Care to guess the population of Houston, Texas? Here’s a hint: The same number of people are in U.S. prisons, about 2.2 million, and that is a world record.

That’s right, our country has more people in prison than any other, according to the United States Department of Justice.

Of that 2.2 million inmate population, about 150,000 are serving life sentences which means that the others will pay their debt to society by doing time and then released, stepping into the sunshine, finding a decent job, having learned their lesson, never to return.

Of course I was told that by the Tooth Fairy who apparently never heard of the terms recidivism rate or repeat offender. While the figures do vary depending upon the types of crimes committed, within three years, from 60 percent to 80 percent of people sentenced to prison will re-offend.

In many cases, because of something on a job application form, and, as we learned:

“They may have been released, but so many are, practically speaking, still locked up, inside an invisible prison due to a small box on a job application asking if they had ever been convicted of a crime,” we were told by an assistant warden who holds a law degree and has over 20 years experience at well known West Coast prison. We will just call him “Warden Jack.”

“We failed to anticipate the consequences of this growth industry”

“As a nation, we failed to anticipate the consequences of a nation which keeps so many people behind bars. When prison building became a growth industry, little thought was given to ways of helping inmates truly re-enter society through employment.

“Professionals in this field openly discuss the fact that the ‘lock’em up and throw away the key’ attitude is working well indeed as a round-trip ticket, back to prison.

“A huge problem is that many employers will not hire anyone who has a criminal record, even when the offense has nothing to do with the job. This attitude is fanning the flames of recidivism.

“If you want to know what drives wardens crazy, it’s seeing a guy who got an education in prison, has ability, grew up, and could become a productive member of society, but that job application form or a background check disqualifies him from employment. Add to that being a minority, and the deck is even more stacked against the inmate,” Warden Jack maintains.

Rejecting all applicants with criminal records can be discrimination

“The saying, Hire the best — Reject the rest, is something that most employers live by. It is common sense — employers only want to best employees. However, today, following this motto could become an expensive legal nightmare, as employers find themselves running afoul of federal laws prohibiting discrimination,” Nashville, Tennessee-based employment attorney Jennifer Lankford makes clear to the lawyers who attend her National Business Institute seminars.

“Dennis, you would be surprised at the number of employers who are engaging in employment discrimination without intending to or even aware that they are doing so,” she explains.

“We call this disparate impact discrimination and it often results from what on the surface appears to be a reasonable, neutral policy — treating everyone the same — but which disproportionately screens out a legally protected group, such as racial minorities.”

“It is well established that African Americans and Latinos are arrested and convicted disproportionately than their numerical representation in the population. When an employer has a blanket policy of not hiring anyone with a criminal conviction — even when the crime has no relation to the job — then more minorities than white applicants are being screened out. This is a classic example of disparate impact discrimination.”

We asked Lankford if this means that an employer must hire any minority who shows up, regardless of having a nasty criminal past.

“Employment attorneys hear that question often, and the answer is that you do not have to close your eyes to a person’s criminal past. But, you need to demonstrate that your policy of exclusion is job related and consistent with a business necessity.” Employers should consider:

• Requirements of the job
• What the person was convicted of
• The time that has passed since the conviction.

“These questions demonstrate whether the exclusionary policy is truly relevant to the underlying job position. As you might imagine, if the person has a history of theft offenses and is looking for a job as a cashier, the person is not suited for employment.

“However, if the applicant had a minor drug offense, years ago, the exclusion is less justifiable,” Lankford concluded.

For our employer-readers, we suggest a review of your hiring practices by an attorney who specializes in Employment Law. Running a business is no piece of cake.

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post ‘Criminal record? Don’t apply for this job’ appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post ‘Free trial’ Keto scam almost ripped off small business owner appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

For readers who are on medication for high blood pressure – especially anyone who has ever worked in a restaurant – it might be a good idea to have extra tablets handy before reading today’s story. You might need them, and will certainly be asking these questions:

“Why are we paying unemployment insurance judges close to $10,000 a month to toss common sense out the window and give benefits to people who obviously do not deserve them? When employers and former co-workers stand up for what is legally and morally right, why does it seem so often they are facing judges on a mission to reward rotten behavior?”

Our story began in January 2009, when Karen (names have been changed) began work as a waitress at Freddie’s, a small, family-owned, restaurant, similar to an IHOP or Denny’s. Especially in these types of restaurants, servers are key employees.

