Attorneys Blog Blog Why Your Lawyer Choice Could Make or Break Your Case

Why Your Lawyer Choice Could Make or Break Your Case

Choosing a Securities Attorney: Why Your Lawyer Choice Could Make or Break Your Case

Selecting the right attorney for your investment fraud case might be the most important decision you make in the entire process. The difference between an experienced securities lawyer and a general practitioner could literally be hundreds of thousands of dollars in your pocket.

Let me tell you what to look for and what red flags to avoid when choosing legal representation.

Why Securities Law Is Different

Securities law is incredibly specialized. It involves:
– Complex federal and state regulations
– Industry-specific rules and procedures
– Specialized forums like FINRA arbitration
– Unique damage calculation methods
– Technical investment concepts

A lawyer who handles divorces and car accidents might be great at what they do, but they’re probably not the right choice for your investment fraud case.

Essential Qualifications to Look For

Securities law experience – Look for attorneys who focus primarily on securities cases, not general litigation.

FINRA arbitration experience – Most investment disputes go through arbitration, which has its own rules and procedures.

Track record of success – Ask about recent case results and client recoveries.

Industry knowledge – Your attorney should understand investment products, market practices, and industry standards.

Resources – Securities cases often require expert witnesses and extensive document review.

Questions to Ask Potential Attorneys

How many securities cases have you handled? – You want someone with substantial experience, not someone learning on your case.

What’s your success rate in FINRA arbitration? – Look for attorneys who win more often than they lose.

Can you provide references from recent clients? – Good attorneys should be able to provide references (with client permission).

How do you calculate damages in cases like mine? – They should be able to explain their approach clearly.

What experts do you typically use? – Securities cases often require economic and industry experts.

How long do cases like mine typically take? – You should have realistic expectations about timing.

Red Flags to Avoid

Guarantees of specific outcomes – No honest attorney can guarantee results in litigation.

Pressure to sign immediately – Good attorneys will give you time to make an informed decision.

Lack of securities experience – Don’t let a general practitioner learn securities law on your case.

Unwillingness to explain their approach – You should understand how they plan to handle your case.

Poor communication – If they’re hard to reach during the consultation, it won’t get better.

Understanding Fee Arrangements

Most securities attorneys work on contingency, meaning they only get paid if you recover money. Typical arrangements include:

Contingency percentages – Usually 33-40% of any recovery, depending on the complexity and stage of resolution.

Expense arrangements – Who pays for expert witnesses, document production, and other costs? Some attorneys advance these costs, others require clients to pay as they’re incurred.

Fee shifting – In some cases, you might be able to recover attorney fees from the other side.

Make sure you understand all fee arrangements before signing any agreement.

The Importance of Resources

Securities cases can be expensive to prosecute properly. Your attorney should have:
– Access to qualified expert witnesses
– Resources to handle extensive document discovery
– Technology for managing large document productions
– Support staff to handle case administration

Small firms or solo practitioners might not have these resources.

Geographic Considerations

FINRA arbitration can be conducted anywhere, so you’re not limited to local attorneys. Sometimes the best securities attorneys are in major financial centers like New York, Los Angeles, or Chicago.

However, local attorneys might have advantages like:
– Lower travel costs
– Familiarity with local arbitrators
– Easier face-to-face meetings

The Initial Consultation

Most securities attorneys offer free initial consultations. Use this time to:
– Explain your situation clearly
– Ask about their experience with similar cases
– Understand their assessment of your case
– Evaluate their communication style
– Discuss fee arrangements

Don’t be afraid to consult with multiple attorneys before making a decision.

Checking Credentials

Before hiring any attorney, verify:
Bar admission – Make sure they’re licensed to practice law
Disciplinary history – Check with the state bar for any disciplinary actions
Professional memberships – Look for membership in securities law organizations
Publications and speaking – Evidence of expertise in securities law

The Team Approach

Many successful securities cases involve teams of professionals:
– Lead attorney with securities expertise
– Support attorneys for research and document review
– Paralegals for case administration
– Expert witnesses for technical testimony
– Economists for damage calculations

Make sure your attorney has access to qualified team members.

Communication Expectations

Establish clear expectations about:
– How often you’ll receive updates
– How quickly they’ll respond to your calls or emails
– What decisions require your input
– How they’ll keep you informed of developments

Good communication is essential for a successful attorney-client relationship.

Trust Your Instincts

Beyond credentials and experience, you need to feel comfortable with your attorney. Ask yourself:
– Do they listen to your concerns?
– Do they explain things in terms you can understand?
– Do they seem genuinely interested in your case?
– Do you trust their judgment and advice?

If something doesn’t feel right, keep looking.

The Cost of Choosing Wrong

Hiring the wrong attorney can be devastating:
– Missed deadlines due to inexperience
– Poor case preparation leading to bad results
– Inadequate damage calculations reducing your recovery
– Lack of industry knowledge hurting your credibility

The difference between a good securities attorney and a mediocre one can be enormous.

Making Your Decision

After consulting with potential attorneys, consider:
– Their experience and track record
– Your comfort level with their approach
– The resources they can bring to your case
– Their fee arrangement and costs
– Your gut feeling about working with them

The Bottom Line

Your choice of attorney is crucial to the success of your investment fraud case. Don’t make this decision based solely on cost or convenience. Look for experienced securities attorneys who have the knowledge, resources, and track record to maximize your chances of recovery.

An experienced securities attorney like Attorney Robert Wayne Pearce brings the specialized knowledge and proven track record you need to navigate the complex world of investment fraud litigation.

Remember: this might be your only chance to recover your losses. Make sure you have the right legal team fighting for you.

