Boutique Law Firm Versus Larger Firm
Some of our larger firm competitors argue that major companies should look to large law firms for defense in major products liability litigation. Their claim is that having greater resources gives them an edge. We disagree. Our firm’s founders spent many years with one of the nation’s largest law firms defending high exposure product liability and mass tort cases. While there, our senior partner, Dale Markland, served as the Head of the Product Liability Practice Group for that firm. Our partners chose to leave big firm life behind in order to build a much leaner firm, one that can handle major product liability litigation more effectively and more efficiently for our clients. We believe we can defend cases within our niche practice areas better than any other law firm. Unlike large firms, we focus exclusively on products liability cases, involving specific types of products, for a few valued clients. We also focus on only a few clients in any given industry segment – thereby virtually eliminating potential conflicts of interest. We can represent your company when you need us.
The notion that large law firms can provide greater resources in major products liability litigation than our boutique law firm can is erroneousness. In major products liability litigation that does not rise to the mass tort level, our firm can handle such litigation in our niche areas of practice better than our large firm competitors, and in mass tort litigation we can serve the roles discussed under the website tab “Our Firm’s Role in the Virtual Law Firm”. The argument that large law firms can provide greater resources in major non-mass tort litigation is clearly without basis. While at our former firm, Vinson & Elkins, LLP, at a point in time when the firm had between 800 and 900 attorneys, we represented major product manufacturers in major catastrophic injury cases every day. We utilized the same type of two to three attorney teams on individual cases as we utilize today at our boutique law firm. We obtained the best possible results utilizing such two to three attorney teams on individual cases. Additionally, if more attorneys than we have presently at Markland Hanley are needed for a given matter, our firm’s attributes are such that we can immediately attract as many highest quality attorneys as necessary for that particular matter. In our view, it is our highest quality boutique law firm, not the larger law firms, that can attract the best young attorneys.
Our boutique law firm, handling a limited client base and focusing on specific niche practice areas and types of products can also provide the extreme knowledge necessary to handle complex product liability cases and at an extreme economic value. In our view, the economic value that we can provide cannot be touched by law firms that are our product liability competitors in Texas.
We have also heard large law firm competitors argue that “Your company and its in-house counsel need the security of having hired a prestigious, large law firm- just in case things go south in the lawsuit.” Relative to our firm, that argument again makes no sense. Our firm’s founders came from a large prestigious law firm. Our senior partner was the head of the Products Liability Practice Group for that firm.
The professional accolades that our firm and our attorneys have received cannot be beaten by our larger firm competitors. We left the large firm to provide clients with better legal service- better because our client base will not present the same conflict of clients’ issues that a large firm’s client base presents, better because our limited practice areas and our firm’s commitment to devoting non-billable time to our educational process allows us to develop the extreme knowledge in our limited areas of practice that cannot occur in larger firms, and better because we provide the economic value that larger firms cannot provide.
Our practice model allows us to have the quintessential, highest quality, cost effective, products liability practice available.