“Servers do not simply take orders and bring plates to tables. They are integral to the success of that business,” observes Martha Keller, who teaches Hospitality Management at the Culinary Institute of America, Greystone campus in St. Helena.

“Research shows that if guests receive exceptional service, but the food is marginal, they will return because of the service, hoping the food gets better. However, regardless of how good the food is, if service is poor, they will not return and will tell others to stay away,” she points out.

Never justified to yell at a customer

Skokie, Ill.-based Lloyd Gordon of GEC Consultants has spent more than 40 years in the hospitality industry, and routinely testifies as an expert witness. When I asked him if it is ever permissible for a waitress to lose her temper and yell at a customer, his answer was brief:

“Never! The first time that this happened, if we kept the employee, they would be told if it ever occurred again, they would be terminated for cause. Should that take place, I would object to their request for unemployment insurance. Yelling at customers or treating them disrespectfully is the same as stealing from the employer. It should not be rewarded with unemployment insurance benefits.”

‘We look in the window to see if she is working’

Within days of starting her job at Freddie’s, Karen lost her temper and yelled at a customer. Instead of immediate termination, the owner wanted to give her another chance.

“Anyone can have a bad day,” Freddie reasoned. “Times are tough and it is always difficult to find good staff. I always feel that you need to give a person extra time to prove themselves,” he reasoned. (His kindness would prove to be the classic mistake made by so many employers.)

Things remained calm until the summer, when there were two episodes of over-the-top rudeness and downright frightening behavior.

In one situation, two elderly women, long time customers, ordered a cappuccino, “Which is always served in a tall, mug-type cup. But Karen used a regular sized coffee cup and only filled it half way, leaving out the whipped cream,” the customers stated.

“When we asked her for a correctly-filled mug with whipped cream – the way they always serve cappuccino – she rudely refused. In a very nasty and frightening tone of voice, she said that she could not fill it up, and that this is all they are allowed to give the customers.”

The women were so frightened of Karen doing something to them, that they begged the restaurant’s attorney to keep their names confidential.

Karen’s threatening behavior worsened.

Longtime customers Mario, Angela and their daughter, Sandy, came to the restaurant for lunch. After being seated, they politely asked Karen for silverware, as there was none on the table. “She returned and literally slammed silverware items down on the table. This was the beginning of an unbelievable experience,” they stated in a declaration filed in court.

Karen presented them with a bill which was excessively high. “We told her that when we deal with the blond waitress, we are charged the price which is shown on the menu. She screamed, “I am not that blond waitress!!!”

“We feel this young lady has some serious, potentially dangerous issues. After that experience, when we would go to Freddie’s, we looked through the windows to see if she was working. If so, we did not go in as we did not want another bad experience. We are concerned about our safety and do not want her to know where we live or work.”

Next week: Karen’s behavior becomes even more bizarre. Stranger yet, was how an unemployment insurance appeals judge so easily ignores the law and his own rules to reward a dangerous person.

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post ‘I am not that blond waitress!!’ – Part 1 appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

Readers who enjoy classic American films will recognize the headline of this article as a line from “The Treasure of the Sierra Madre” (1948), starring Humphrey Bogart. A similar remark was used in “Blazing Saddles,” the 1974 Mel Brooks comedy.

When we hear the word “badge,” what usually comes to mind is a police officer, firefighter, or even a merit badge awarded to Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts to signify certain accomplishments. (Boy Scouts of America is rebranding to Scouting America in 2025.)

A badge signifies that the person wearing it is a legitimate organization or company employee.

So what are the possible consequences and risks to employees (and their employers) who should have been provided with a badge or other form of identification but were not?

Easements

A frequent surprise to first-time real property buyers is the discovery of one or more easements on their land allowing a utility or communications company — cable, internet, or phone — to access, inspect, and perform work on its equipment.

Most utilities have employees who perform these tasks, some hire contractors, and this is where problems can arise.

‘I need to get into your backyard’

Recently, several homeowners came face-to-face with a major utility’s “contractors,” who were hired to inspect the company’s easements in their neighborhood.

Eighty-five-year-old “Sarah” related this exchange with “George”, a polite but embarrassed young man who wanted to examine an easement in our backyard.

Looking at him through my peephole, I could see that he was not wearing a company uniform, had no identification badge, no business cards, and nothing visible to prove his legitimacy. I told him, “‘For all I know, this could be an attempted home invasion. Do you have anything that proves who you are working for and the need to get into our backyard?’”