Leave a Reply

Related Post

Laredo Auto Accidents – Car Accident LawyersLaredo Auto Accidents – Car Accident Lawyers

Laredo Auto Accidents – Car Accident Lawyers

A high percentage of accident-related personal injuries resulting from auto and truck accidents. The number of people injured or killed because of negligence on our roads and highways is higher than ever before. Driver inattention, dangerous road conditions, and defective car parts often contribute to serious injuries including whiplash, neck injury, back injury, head and brain injury, spinal cord injury, loss of limb, amputation, and bone fractures. More on this website

Call to schedule a consultation with an experienced auto accident attorney. Our Law Firm has handled countless personal injury claims over the years. Our traffic accident attorneys know how to maximize results for clients injured in interstate accidents, drunk driver accidents, or any type of other roadway accident.

Preserving Evidence after an Automobile Accident

To increase your chances of a successful recovery after an automobile accident, you should preserve evidence at the scene to the best of your ability. Preserving evidence includes interviewing witnesses and photographing the accident scene and damaged vehicles.

Accident Attorneys with more than 100 Years of Combined Experience

You have suffered serious injuries in a car wreck. You are dealing with pain and suffering arising from your head injury, back injury, or a broken bone at the same time that you face new financial challenges. You are attempting to get your vehicle repaired or replaced. You are dealing with mailboxes full of insurance paperwork. You know it was someone else’s fault, but the painful consequences are yours to deal with.

Our auto accident lawyers are well qualified to handle your compensation claim for physical injuries, medical bills, lost wages, and other expenses properly. We have more than 100 years of combined experience. Your chance of having an attorney who has handled cases very similar to yours is very high at our Law Firm.

To learn more about how our auto accident Law Firm can help after your automobile collision, contact our office to schedule a free consultation.

Medical Malpractice Claims In NevadaMedical Malpractice Claims In Nevada

Medical malpractice can be committed against you or a family member by any provider of health care and treatment including: anesthesiologist, hospital, clinic, psychiatrist, dentist, doctor, nurse or any other health care provider. In , the act of medical malpractice occurs when a  health care provider causes a patient to be injured because of the lack of skill and competence which is normally used to treat and care for a patient. The level of skill is known as the “standard of care.” A  medical malpractice complaint will allege that the actions of the health care provider fell below the required “standard of care” for that type of professional. This is another way of saying that the average professional (in that area of practice) would have known better and would not have committed the act which caused the injury.

A medical malpractice (Med-Mal) lawsuit usually requires an attorney to use several experts to prove that the health care professional did not meet the standard of care for that specific area of medical practice. A  medical malpractice claim is typically expensive to litigate because many experts are required to prove that the care of the patient was below the normal standard. Medical malpractice claims are subject to a statutory cap which limits certain types of damages available to patients. The high costs of using experts and the limit on certain damages may cause some  lawyers to take fewer medical malpractice cases as part of their personal injury law practice. An attorney may have an expert evaluate your case early in the process, so that both you and the attorney can learn whether a viable claim can be made against the negligent party.

If you or a member of your family sustained injuries because of the medical malpractice of a health care professional, you can get a free consultation an attorney of our law firm. We provide legal representation for residents throughout the area,

 

Negligent Infliction Of Emotional DistressNegligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress

This case is governed by State v. Eaton, 101 Nev. 705, 710 P.2d 1370 (1985). Eaton requires that HN1a bystander plaintiff be closely related to the victim of an accident, be located near the scene of the accident, and suffer a shock resulting from direct emotional impact stemming from the sensory and contemporaneous observance of the accident. Id. at 716, 710 P.2d at 1377-78. The majority of the cases on negligent infliction of emotional distress have involved automobile accidents, including Eaton. Thus, some of the language of these cases cannot appropriately be applied to the negligence of a pharmacist dispensing drugs. In addition to debating whether a plaintiff is a bystander or what the plaintiff actually observed, we should to look to the basic principles underlying the tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress.

In Eaton, this court discussed some of the history of the tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress due to injury to another. This court embraced the ruling in Dillon v. Legg, 68 Cal. 2d 728, 441 P.2d 912, 69 Cal. Rptr. 72 (Cal. 1968) by saying:

The [Dillon] court held that liability could be circumscribed in these cases, as in all tort cases, by the application of the general principles of negligence. 441 P.2d at 924. The trial courts could determine whether the accident and the harm to the bystander was reasonably foreseeable and “thus mark out areas of liability, excluding the remote and unexpected.” 441 P.2d at 921. We agree with the reasoning of the California court. We “see no good reason why the general rules of tort law, including the concepts of negligence, proximate cause, and foreseeability, long applied to all other types of injury, should not govern the case before us.” 441 P.2d at 924 . . . See also II Harper and James Sec. 18.4, p. 1039 (“mechanical rules of thumb which are at variance with these [general] principles [of tort law] do more harm than good.”)

Eaton, 101 Nev. at 713, 710 P.2d at 1376.

Under this reasoning, it is not the precise position of plaintiff or what the plaintiff saw that must be examined. The overall circumstances must be examined to determine whether the harm to the plaintiff was reasonably foreseeable. Foreseeability is the cornerstone of this court’s test for negligent infliction of emotional distress. Id. at 715.

In this case, a daughter purchased prescription medication for her mother. The daughter then initiated and continued administration until her mother was rendered comatose. In effect, because of the pharmacist’s negligence, the daughter poisoned her mother. Under these facts, it was entirely foreseeable that the drug would significantly harm the actual patient and that a close relative would continue administration until the ultimate catastrophic effect was realized.

Of course, the plaintiff still faces the burden of proving her damages and proving that they were the proximate cause of the pharmacist’s negligence. The jury should be allowed to make the determination of whether [the]’ claim is meritorious.