Will the Power of Twitter find Atlanta Youth Soccer Teams a Sponsor?

Our firm is on Twitter and other sites. It's good to gather news, read about breaking litigation, and recent caselaw.

Now it's time to see if we have success with something else. I'm a volunteer overseeing youth soccer in metro Atlanta. A 2nd season group of teams for a school seeks a sponsor for the 12 + teams which the school will field. The teams will play eight games, four home and four away. The field locations are at other Atlanta private schools, where parents are upper end wage earners.

The color, and the shirt:

We are seeking sponsors, and hope to raise up to $5,000. So, what does sponsorship get your company or business?

$5000 - Company/business is the only logo or artwork on 120 youth jerseys. We list you as a Gold Level sponsor on all  emails, flyers, and communications. You also are prominently displayed on our website. At season end, we again send out information to the families with children enrolled at the school.

At this level, we also name our field after your company/business. You'd have exposure to more than 500 families each season, along with another 250 students/families at the school grounds.

For about $10 a family, your company gains almost 20 hours of exposure for each family.
 
$1,000 - If there isn't a $5K sole sponsor, sponsorship at this level puts you as our sponsors on the jersey above (sleeves or back of jersey). Your company also  gets a logo/sponsor graphic on our site, and we send out one promo piece to all parents of team members.

We seek up to 5 total at this level.

 At this level,  we prominently list your company/business on our field signage.

Your company has a chance to be in front of high end wage earning families for 10 weeks on the jerseys, and     you are in front of families on our web site and our field.

Interested? All of the sponsor monies go directly to jerseys and field maintenance. No monies go to administration.

Reach us at: galawyerblog(at)yahoo.com

When Roads Are Icy, Do "Accidents Happen" or is there Negligence?

A post on twitter asks that question - or more precisely - do juries find liability.

In the South where icy conditions are not as rare as you think, that depends. The first reaction here in my office is - a wreck in icy conditions with injuries is often attributable to conditions. Some questions come to mind:

1)Get details of the wreck in excruciating detail. GA is a 50%+ state on negligence. If a person calls b/c of a wreck with injuries we talk about how long the person knew of and drove on the icy road. If the person is from a warm weather state, new to the city, or if the person was speeding, or on the phone, or late to work, or you get that sense that something isn't right, you get to 50% negligence here in a hurry. And 50% means zero recovery,  and a denied claim. We work way too hard on cases with merit to get bogged down in cases with denials.

Second, we look to all circumstances.

Was the person driving a car or SUV with four wheel drive; was the road an interstate with patches of ice in the hammer lane, or a state road, or a county road. In that order you usually see a high degree of clearing., some clearing of ice, and no clearing of any.

What were the conditions. We had in Atlanta 3 days of sun while the roads were a total mess.  To be candid, anyone with any sense should have stayed home, and that is what a jury will think if the case gets that far.

For us, we'd consider talking to someone if perhaps the person was at a stop, and a vehicle barrelled into him/her, causing extensive property damage. Again, facts to consider - abrupt stop? other cars pulled over?

2)Gather information from various sites about the weather details the date of the incident. Did the wreck happen after sundown, black ice, with forecast of ice and snow? Was the wreck two days later after snow melt and refreeze? NOAA and other sites will explain the conditions.

Educate yourself on the road where the incident happened: I285 in Atlanta was for the most part problem free after day 3. When a wreck occurred, I can almost predict it was driver error (speeding, lane changes). One road was, however, nearly impassable and I'd want to investigate to make  sure the condition was as stated.

3)From a fault standpoint- My gut feeling is that if the incident happened on a road that most knew was tough to drive on, or nearly impassable we decide we can't help. If it's day 2 or 3, clear  skies, no obstructions, we talk a bit more.

All of this of course presumes some serious injury happens.

4)Next: The reality is that insurance companies have been dealing with risk like this for more than 50 years. If the claim is questionable, it either won't get paid at all, or a minimal offer is made. In my experience, a real case of wrong doing never sees a lawsuit filing, much less jury selection.

If you agree or disagree, let me know.  
 

12/16/2010 Darvocet Legal News for Savannah, Richmond Hill and Brunswick, GA

Judge wll not ban Brunswick's Disorderly Ordinance

A federal judge has ruled Brunswick police may continue to enforce the city's disorderly conduct ordinance and have the legal authority to ask small groups of protestors whether they have a permit to demonstrate.

Under the city's ordinance, any group 100 or larger must obtain a city permit.

Read more here: http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2010-12-07/story/federal-judge-declines-ban-brunswick-disorderly-conduct-ordinance

Elbert County News

Image via WikipediaElbert County residents fought hard against a plan to build a waste-to-energy incinerator and 39-acre landfill west of Elberton by funding lawsuits, signing petitions and talking to their neighbors.

GreenFirst announced its decision a week after winning a ruling in one of the four lawsuits spawned by the proposal. Northern Circuit Superior Court Judge Jeffery Malcom rejected residents' efforts to hold a referendum on Elbert County government policies that cleared the way for the incinerator.
Plant Granite, which the company planned to build off Georgia Highway 72 between Elberton and Carlton, would have burned garbage and wood to generate electricity, and would have disposed of the ash in an on-site landfill.

