(Such An) Easy Question.

Hi folks, so you all have a nice weekend?

Hey, what do you know -- Fort Lauderdale attorney James S. Haliczer, managing partner at an 11-attorney firm, thinks big firms are too expensive and don't deliver value compared to smaller firms:

In the frothiest days of the bubble, mega-firms with rates approaching $1,000 an hour were common. In the words of Larry Bodine, a blogger who deals with the law and legal issues, ``no lawyer who cannot shoot laser beams out of their eyes is worth that much money.''

Well, you can fool some of the people some of the time, but clients are waking up to the fact that there are highly competent small- and medium-sized law firms that can offer legal representation every bit as aggressive and effective as the mega-firms -- at a fraction of the price.

This awakening partly explains the Feb. 12 ''Black Thursday,'' when six top law firms dismissed more than 700 staff members and attorneys in a single day, and why 7,000 jobs were lost in the legal profession between December 2007 and December 2008.

SIGN OF OPTIMISM

Meanwhile, firms charging less than $500 an hour are actually hiring and expanding their marketing budgets, a sure sign of optimism.

The lesson is clear: Individual, corporate and government clients are eschewing the top-of-the-food-chain law firms with their astronomical fees and retainers in favor of smaller firms that can offer the same, and often better and more personalized, results at a fraction of the cost.

Unless the economy recovers more quickly than expected, this will likely lead to a long-overdue paradigm shift correcting the market for legal services, creating significant growth potential for those law firms that quickly recognize and seize the opportunity. And even better, more competitively priced legal services would be available for Americans.

I agree with this (except the laser beam part), but next time maybe get someone else -- like a client -- to deliver the message?

Here's a rule that extends beyond the law -- if you claim to be really great at something -- like being a great trial attorney --and tell everyone how good you are at it, chances are you are not as good as you think you are. This applies to love, law, carpentry, Shamwows -- it really doesn't matter the subject.

Wow, did you know the Canadian Supreme Court is more influential worldwide than our own Supreme Court?

I didn't even know Canada had a Supreme Court.

Finally, a local blogger is in trouble for criticizing Goldman Sachs.

The investment firm has hired Chadbourne and Parke, and has threatened to sue:

According to Chadbourne & Parke's letter, dated April 8, the bank is rattled because the site "violates several of Goldman Sachs' intellectual property rights" and also "implies a relationship" with the bank itself.

See for yourself, the website is www.goldmansachs666.com.

Here is the header at the top of the page:

This website has NOT been approved by Goldman Sachs, nor does this website have any affiliation with Goldman Sachs. This website was designed to provide information about Goldman Sachs direct from the public, and NOT from Goldman Sachs's marketing and public relations departments. You may find the Goldman Sachs website at www.goldmansachs.com

Guess disclaimers only work when big corporations employ them and bury them someplace.

Come on, Chadbourne and Parke?

Goldman Sachs really should have listened to Jim Haliczer.