George produced a one-page sheet from his employer I’ve seen that stated, “I work for (employer), who is an approved contractor for (your utility).” The document explains why George needs access to Sarah’s property. There is a place for the name of a field engineer and a phone number, but that area is blank.

Sarah learned that George is a college student and is part of a crew traveling from city to city, inspecting easements.

“How long have you been working for them?” she asked.

“Three months, and even though I’ve repeatedly asked, they have not provided any form of proper ID, which is creating problems for all of us on the crew.”

My reader then phoned the company, but not wanting to get George in trouble, refused to identify him when the receptionist asked, “Are you having problems with our employee?”

“No, you are the problem!” Sarah replied. “How dare you send your employees without sufficient identification into situations that can be dangerous to them and potentially frighten homeowners?”

Also, I phoned the employer and spoke with a supervisor, who insisted that all of their people had proper ID. I knew that was a lie but, while pressed, did not reveal the employee’s name or precise location. My phone did not reveal my location either.

Proper identification is the standard of care

From police departments to school districts, badges or other forms of visible identification are obligatory in thousands of occupations. In several states, failing to produce identification can result in fines against the employer. In some professions, such as health care, failing to wear a name tag can be considered unprofessional conduct.

For example, according to the Arkansas State Board of Nursing, “Failure to display appropriate insignia to identify the nurse when providing health care to the public is grounds for disciplinary action.”

Liability of employer for injury to employees

Employers have both a moral and legal duty to protect their employees and prevent foreseeable harm while on the job. Making safety a priority isn’t just the right thing to do; it is legally required, and a breach of that duty can result in significant costs in the form of workers’ compensation claims, in addition to a serious and willful charge that can cost an employer thousands of dollars that won’t be covered by insurance.

In my conversation with George’s supervisor, I asked him if his company had thought of the liability it faces by putting these college kids into potentially dangerous situations where someone could get shot.

Or, what if a homeowner suffered a heart attack out of fear? “Did you folks even think of these possibilities?”

“Yes, we have,” he said.

Really?

If you fill out certain surveys online or use a particular retirement calculator, you might get a phone call or even be paid an unsolicited visit by a rep wanting to set up a sales appointment.

Any legitimate solicitor should be able to show you a proper ID that also clearly identifies the company they work for.

Years ago, Nancy Reagan, one of our nation’s most appreciated First Ladies, told our kids to “just say no” if they were offered drugs. Her advice still applies to 85-year-old “kids” who can’t see a badge or adequate ID on someone who wants you to open the door. Just say no.

Dennis Beaver Practices law in Bakersfield and welcomes comments and questions from readers,
which may be faxed to (661) 323-7993,
or e-mailed to Lagombeaver1 – at – Gmail.com.

The post ‘I don’t have to show you any stinking badge’ appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

“Over my 25 years of family practice in California’s Central Valley, I’ve always trusted my intuition when making a hiring decision. With two front-office employees retiring, we will soon start searching for replacements.

“In this rural area, qualified people are hard to find, and I do not want to miss out on a good hire because of an expensive, time consuming background check. My wife tells me that I am being foolish, that it’s a different America, and what we spend to check someone out could save us a great deal in the long run. Perhaps, but we have never had an issue with dishonesty or problem people in the past.

“After reading your column for years, I will follow your advice. Thanks, “Dr. G.”

Intuition will not prevent a lawsuit

If you ask a labor lawyer or private investigator about the wisdom of relying on intuition — a gut feeling — in making a hiring decision, expect an identical response.

We did just that, speaking with Franklin, Tennessee-based attorney Jennifer Lankford and private investigator Riley Parker of Santa Maria, California. Lankford’s specialty is employment law. She is also a seminar leader for the National Business Institute, one of the nation’s largest providers of continuing legal education.

“Dr. G should listen to his wife. It is indeed a different America with larger risks to employers today — especially in the health care field. Those risks didn’t exist when he began his practice. A good feeling about a job applicant is fine, but it’s only a beginning. Your reader has been very lucky,” Parker observes.

“Mrs. G is absolutely correct,” commented Lankford, adding, “Employers who fail to conduct thorough background checks are inviting trouble, citing types of lawsuits which, many employers have never heard of, resulting in large jury-verdict awards.” They include:

Negligent hiring:

“This is a claim against an employer by an injured party where the employer knew or should have known about an employee’s background which would have shown that person to be dangerous, untrustworthy or otherwise unfit for the job and therefore not hired.

