All Our Tips
Emails and Client Expectations
Tsunami, blizzard, avalanche, flood, plague. There are many ways to describe the volume of emails that hit your Inbox every day. One aspect of the problem that is created by the flood is managing the clients’ expectations. Intellectually they might appreciate that you have more than one client and are busy but, intuitively, they expect a reply to their emails almost immediately. Here is one way to provide that reply and yet maintain the right to manage your own priorities in a meaningful way.
You know how to create a Signature in your email app – and it does not have to be just your name and address. Create this Signature:
I will have to take a look at this and get back to you in the next few days. If there is some urgency that I have overlooked, please let me know.
Thanks.
Yours truly
Once you add a Dear X, away it goes. The client is happy – you read his email! You are happy – you can reply substantively later, without rushing, and avoid putting what might be a low priority task ahead of something that is Urgent and Important. All it took was a couple of key strokes to send that Signature.
Of course, having given yourself time to reply, you must reply. Make sure you have a system in place to ensure that gets done. I like the 4D system: Do, Defer, Delegate, Dump. Take a look at a great article by Sheila Blackford in the Oregon State Bar Bulletin archives entitled Managing your Email.
-Barney (Bjorn) Christianson
Always Cross Check Note Up Results
Today’s tip is to double check the way you are noting up decisions. Taking a few extra minutes to cross check your results will really strengthen your research!
When we’re noting up a decision, typically we want to know if a) the decision has been appealed (i.e. history), and b) if subsequent decisions have discussed it (i.e. citing references). The most effective way to do this is to enter the decision citation into the note up field on Westlaw or LexisNexis Quicklaw. There are two nuances to this process that I want to highlight to ensure you always get the most comprehensive note up results.
- Use both LexisNexis Quicklaw and Westlaw to note up the same citation. While we rarely see one of these sources miss a subsequent appeal of a decision, it’s common that the citing references will differ slightly. This isn’t a deal breaker on every occasion but there’s nothing worse than missing a key citing reference because you didn’t take the extra 5 minutes to cross check your note up.
Also worth noting is that occasionally either QL or WL will have a slightly deeper case history for a decision. For example, noting up the Supreme Court of Canada decision Grassy Narrows First Nation v. Ontario (Natural Resources), 2014 SCC 48 on QL reveals a case history dating back to 2003. However, the same note up on WL shows the litigation commencing much later in 2011. A close reading of that 2011 decision on WL would have indicated to the reader that indeed prior litigation did exist. However, if the researcher takes the WL note up at face value, without cross checking against a second source, an incomplete picture of the litigation would emerge. - If you’re doing a deep dive on a case or topic, note up each subsequent decision in a case history separately. QL & WL will (quite properly) only show you the citing references for a trial decision when you note up that trial decision. If you note up a subsequent appeal decision, you will only be shown citing references for that appeal decision, not citing references for the prior trial decision.
In the same vein, but possibly for different reasons, QL & WL may show you different case histories depending on whether you note up the trial decision or a subsequent appeal decision. For example, noting up the Tsilhqot’in Supreme Court of Canada decision (2014 SCC 44) on QL reveals a concise case history of a 2007 trial decision and a 2012 appeal decision. However, if you also note up either of the 2007 or 2012 decisions on QL, you will see an extensive case history including 30+ procedural decisions dating back to 1999!
Have you ever come across quirks or discrepancies when you note up cases? Chime in with a comment below to share your experience!
[Today’s tip echoes the sentiments in Shaunna Mireau’s excellent tip from 2013 where she also recommended using two sources when noting up. Thank you Shaunna!]
How to Ask for Referrals – Part II
Last week, in ‘How to Ask for Referrals – Part I,’ we heard from lawyers and accountants. This week, we will hear from consultants.
FROM THE CONSULTANTS:
Mark Federman, Ph.D
Federman – Reengagement Realized
Asking for a referral is, by definition, all about me. It’s something I want to benefit my business. A more effective ask would be to turn this around, and offer a benefit to the potential referrer first. Using your great probing and listening skills, determine what interests the other person. What problems do they have for which you might be able to offer a solution? What opportunities do they see for which you can offer an advantageous approach? By freely suggesting a new way to perceive their challenge that draws on your key business skills, you set yourself up to ask the obvious follow-on question: Who else do you know who might be facing the same, or similar situation that might also benefit from my approach? Voila! Instant, natural, and painless referral.