But GreenFirst decided to abandon the incinerator plan when Covanta, the company that would have operated the plant, backed out of the project.

Read more at the source: http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/121210/new_755348800.shtml 

More Good News about Amazing Aspirin

From NPR:


I'm one of those guys who takes an aspirin daily. So, I read this news with interest:

A British study claims evidence that aspirin can prevent death from a variety of cancers, if you take the medicine long enough in middle age. Even a baby aspirin might be enough.

 Published in The Lancet, the study suggests aspirin could provide protection against a wide variety of tumors. They range from pancreatic cancer to the type of lung cancer that strikes nonsmokers.

For some of these cancers, the reduction in death was noteworthy. Twenty years after people had started taking aspirin regularly (and kept it up for at least five years), their deaths from esophageal cancer were reduced by 60 percent compared to study subjects who got a placebo.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2010/12/07/131873139/study-aspirin-cuts-deaths-from-wide-variety-of-cancers
Read more: 

Is Social Media Crucial to Law Firm Marketing?

I know that when it comes to the law practice (and consumer law/personal injury), it's much different than selling shoes. Alas, some so called 'social media experts' do not understand that. Imagine if Zappos.com the shoe sales site had to actually have its employees sit and take a licensing test in order for shoes to be sold in Florida?

That takes me to the subject of social media for lawyers. I will tell you that I have spoken more than a dozen time at lawyer CLE courses about law and technology, and marketing in the 21st century using the web. First and foremost I find that at least in terms of lawyers in the injury field, many lawyers get an "F" grade just for their websites. Lawyers with blogs? Right. I would say 10-15% blog, and of those less than half blog regularly.

So, why dive into social media marketing headlong, like Rene Perras suggests in this article, "Social Media is Crucial to Law Firm Marketing Efforts?"

It's easy. You don't. I will accept at face value for the sake of this post that the statement that "Currently, there are over 500 million active users on Facebook, who spend over $700 billion a month" is correct. There is a Twitter reference as well. Law services -- sticking again to the injury law practice - is not like buying books on Amazon.

Parras then goes on to write what I think is just plain bullsh*t: "Cepac uses specialized approaches to find online conversations people are having that are relevant to law firms to capture potential clients." 

Remember myspace.com? Three to four years ago, the buzz was you and your firm had better get on myspace or you'd be roadkill. Folks who were 'experts' insisted to me that I had better get with it. Now, a new .com, but the same old verse. What happens in 3 years if FB goes away?

For lawyers, you make mistake number one if you or your firm go to Social Media first without taking an honest assessment of your website and the message the site conveys. Oh, I also have news for you. Now law firms (like mine) have multiple websites, niche sites, and blogs. Combined with a sensible google adwords approach, those are the touchstones to the tech/internet approach to marketing on the web.

Where does Social Media fall? Let's compare: I have almost 2700 tweets since jumping into Twitter in December of 2008. I have almost 1900 followers. Zero cases. In fact, since I have started, only one lead.

Now, look at my firm's blog network, including this one and the others. In a typical week, my firm will post 2-10 times on any given subject or set of subjects. By the end of each month, we average more than 50 calls or emails a month, and usually meet with and are retained by no less than 15 new clients. A month.While there is a cost in terms of posting time, there is zero cost for google adwords.

Google adwords has --separate and apart from the blogs - helped the firm prosper. Huge successes. Right now, though -- today -- there are firms wasting thousands on google with crooked and incompetent vendors. Start there if not with blogs. In Georgia, at the top of the results is a sponsored link for a firm - seeking a very niche client - that not only is based in California, but the firm (who I called) will not even accept a case in GA. Does that sound wise to you?  Lawyers, however, will pore over a grocery bill and argue about being overcharged for milk, but won't ask why thousand of $$ are being spent on the web in areas other than your practice zone, or will spend money on adwords that don't generate leads, and don't question their vendor. Start there. I will tell you that I actually make fun of certain firms that simply don't get it when it comes to google adwords. Learn it!    

Now what about Social Media? Twitter to me is good for information gathering. I'm able to direct folks to our firm blogs for news.

Facebook? I've tried it a bit with a business page at the beginning of the year. Advertise on FB? We do. Just like we have ad buys on linkedin.com. For a biz page or other page, however, you and your firm are foolhardy if you hire some person out of the blue to handle SM. Beware the 'experts' in the area.

Social media is like that new client who walks in the door. Do the research on your own. Biz lawyers call it due diligence. Don't allow yourself to get your eyes glazed over and let someone else do it for some price  Roll up your sleeves and spend no less than 50 hours on sites like I have (and I may be your competition) first.

Never mind that what Parras suggests would possibly be unethical in some states. In Florida, you're not even permitted to have on your own website a page about verdicts without first posting a "warning" page ahead of it that the user acknowledges that the page is deemed an ad before viewing. Never mind that lawyers who are not licensed in Mississippi who wind up with info that may reach citizens there could risk a criminal charge.

My advice: Look very closely at the substance before rushing headlong into SM. Perhaps toutmeisters who seek SM clients might look up the definition of "crucial" - "Extremely significant or important. " Better yet:    "Vital."  None of those words in my view would marry up with lawyers, their practices and 'social media.'

I will tell you this: Look at Social Media closely. It's crucial that you don't make a costly mistake.