“Lawsuits based on Negligent Hiring arise when an employee commits a criminal act, for example, DUI, theft, assault or, identity theft and it is discovered that a simple background check would have revealed factors questioning the person’s suitability for the position.

Negligent retention and supervision

“For the safety of other employees and customers, management cannot turn a blind eye to unfit employees. Upon learning that an employee might have a problem that interferes with the job and/or the welfare of co-workers, there is an obligation of immediately conducting an investigation and then, if warranted, to take corrective action, such as training, reassignment or termination.

“When steps are not taken to protect other employees or the public and harm results, the employer could be found responsible,” she cautions.

Be wary of online services — Use a consumer reporting agency

And just what are the steps which all employers — that’s right, all employers — need to take?

The common sense answer is to run a background on anyone applying for a job. But there are background checks and real background checks.

The old saying, “If a job is worth doing, it’s worth doing right,” applies here. False economy at this stage — being a cheapskate — can get you sued, as we learned.

The Internet is filled with ads claiming to “Find Out Anything About Anybody for $25.” Is it possible to do an adequate background search this way on a job applicant? Are they worth it? Or, could using one of these sites get you into trouble?

Both Parker and Lankford issued cautionary warnings about many of these services:

“You just can’t find everything online,” Parker stressed. “Many counties do not provide civil or criminal case information to the major, professional data reporting services, and it often takes a visit to the courthouse to examine court files. Without feet on the ground, an enormous amount of information might be missed.”

“The fine print — Terms and Conditions — of many sites admit that they are not Consumer Reporting Agencies and that your results do not comply with the Federal Fair Credit Reporting Act and cannot be used for employment purposes!

“But who reads the fine print?” Parker correctly asks.

Lankford agrees, pointing out “serious, potential violations of federal and state discrimination laws which many employers are often completely unaware of when evaluating job applicants in house or using a service which is not a Consumer Reporting Agency.”

So your applicant was a gang member and spent time in the joint for bank robbery but wants to work in your ice cream shop. Certainly you can refuse to hire her, or can you?

We’ve got the scoop for you, next time. 

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post ‘I have good intuition and don’t need background checks’ appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

Today’s story will be of special interest to families where mom and dad are financially successful and in a world where parents give their children all the “right” things that money can buy, including designer clothing, attending a private high school, followed by private university, and, of course, while there, a car, an expensive car — even if one is not needed.

No matter how simple and practical parents would like to be, for some, the downside of monetary success is an odd pressure, a need to belong, to be accepted, to show others, “Just like you, we’ve made it and give our kids all the things we never had growing up.”

And so, for “Tyler,” raised on a steady diet of nice things, after graduation from college, living at home, no job, “thinking about going back to school for an advanced business degree,” driving his birthday present — a new Audi SUV — with a pocket-full of mom’s and dad’s money, life was good, life was fun — until it wasn’t — a recent Saturday at 2 a.m.

Our son phoned us from jail

“Mr. Beaver, my wife and I have read your column for over 20 years in the Hanford Sentinel, and never thought that one day we would be asking for your advice, but that day came last Saturday, when our 24 year-old son, Tyler, called from the county jail.”

“He had been booked for DUI after being in a single-vehicle, roll-over accident. There were no other passengers in the new Audi SUV we had just bought him as a birthday present a week earlier! It was a total loss, but all he got was a concussion, and otherwise, not a scratch.

“As my wife and I are well known health-care professionals in town, it would be highly embarrassing if word of this gets out. We have to be in Bakersfield for a neurological consultation of our son’s concussion, and would greatly appreciate meeting with you. We need to know what to expect, and to hear an honest evaluation of the DUI case. Thanks, Dr. Jim.”

‘You blew almost three times over the limit’

As my paralegal, Anne, and I would learn during our meeting with Tyler and his parents, he finished a late dinner at about 9:30, admitting to “having consumed two vodka cocktails prior to eating.” At midnight, he drove to a bar, meeting friends, had “two vodkas, one bourbon and left at about 1:30 AM.”

“What caused your SUV to flip?” we asked.

“There was a vehicle headed straight at me. To avoid a collision, I must have over-corrected, struck the curb, overturned and was knocked-out for some time, regaining consciousness when a CHP officer arrived.

“He asked me if I was ok, and if I would like to take a breathalyzer test, which I did and was informed that the result was almost three times the .08 limit. I was taken to the hospital, blood was drawn, and I spent the next several hours in custody.”

