Susan Cartier Liebel : March 08, 2008 7:57 AM

 

But if that's Susan's stat, then doesn't Susan have to define it and/or source it?

# posted by  Anonymous : March 08, 2008 11:14 AM

 

I posted on this at my blog here - http://www.myshingle.com/2008/03/articles/solo-practice-trends/whats-a-solo/

# posted by  Carolyn Elefant : March 08, 2008 3:46 PM

 

What kinds of cases to take and what to turn down? Which to refer?
The answers to these questions also define a Solo Practitioner. What is your answer?

# posted by  Linda Sherman : April 06, 2009 4:00 PM

 

What kinds of cases to take and what to turn down? Which to refer?
The answers to these questions also define a Solo Practitioner.

Solos come in all shapes when it comes to practice areas. The woman who argued Roe v. Wade for example (Sarah Weddington), was a solo just a few years out of school.

It can be any field.

# posted by  Eric Turkewitz : April 06, 2009 4:16 PM

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

<$BlogBacklinkTitle$>  
<$BlogBacklinkSnippet$>

posted by <$BlogBacklinkAuthor$> @ <$BlogBacklinkDateTime$>

Create a Link

<< Home

The New York Personal Injury Law Blog is sponsored by its creator, Eric Turkewitz of The Turkewitz Law Firm. The blog might be considered a form of attorney advertising in accordance with New York rules going into effect February 1, 2007 (22 NYCRR 1200.1, et. seq.) As of July 14, 2008, Law.com became an advertiser, as you can see in the sidebar. Law.com does not control the editorial content of the blog in any way.

Throughout the blog as it develops, you may see examples of cases we have handled, or cases from others, that are used for illustrative purposes. Since all cases are different, and legal authority may change from year to year, it is important to remember that prior results in any particular case do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes with respect to any future matter, including yours, in which any lawyer or law firm may be retained.

Some of the commentary may be become outdated. Some might be a minority opinion, or simply wrong. No reader should consider this site (or any other) to be authoritative, and if a legal issue is presented, the reader should contact an attorney of his or her own choosing for advice.

Finally, we are not responsible for the comments of others that may be added to this site.