Do you consider an “exceptional” lawyer to be essential? Will you truly be content employing a mediocre attorney?
There may have been a point when one distinguished between exceptional and essential. In the past, many individuals may have been content in utilizing a physician, dentist, accountant, an attorney and/or any professional, perhaps as long as they were not inferior. However, is it any different in reading or watching the news, utilizing a barber or beautician, going out to dinner, or watching a movie? When the emphasis is on the desired result, it becomes essential to want a higher standard, receive value and choose to utilize the services of an exceptional or superior individual. In this regard, therefore, the significant keyword and the number one criterion in selecting the people we employ or retain to perform services (and the things we do), becomes very important; doing anything else, such as what may only be “o.k.” becomes tantamount to accepting mediocre and, at times and at best, this is superficial, inadequate, deficient and, even worse, useless and a waste of time.
Most of us want more, with the emphasis on an effective outcome. Yet, some will inevitably place a greater importance on the apparent cost rather than the potential adverse outcome. In other words, they do not automatically ask “what do I have to lose, such as the priceless time I have, my professional career, credibility and/or personal integrity?” Therefore, with all of this in mind, many do not want “just o.k.” and, instead, focus on exceptional as the measurement for the individual with whom they choose to employ and, often, on the things they do with the time they have.
In selecting a lawyer, competence is the same criteria because it can be critical. The website Avvo provides a profile on all of the attorneys in the United States. This website provides one with the opportunity to decide whether (s)he wants an attorney who is exceptional, as well as knowledgeable, competent, skilled and highly experienced, particularly with a proven and written record of ongoing favorable results. For example, it might not at the outset seem as important in choosing a contractor, until one first looks at testimonials to determine whether there are others who have spent their savings or mortgaged their home, only to then experience their contractor departed from the plans and specifications, delayed at great length on the work and/or did not actually complete the project. The cost to correct the deficient workmanship can exceed the original price of the contract or simply be overwhelming as to the nature and time to resolve.
In the practice of law, it can be critical the attorney does more rather than less. It is essential in order to diminish the risk or not gamble on the outcome. Hence, in choosing a lawyer, it is recommended you evaluate the advantages of a comprehensive scope in the work to be performed involving, among other things, indispensable steps, such as a full risk assessment; an exhaustive factual and legal analysis; focused research; essential strategizing; and utilizing credible experts to evaluate and provide an opinion integrated into a proper and lengthy forensic report concerning such issues, including those directly or indirectly, related to the standard of care, competency, prudence, judgment, fitness, lawfulness, honesty, moral turpitude, etc.
In summary, what some may have previously thought were unnecessary principles because they did not think they required selecting an attorney who is exceptional, now are considering the above issues as extremely important fundamentals and, therefore, essential characteristics in choosing the right lawyer to provide advice and representation (and most if not all of the things they do).