“Based upon what our son consumed,” his father inquired, “how could the blood alcohol level be so high? That would have required over 10 ounces of hard spirits!” There were three possible explanations:

(1) The breathalyzer was out of calibration, and gave a false reading — which was not likely.

(2) If the last drink was consumed within a few minutes of the breath test, the result could easily be influenced by residual mouth-alcohol — which was possible, but also not likely.

(3) Tyler drank far more than he remembered or wanted to admit.

Marijuana and alcohol = bad combination

“Do you think that the medical marijuana I use could partly explain the accident? I eat medical marijuana — chocolate squares containing cannabis — for neck pain,” he explained.

In fact, the combination of both substances has been found in several studies to be synergistic, that is, each potentiates the other. It’s as if more of either was consumed adversely impacting the ability to drive safely.

‘Look at mom and dad’

“The police report, witness statements and blood test are elements of your son’s DUI arrest which will tell the entire story. If his blood level is more than twice the limit — and I’m betting that it will be over that — he will almost certainly face 10 days in custody, not just work release — picking up leaves — but real time in jail if he pleads or is found guilty after a trial.

“And if that happens, in my experience, the only thing that helps people, just like your son, is that place where no one wants to go.

To Tyler, I said, “Look at mom and dad. They love you. Someone almost took you away from them. Do you know who?” I asked.

“Yeah, me,” he answered, sobbing. 

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post ‘Our son was arrested for DUI’ appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

January 26, 2026  • By Dennis Beaver

Talk about putting useful information to work — our January 13 article, Billed 12 Hours for a Few Seconds of Work: How AI Is Helping Law Firms Overcharge Clients, riled up several readers.

The article notes that some law firms are using AI to produce — in seconds — documents that would normally take hours to draft. Yet, they’re billing for those hours as if the work had been done the old way.

This lit a spark under many who read the story and had “are you kidding me?” discussions with their lawyers.

Don’t be afraid to bring it up

Beyond saying, “I think you owe me a refund,” many readers reported that they went a step further. Not wanting to be dismissed with, “That’s our bill — pay it,” they researched their state’s bar regulations on charging for work that was actually performed — the time that was, in fact, spent on the task.

“Ben,” in Cleveland, wrote, “I found a shopping list of violations that could jeopardize her license to practice law. I don’t want to be accused of extortion or blackmail. I want to say, ‘AI was used, yet I was billed as if you had done the work yourself. I expect a refund for the unearned hours. You know the consequences if I file a complaint with the bar.’

“What if she replies, ‘Don’t threaten to complain to the bar, because that is blackmail, and you’ll find yourself in trouble.”

Ben absolutely can say that. Filing a complaint with his state’s bar would not be extortion, as there is a legitimate reason. I suggested this direct, yet more diplomatic, approach:

As AI was used to generate the material, all I am asking is for a refund of what I was overcharged and nothing more. I am prepared to file that complaint, but that is not what I want to do.

Lawyers comment on 2,000-hour billing requirement

Our story also cited the destructive, inhumane, fraud-creating requirement for attorneys to bill 2,000-plus hours yearly to keep their job, which translates into expecting high-quality legal work to be produced 12 hours a day.

“Utterly impossible,” according to Dr. Luis Vega, professor of Psychology at California State University, Bakersfield. “This completely unreasonable and unachievable hour total finds decent people caught in a web of corporate greed.

“While there is individual variation, on average, four hours of intense focus is typically the most one can expect per day. It is called the Four-Hour Rule of Productivity.”

The responses to this issue, from attorneys in the U.S. and Canada, were touching.

From midsize to Big Law firms, lawyers phoned my office after 3 p.m. Pacific Time, which made it 6 p.m. on the East Coast, when most support staff had left for the day. (I ran phone numbers through a reverse look-up service to verify their origin, often seeing a photo and description on their firm’s web page.)

I listened as young lawyers poured out their hearts to me, some who had read this column throughout law school.

YouTube helps some lawyers cheat

I spoke with “Claudia,” “Rex” and “Tim” in New York, who teamed up on speakerphone. Claudia said, “When you used the term ‘sweatshop,’ that describes our job environment perfectly.”

Rex added, “This place is just plain toxic. When we were in law school and attended the firm’s summer camp, it was all fun, but no one ever told us that, when hired, we would become slaves to the billable hour.”

