Rainmakers bring in clients. But nobody shares the secret sauce about how to become a rainmaker. The common advice includes: “Do a good job for your clients, practice with civility to opposing counsel, and referrals will follow.”
But how do you get those clients? In late 2023, I joined the King County Bar Association Lawyer Referral Service (LRS) and completed over 150 potential client consultations in six months. This article shares my experiences.
First, the mechanics. I signed up for the LRS by submitting a form about my background, selecting my preferred practice areas (panels), and paying a fee. Potential clients (PCs) contact the LRS via phone or the online portal and undergo a vetting process by trained intake specialists. If a PC has a suitable matter, the intake specialists will gather key information, including identifying opposing parties, collecting the PC’s contact information, and creating a narrative or description of the issue. Then LRS sends an electronic referral via email to up to three attorneys on the appropriate panels.
All attorneys agree to provide a free up to 30-minute consultation for each referral. All PCs agree to pay the attorney if the consultation results in an engagement. The attorney and the PC are responsible for scheduling the consultation.
During my first dozen or so consultations, I exchanged emails and scheduled video meetings with PCs. The video meetings were meaningful. However, I soon found it much more efficient to call the PC directly (with the phone to my ear rather than on speaker phone) and complete the consultation at that time.
Although this article focuses on the initial consultations, the process of signing up a client through LRS is the same as signing up a client directly, except that there is a percentage-based fee-sharing arrangement with the LRS. I include a chart explaining this arrangement in my engagement agreement.
Elevator pitch. I developed a concise introduction to set the tone from the very beginning of the initial consultation:
Let me start by telling you a little bit about how I operate as an attorney. I am a civil litigation attorney, and I practice in both state and federal court. I’m licensed in Hawaii, Washington, and California. Right now, my practice is split between the Seattle area and the Bay area. I’m an hourly rate attorney, which means I charge by the hour, and my hourly rate is [$rate] per hour.
I pause. Usually, I’m asked to repeat this number.
I also require a refundable deposit of [$deposit amount] to start working on your case; this money will be returned at the end of your case. However, it does not mean that the total cost will only be [$deposit amount], and I will invoice you every month for the prior months’ work. I say all of this up front because my billing structure differs from some other attorneys who work on contingency. Does that structure sound like something you are looking for?
Most of the time, PCs say, “Yes, they are okay with paying by the hour,” but sometimes they have clarifying questions or say it is too expensive. Even if they say that my fee structure won’t work for them, I remind them that,
As part of the Lawyer Referral program, I have agreed to a free 30-minute consultation, and I’m happy to hear about your issue and see if I can offer my thoughts based on this initial consultation if you would like to do that.
I can’t remember a PC who did not take me up on this offer. Then, I go on.
Based on your written intake information, I understand that you’re having a problem with [name of potential opposing party]. Now, one of the things I have to do as an attorney is, before we talk, I need to clear conflicts to make sure I’ve never represented [opposing party] before.
I pause. Usually, this results in an “okay” or “I understand.”
I’ve already cleared conflicts for [opposing party], but during this initial consultation, if we start talking about other people involved, I may need to stop you and make sure I don’t have a conflict before we continue.
Please tell me what’s going on.
Then I stop talking. Listening is the most important part of the consultation. But, although the PC is leading the conversation, I am still furiously working. While mustering all my skills to be an active listener, suss out the legal issues, and encourage the PC to expound on pertinent facts, I am simultaneously evaluating whether this PC is compatible as a client. Are they able to articulate their issue in an organized manner? Do they respond to my cues and questions, or are they solely focused on telling me what they want me to hear? Are they clear on their goals for this case? Do I trust that they are being candid about the facts, good and bad?
In the beginning, my consultations almost always surpassed my 30-minute commitment. I once had a video consultation that lasted almost two hours, and by the end, both the PC and I were in tears. Over time, I learned how to streamline the consultation, and now, I can usually tell if a PC will be a good fit for my practice within a few minutes. However, even if I’m confident I will decline an engagement, I still complete the consultation with the same attention and care I would otherwise.
After about twenty minutes, I encourage the PC to wrap up their description. I want to leave time to first ask pointed questions if I have any doubts about not pursuing an engagement, and then to give my feedback and address any follow-up questions.
If I decide not to pursue an engagement, I am upfront and tell the PC that their matter is not a good fit for my practice. I then explain why it is not a good fit and offer to describe, in general terms, what I think the PC will expect if they pursue the matter on their own or with another attorney. But I always encourage the PC to consult with other attorneys—even if I think I will take an engagement.
Power and responsibility. Many LRS PCs are hoping for 30 minutes of free legal advice. I have no problem providing my opinions with the appropriate disclaimer that they are limited to the information available at that consultation. However, I am careful with my words because I know that the PC is seeking professional help with a problem they cannot solve, and they will put great weight on anything I say about the strength of their case, despite my disclaimers.
Barriers to legal services. Unfortunately, almost all one hundred and fifty PCs told me they had previously contacted other attorneys before talking to me. I am ashamed for our profession to report that the common refrain was that attorneys didn’t return phone calls, didn’t respond to emails, or, even worse, took the PC’s money and left the case in disrepair. I don’t think we have a problem with a lack of attorneys; instead, we have a quality problem.
Humility. When I take a case, I proudly tell my clients I will protect them from sleepless nights of worry. But although my promise is intended to provide comfort, it is, at most, aspirational. While I will live my client’s case while I work on it, they will deal with it for the rest of their lives.
Most of the LRS PCs that I’ve encountered were intelligent, resourceful, and active participants in developing their claims or defenses. I’ve also found that PCs truly appreciate my efforts to understand their legal matter and to translate legal jargon into common-sense advice. I’ve received thank you cards, referrals, and an outpouring of earnest acknowledgment.
Tremendous growth potential. I recommend the LRS to any attorney seeking to develop the ability to bring in new clients. While completing one, two, and sometimes three consultations per day was exhausting, I’ve learned profound lessons about my practice, my role in my community, and the steps to becoming a rainmaker.
Chris has an active state and federal practice in Seattle and the Bay Area in California. He especially thanks the LRS intake staff for their work. www.fargomasuda.com.