Catherine Moffitt
Cosgrove
In general, when we feel comfortable with a client, in a casual conversation when the vibe seemed right, we might mention that we would always appreciate referrals.
We also meet with our clients’ accountants to present what we do, with the sole purpose of trying to create excitement so they will refer us to others who would benefit from our services.
——
I will add that one method that has consistently worked well in my own consulting practice is maintaining visibility. I have received referrals after sharing information, ideas and insights that added value to my network at speaking engagements, on my blog, LinkedIn, Twitter or by way of my newsletter. This includes referrals from people I didn’t know, but who were somehow connected to my professional network!
For more on generating referrals, see this previous post on SlawTips:
Also, see Toronto Marketing Blog for generating the type of referrals that fit your practice:
However
Commonly misused.
First, as a conjunction, which it isn’t:
The Outside Directors and Officers Liability policy held by the firm on your behalf is set to expire on July 30, 2015, however your assistance is required in advance.
Don’t do this. It’s a bad run-on sentence, and just replacing the second comma with a semi-colon doesn’t fix it.
Segue to second misuse: at the beginning of a sentence (or after a semi-colon):
However, Gross Negligence or Wilful Misconduct does not include…
Perhaps not incorrect, but inelegant. Doesn’t that initial however somehow have a Valley Girl’s rising intonation to it? Not quite what you want in your client piece (or your contract, for that matter).
‘However’, properly used, is what is called a post-positive; it needs to rely on a previous statement, like so:
Mention was made, however, of a continued intention to implement…
Be careful, however, not to place it too early. It would be a bit weird to phrase that last example as ‘Mention, however, was made …’
Next writing tip: said, same, such
How to Ask for Referrals – Part 1
Today’s tip is simple and focused. How should lawyers ask for referrals?
I asked lawyers, accountants and consultants to share how they go about it. They shared their tips generously and, as you will see, everyone has a slightly different approach.
In Part 1, we will hear from lawyers and accountants.
This is what they told us.
FROM THE LAWYERS:
Mitchell Rose, Stancer, Gossin, Rose:
Getting to know your colleagues, both online and off, can not only lead to genuine friendships – but it can also help set the stage for referrals.
Even with lawyers that are in the same area, there is often a need to refer a file due to either a conflict or the need for a different skill, experience or hourly rate.
But, still, some lawyers are passive about this. They are shy to ask for referrals if they are not forthcoming.
It’s okay to tell people that you are looking for additional work. You just have to do it at the appropriate time and that depends on the relationship. To simply introduce yourself to someone at a networking event and ask for a referral doesn’t work. There’s a degree of emotional intelligence, luck and timing involved. Always make sure to put relationships first and referrals second.
Joseph Caprara, Caprara Barristers:
Lawyers have two key sources for referrals – professionals and clients.
You will need to treat them differently:
- Many professionals may get turned off if you ask for referrals outright. It’s more about setting up the relationship. Referrals will come.
- With clients, there are two opportunities when it’s ideal to ask – at the initial intake and after the case is resolved. That’s when we can do no wrong and they will go out of their way for us. I give out my cards and tell them that if they have any friends or family that need anything to feel free to pass them along. When something comes along, you’re the first one they call. I once had someone track me down after 20 years! They remember the results. But they also remember the way we treated them.
FROM THE ACCOUNTANTS:
Ian Wollach, Collins Barrow:
How do you ask for a referral? You ask!
You have a great opportunity once you’ve done something for a client. The easiest way is to start by asking if they are they happy with the work.
If yes, ask, “Do you know anyone else who has a similar need and would you mind providing us with a referral?”
Douglas Stansbury, Stansbury & Company:
Referrals are by far my most important source of new business. When I examined the referrals I had received, it was apparent that the best referrals were all coming from a small group of select people.