Claudia chimed back in with, “You can’t fulfill a 2,000-hour yearly billing goal honestly. It is impossible. But YouTube billing tutorials by other lawyers showed us how to bill creatively — in other words, commit billing fraud!”

She directed me to a YouTube video where an attorney suggested billing whatever time is spent thinking about a client’s case — while taking a shower, driving to work, even sleeping.

“So,” Claudia continued, “when you wrote that the pressure and insane time demands destroy families and lead to divorce, burnout, depression and substance abuse, you have described most lawyers here — some are on their second marriage, at least.”

Tim observed, “Many attorneys who have been here for several years virtually have ‘I hate this place’ stamped on their foreheads. I do not know a single colleague who can claim being happy to come to work, despite the money.”

He added, “Not in our pre-law university classes nor law school was any of this reality ever discussed. I am looking for a job with the county or city because I do not want to become a statistic. I want a normal life, dinner with my family, taking our kids out for a trip to the park. I want to be a real husband and father, not someone who is married to the firm!”

A promise of change

One Kansas City, Kansas, law firm was different, though.

“Mr. Beaver,” “Monique” said, “your column is very popular here and is frequently discussed in office meetings. So when your AI story ran, there was quite a buzz!

“One of the partners called for a meeting and said, ‘We should send Mr. Beaver a box of Kansas City steaks. His AI story brought out into the open something we have all been aware of and, I’m sure, bothered by.

“‘Just so everyone knows, management gets it. We have been exploring old-fashioned ways to bill for services, just like Beaver referenced in his article. Please give us some time. Please trust us to make things better.'”

Dennis Beaver Practices law in Bakersfield and welcomes comments and questions from readers,
which may be faxed to (661) 323-7993,
or e-mailed to Lagombeaver1 – at – Gmail.com.

The post ‘You Owe Me a Refund’: Readers Report Challenging Their Attorneys’ Bills appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

HANFORD — Over the years, two small law firms in this town have generated more questions from readers about attorney fees and billing practices than any other we have seen, and this column has reviewed bills from across the country.

For things that are normal overhead — customarily covered by an hourly fee — these lawyers would charge extra, such as: “Discussing your case with my secretary, 30 minutes. Review of File — 45 minutes. Reviewing your file with my new associate and paralegal, 1 hour.”

On cases where nothing was happening (confirmed by examining the court’s file) “Review of File — 1 hour” would appear on a bill every six weeks. With several clients, over half of the retainer was cannibalized this way.

Now, you don’t want to see your lawyer standing by the side of the road with a sign reading, “Will Give Legal Advice for Food.”  If an attorney is competent and knows how to run a business, then it’s not that difficult to earn a good income. Note: The operative word is earn, not steal.

But when a lawyer’s moral compass is Gordon Gekko, and he or she lives by the motto “Greed is Good,” then clients become victims of predatory billing practices. This column has helped our readers stand up to these guys, saving thousands of dollars, and it would have been easy to conclude that one of them was up to it again when we received this email:

“Our attorney is handling a real estate matter and I phoned to check on how the case was coming along. Later, his bill arrived, and in addition to other items, there was a $150 charge for that telephone conversation. Is it reasonable to be billed for simply asking about the status of our case?”

‘Time is the Lawyer’s Inventory’

As we would learn from New York attorney Seth Rosner — regarded as one of the nation’s most respected experts in legal ethics and professional responsibility — the answer to the question is: Yes – No – It Depends.

“That truly is a serious answer,” Rosner explained. “Clients need to know what is happening with their case or, for example, if a draft of their will or contract is ready. Questions which can be answered briefly should not be billed.

“But often it isn’t a question that calls for a yes-or-no type of answer, as the client asks for an explanation, or provides information in response to the lawyer’s request. Before you know it, half an hour is gone,” he points out, and next highlights the difference about law practice from most any other line of work:

“For a moment, let’s think of a Lowe’s or Home Depot, and the enormous inventory of things which they sell to generate the money which pays employee salaries, heat, air conditioning, rent, computers, all the same things which lawyers have to pay for as well.

“But our inventory isn’t stuff; rather, it’s time. We sell time, advice, knowledge and information. Whatever result the client is looking for, the attorney-client relationship is all about time. But often what the client expects goes well beyond what the lawyer understands, so this needs to be addressed when the attorney is hired,” he maintains.

A clear retainer agreement is important

“In general, where attorney fees are expected to exceed a certain amount — for example, $1,000 in California — a written fee agreement is required. This is also known as a retainer or engagement agreement.

