New Jersey lowered the boom on AVVO and LegalZoom the other day, finding their practice models violated a number of ethics rules, including fee sharing with nonlawyers and operation of an unlicensed referral service. I doubt this marks the end of them — it’s more like a speed bump — but what our chief justice had to say the other day on alternative forms of dispute resolution is probably much more important.
I have been following AVVO, LegalZoom and a host of other players in this “disrupted” legal market for years, trying to figure out whether they are going to really change the way we do business or just cut the pie into thinner pieces. Interestingly, as these enterprises matured, they seemed to grow more like traditional law delivery systems instead of revolutionizing things.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