These were the people that I have the strongest relationship with, and who know what I am looking for in a client. I decided that rather than asking for referrals from a wide range of sources, I would focus on strengthening my relationship with this small group of referrers (and perhaps add a couple of more to the group).
The results – my practice has grown at a rate of 30% for the past two years, and I expect to repeat that growth again this year. Roughly 90% of that growth is from referrals.
…..
In Part 2, we will hear from consultants, with more tips on asking for referrals.
Use Deep Links
Deep links are links that take you directly to content within a website or database, rather than to the website’s home page. The advantage of deep links is that they allow you to send users directly to content of interest, rather than having to navigate through the menu system. An example of a deep link is http://www.lexisnexis.com/ca/legal/api/version1/toc?csi=386929 which takes you to a volume of Halsbury’s Laws of Canada on Quicklaw.
It is helpful to use deep links in the library catalogue as well as in online research guides. They can also be included in research reports (so that the end user can more easily find the materials being referred to) or when recommending specific resources online.
Keep in mind that not all database services allow you to create deep links to materials, and some make the process easier than others do. Some services have an icon or link that allows you to create deep links automatically; others may require you to derive a deep link by editing the URL.
One final tip: before sending a deep link off to another user, it is good practice to test it in another browser to ensure there are no problems with the link.
Is That an Assistant in Your Pocket?
I started this article a while back after reviewing a NY Times article entitled: “Siri, Alexa and Other Virtual Assistants Put to the Test” (http://ow.ly/XABKz) as it highlighted the issue I have with technologies employing the words “virtual assistant” to describe their product or gadget. More recently, a legal tech company called “Riverview” started tweeting out about the “virtual assistants” built into their product which brought this topic back to the surface for me.
First, to clarify, according to dictionary.com, the term “assistant” is defined as:
–noun
- a person who assists or gives aid and support; helper.
- a person who is subordinate to another in rank, function, etc.; one holding a secondary rank in an office or post: He was assistant to the office manager.
Did you notice the second word in each one of those definitions was “person”. A “person” – not a gadget, not a cartoon character on your website, not an e-mail reminder service and certainly not a tech.
Just to be certain that I’m not going crazy, I checked and here’s the definition of a “person”:
–noun
- a human being, whether man, woman, or child: The table seats four persons.
- a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing.
Don’t mean to be touchy on the subject, but I spend my days trying to help people figure out that you can’t replace the live thinking brain in the business process of having an “assistant” with some type of tech – no matter what the tech salesmen state! If you remove the live, thinking “assistant”, chances are the software, tool or service you are being pitched will be much less effective and much more time/labor intensive than you’ve been lead to believe.
Technology purveyors are not helping the issue. They throw the term “assistant” around on a whim. They add it before or after their applications and processes as though any tech could take the place of a live, thinking brain.
Worse still are the ad campaigns calling out to you that if you use a real live assistant, you are “old school” or don’t have a clue about technology. Not so! They want to make you think you need to use THEIR tech… yeah only THEIR tech solves all your woes… and for only the low, low monthly price of ….
So, exactly when did having or being an assistant become a negative? When did the noble profession of assisting become a badge of shame; some sort of weakness or incompetence on the part of the person using the assistant and some sort of sub-human, subservient position to hold as the assistant?
I’m not certain, but I believe it coincided about the same time that the majority of the population started typing with more than four fingers. No, I’m not kidding. It’s sad really. Why? Having the skill to type relatively fast does not mean you can or should be spending the majority of your time behind a keyboard performing the administrative and secretarial functions required to run your practice.
So let me take a moment here and set the record straight. I am a legal Virtual Assistant. No – I’m not a voice trapped in your phone nor am I some technology. I am a live, thinking brain and I say it loud and proud!
By the way, how many “successful” people do you know who do NOT have a live, thinking and without a doubt human assistant? Presidents, celebrities, doctors, CEOs … about the only peeps who don’t have assistants are the ones who could use them the most – Moms!
-Andrea Cannavina, New York City.
Waffle
This was my grade-10 English teacher’s expression for useless verbiage. Other ways to say it: throat-clearing, filler, circumlocution, BS.