“Clients typically have greater expectations for work than what the lawyer thinks. For that reason, the agreement must define as precisely as possible the scope — what services the lawyer will perform — and just as important, services which the lawyer will not, such as filing an appeal. And it is extremely important to state how the bill will be calculated.

“It is critical that the written retainer agreement be in clear language.” Rosner stressed.

“While it is a business transaction, an attorney-client relationship is different from virtually all others. It must be based on truthfulness, trust and placing the client’s interests ahead of the lawyer’s.

“So, an easy-to-understand retainer agreement will often be the key to establishing a relationship that lasts for decades and embody the Lawyer’s Golden Rule:

“Always treat every client as you would wish to be treated if the client was sitting in your chair and you were on the other side of the desk,” Rosner concluded.

And our Hanford reader? Did he ask a question that called for that brief, yes-or-no kind of an answer, or was their discussion far more involved? We’ll tell you next time, as well as focus on how clients can drive their lawyers “sane.”

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post ‘I asked for an update on my case and got a $150 bill!’ appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post ‘I’m afraid of my wife’s business idea!’ appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

Is there a window of opportunity — an age or grade level in school — where a kid headed for trouble has what will likely be the last chance to be helped and steered in the right direction?

Hanford School Resource Officer Per Westlund knows the answer to that question only too well. For him, “the time frame is junior high school, at the latest.”

“It is easier to intervene in the life of a junior high school student than a kid on the way to real trouble at high school, who, in his or her own mind, knows it all,” he said.

A healthy fear of consequences

“Working together with school personnel — and if we are lucky, responsible parents — we can often positively influence the attitude and direction of a troubled junior high student. At this level, they are still dependent on family, tend to have more respect and will listen to adults in general, and have a healthy fear of consequences.

“At junior high, these kids have not usually developed anti-authority attitudes, and someone wearing a police uniform gets their attention. SROs at the high school level have different challenges, and in many ways, a tougher job than mine.”

In a 15-year career as a police officer, Westlund has spent the past four as an SRO assigned to Hanford’s JFK and Woodrow Wilson junior high schools.

“Officer Westlund’s own background makes him especially well suited to the job of an SRO, where knowing how to communicate with students is critical, earning their trust and confidence, which can quite literally be life-saving qualities, keeping kids in school and away from the wrong people,” said Jason Strickland, principal at JFK.

“I have lived in the United States the past 25 years and come from a small Swedish town where, at an early age I realized just how important family and education is for future success,” Westlund said. “The values of my little town in Sweden are also very much a part of what I like about Hanford, which really is Small Town America. But today’s America is very different for parents, and a challenge for many families to raise kids in the best atmosphere.”

‘Don’t try to be your child’s ‘best friend’

To the Hanford SRO, that “best atmosphere” starts with parents who aren’t afraid “to be real parents, not trying to be their child’s best friend.”

“Growing up in Sweden, I was more fearful of what would happen to me at home if I got in trouble at school. A problem today, recognized by educators and law enforcement, is that too many parents refuse or simply do not know how to be parents. They want to be their children’s best friend and to be liked. In this environment, children can grow up without the concept of respect, not just for their parents, but for adults and people in positions of authority, in general.

“It is not through buying your kids everything they ask for that you are going to raise well-adjusted members of society. ‘No’ has its place. In order to succeed, children must be taught one of life’s most important lessons: You have to earn what you get.

“All children manipulate their parents. It’s hard-wired from birth, a tool in the psychology of survival tool kit we are born with. But you can raise a failure by saying ‘yes’ when you should be saying ‘no,’ hoping that they will listen to you, because you are so nice. That is giving in to manipulation,and teaching the child dangerous lessons on how to make one’s way in the world.”

JFK’s Strickland agrees.

“Parenting which rewards a young child’s non-stop demands often leads to huge behavioral issues once at junior high school, when children are in a more rigorous educational and social setting. Suddenly they hear ‘no’ from their teachers, are required to come to school at the proper time and complete homework.

“Those who have been allowed to avoid the rules are headed for academic and social frustration, disappointment and anger. As we see these signs as early as the sixth grade, you come to a realization of just how critical a role parents have in their child’s lives, how parenting skills can dictate their child’s future.”

(Next week, we’ll examine that recipe and its ingredients.)

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post ‘I’m your father, not your friend’ appeared first on Dennis Beaver.