Update (August 6, 2012): This past weekend, Minnesota Litigator received two emails purporting to come from two exceptional Twin Cities lawyers requesting that Minnesota Litigator “rate” them for a “ratings website” called “RateStars.” From a short look at the website, it seems to suggest lawyers may be ranked like stocks, complete with green “up arrows” and red “down arrows.”
I hold both of these lawyers in extremely high regard and would not hesitate to direct a client to either of them if the client had matters in their areas of expertise. But these “rating” (and even worse, “ranking”) websites are pernicious. The information (if you can call it that) is inconsistent and unreliable. These sites do a terrible disservice to the market for professional services by spewing misinformation, disinformation, and information (maybe in the mix) in an undifferentiated pile.
Mind you, this opinion comes from a merely excellent but not quite superb lawyer (according to one of these sites). Advice to potential clients: avoid these sites. Advice to Minnesota lawyers: avoid these sites.
Finding a lawyer is not like finding a dishwasher. There is nothing remotely close to a legitimate “Consumer Reports” for lawyers. There are only money-making “plays” purporting to function as “brokers” or “middlemen” matching buyers and sellers of legal services when they provide little or no value to buyers or sellers.
Original Post (May 14, 2012): Persisting on making a point after the point is firmly established, accepted, and/or conceded, is an occupational hazard of litigators (and maybe all lawyers). Why make a winning argument once if you can make it twice, three times, or, better yet, ad infinitem? (Answer: Because courts, colleagues, family, and friends will start to hate you.)
Recently, Minnesota Litigator called out the internet for being less than illuminating about the nation’s judges. Now, we reiterate (again) that on-line “information” can be incorrect.
Back in March, 2011, Minnesota Litigator lamented the inconsistent practice of the Minneapolis StarTribune in naming (or not naming) lawyers in articles about legal matters. In that context, as an aside, we noted that Peter J. Nickitas was named in an article and was identified elsewhere on the internet as “Best Lawyer in Minneapolis” but more digging suggested that this might be a minority opinion, to put it mildly.
A recent petition for disciplinary action against Mr. Nickitas again suggested that the honorific, “Best Lawyer in Minneapolis,” might more appropriately go to someone else. (The allegations in the petition are seriously messed up, including screaming at a client and having to be pulled away by an associate and a bailiff (and more!))
Never before has so much information and so much misinformation been so immediately accessible. On the other hand, there has never been a shortage of either commodity.