Examples (and what to say instead):
a number of some, many
as a means of to
as prescribed by in, under
as to whether if, whether
at the present time now
by means of by, with
concerning about, on [and don’t misuse ‘concerning’ for ‘of concern’, ‘disturbing’, ‘troubling’]
due to the fact that since, because
during the time that during, while
for a/the period of for
have an adverse effect on hurt, set back, impair
including but not limited to including [the ‘but not limited to’ bit doesn’t actually add anything, does it?]
in an orderly fashion [I can’t think why you’d want to say this in the first place]
in a timely manner promptly, on time
in accordance with by, following, under
in addition also, too
in order for for
in order that so
in order to to
in other words [remove and rephrase whatever you said before so you don’t then have to clarify it]
in/with regard to about, on
in relation to about, to, with
in sum [a lawyerism that people picked up in 1L; lose it and just summarise/conclude]
in the event that if
in the process of [leave it out and don’t replace; it adds nothing]
in view of because, since
it is interesting to note that [if you have to say this, it probably isn’t interesting; just leave it out]
pertaining to about, of, on
please find enclosed/attached I enclose/attach OR the [whatever it is] is enclosed/attached [even in the days of snail mail, was it really ever a challenge to locate the extra thing in the envelope with the letter? be gone, nineteenth-century nonsense!]
provides guidance to guides
pursuant to under, according to
put another way [see ‘in other words’; you might also want to rethink ‘for greater certainty’, even in contractual drafting]
regarding about, on
relative to about, on
set forth in in
the fact that [omit and rephrase, so that ‘The fact that the borrower defaulted …’ becomes something like ‘The borrower’s default …’]
the question as to whether if, whether, the question whether
until such time as until
with reference to about
with respect to about
with the exception of except
De-clutter your prose by eliminating verbose (and hackneyed) words and phrases.
Next: however
How Secure Is the Information You Send in E-Mail?
Many I speak with have a misperception that sending an e-mail is as secure as sending a letter through the US Mail. Simply put, such is not the case. The US Mail has a secure process in place which includes controlled physical access to your sealed letters and envelopes by approved and monitored equipment and personnel.
In comparison, each e-mail message you send travels through an unknown number of servers, switches, routers and electronic equipment ~ bouncing along what I call the digital superhighway on its way to the intended recipient’s ISP for download to their e-mail application. There is no way to control over which wires, servers and equipment your e-mail goes and anyone with the applied knowledge and time can intercept, review and alter any e-mail message which touches their electronic equipment. So your e-mail touches their equipment = them able to do whatever they want with information contained in or attached to it. <-let that soak in
This is why I say e-mail is more of a postcard than it is a sealed envelope. Your information is really in the open and you never really know who may have read it along the way.
What About The E-mail You Receive?
Along with worrying about the confidentiality and security of the information and files you send in outgoing communications, you also must worry about the e-mails being received by your domain and downloaded into your e-mail application. Just one wrong “OK” by you or an employee (or anyone at any computer for that matter) can wreak havoc on the machine itself, the network to which it is connected and even worse – can potentially replicate and send itself to contacts and thereby infect them too!
Three of the most common incoming e-mail threats are:
1. PHISHING
Phishing is any attempt to fraudulently acquire sensitive information, such as passwords and credit card details by masquerading as a trustworthy person or business in an electronic communication. Phishing is typically carried out using e-mail and instant messaging.
You’ve probably received messages like this – from banks, credit card companies and financial institutions – many of whom you’ve never heard of or could even been one you actually have an account with (that’s why it’s called “fishing” ). These messages all look real enough, with appropriate logos and great motivational copy, almost always trying to make you think there is something wrong with your account and that you need to hurry. Don’t be fooled!
Never navigate to your bank or other on line service provider for which you need to type in a password through an e-mail you receive. Never! <-Read that sentence one more time so you don’t forget when you’re doing 100 other things! STOP AND DON’T CLICK IT!
Instead, open a new, secure browser and log in to your account to look for information from customer support about any issues. You can also call the customer support number listed right there in your on line account to speak with someone at the actual company or even advise of the phishing e-mail.
2. VIRUSES
A computer virus is a program that can copy itself to a computer without permission or knowledge of the user/owner. A computer virus reproduces by making copies of itself in the computer’s memory, storage, or over a network.
3. WORMS
A computer worm is a self-replicating computer program. It uses a network to send copies of itself to other computers on the network. Unlike a virus, a worm does not need to attach itself to an existing program. Worms typically harm the network, whereas viruses infect or corrupt files on a targeted computer.
In many instances, computer viruses and worms are an attachment to or a link embedded in an e-mail. <-Now read that sentence again and let it sink in!!
This is why you should never open an attachment or click on a link in an e-mail received from an unknown recipient. In fact, even if you do know the sender you still need to be careful and pay attention!! How else can you be certain you’re not clicking on something a contact may have sent you by mistak?! Certainly, when in doubt – opt for no and DON’T CLICK IT!
Let’s face it, e-mail is not going away any time soon. In fact, if your e-mail is anything like mine, over time the volume of incoming only increases.
That’s why it is more important than ever for those using e-mail to understand the inherent risks of conveying personally identifiable or company information and records using e-mail. When used properly and with a mind towards safeguarding your personal and company information, as well as the equipment you use, e-mail can be the one tech that literally sets you free – from your office, your desk and even the 9-5 grind. It’s how I got my start to full mobility.
But when not used properly – when you let e-mail take over or when social security and credit card numbers are openly e-mailed, bad, bad, bad things happen (usually to very nice people).
Don’t let that happen to you and don’t let it happen to anyone who entrusts their confidential information to you. You owe it yourself, your co-workers, your contacts and equipment to use e-mail wisely.
Now here’s a little 2minute-ish video I created out of a past presentation about security:
Direct link: https://tlcxn.podbean.com/mf/play/jgez6h/SecuritySalad2016.mp4
EXTRA RESOURCES:
To check to see if your connection is secure, try Shield’s Up! http://ow.ly/11vLg
FEEL FREE TO ADD YOUR OWN IN THE COMMENTS:
-Andrea Cannavina, New York City (and a Canadian!).
Common CanLII Questions Answered!
I recently sat down with CanLII’s Manager of Content and Partnerships, Sarah Sutherland, to learn what’s new and to ask some common CanLII questions I get from my own users — chief among them being “Are there any decisions I should know about that aren’t on CanLII?”
There’s no one single tip here today, but in the spirit of SlawTips, this is a short read that we hope will be informative and help you work smarter!
— Bronwyn Guiton (@BronwynMaye)
Q (Bronwyn Guiton): What sorts of decisions would readers be surprised to learn aren’t actually available on CanLII?
A (Sarah Sutherland): Most routine matters aren’t written up in decisions, so the information related to them is not generally publicly available online. This means that the information available on CanLII (or any source of caselaw) for subjects like sentencing is mostly for unusual matters and outcomes.
Q: Are there areas of CanLII’s decisions collections that readers might be surprised to learn about the depth or breadth of?
A: We have content going back to the 19th century and are regularly adding more historical content.
Q: CanLII just added Federal and Quebec annual statutes to the site. What do you see as the value added there?
A: This is content that people are already looking for on CanLII, so adding it makes the site more complete. When annual statutes are passed they are added to CanLII, but as the sections that amend other acts come into force they are removed from the acts they came from in the consolidated legislation collections and only appear in the amended acts. Adding annual statutes allows researchers to find this content more easily.
Q: These days, most barristers are comfortable submitting the CanLII PDF’s of decisions to court, but they still copy older decisions from print reporters. Do you see that changing at all as time goes on?
A: I think that as the legal profession generally gets more comfortable with electronic files and confident that others will be too, native electronic files will be more commonly used. Judges are in a strong position to influence this transition. In The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company v High Park Medical & Rehabilitation Centre Ltd, 2015 ONSC 5169, Justice Myers wrote “Scanning and emailing pdf copies of case law is one of the biggest wastes of the profession’s collective time.”
My thanks to Sarah Sutherland for answering these CanLII questions for SlawTips.
