How important is a lawyer or firms reputation in court?

[zoid]

If I need a lawyer does the fact that I hire a big name (and big bucks) firm or attorney really help me? Do judges pay any heed to a lawyers pedigree or will any competent attorney do?

[msmith537]

I think the key term here is "competant". Big name AM100 law firms tend to hire some of the brightest attorneys - top in their class Harvard Law types. They also have more resources to do research, hire consultants, pay for a couple dozen temp attorneys to go through bankers boxes of documents and so on.

[QuickSilver]

Unless litigation in front of a judge is a foregone conclusion, it's also a good idea to find a lawyer who isn't too itchy for a fight. Court trials are expensive and it's almost always best to negotiate and settle before things go to trial.

But yes, what msmith537 said... larger name firms with higher calliber attorneys tend to cost more but yield better odds for their clients (right or wrong).

[Otto]

Originally Posted by msmith537

I think the key term here is "competant".

Or "competent" even.

[Dinsdale]

Depending on the type of action, a lawyer/firm practicing in a particular jurisdiction may have a track record with a particular judge, which may be to his client's benefit or detriment.

I practice in a very narrow area. On many occasions, when my opponents have been less experienced in that area, or are from outside the jurisdiction, I have felt that I had considerable advantage.

In general, I believe it may be in a party's interest to hire local, specialized counsel. Courts can be very parochial - the big out-of-town firm could be viewed as "outsiders."

[NicePete]

I agree with Dinsdale. It depends on what you're hiring them to do. Sometimes the big name "White Shoe" law firms are the way to go. Other times they could be your absolutely worst choice. I wouldn't hire one to defend me from a DUI charge, but I might look to them in an anti-trust case.

Also, it's important to remember that whatever the reputation of the firm, individual lawyer or lawyers will be handling your case. No matter how wonderful the firm is, if the lawyer you're assigned sucks, you're screwed.

[zoid]

Well maybe it'll help to give a little more info........

I'm looking for a divorce lawyer in Chicago. There is one firm in particular that claims to have substantial experience in protecting a father's rights (if you’ve spent any significant time in Chicago I’m sure you know the name).

They are not at all cheap but as much as a struggle as it would be, I would be willing to pay if I had some assurance that I’m getting substantially better representation than I otherwise would.

I do not know if this will end up before a judge. This process is just starting and to be honest I don’t know 100% that the divorce is inevitable (my wife seems to like to go through this exercise for drama’s sake every 6 months or so). However I feel like I need to protect myself in case this time she does in fact file (as of last Friday no filing was listed in the Cook County Clerks office). I will therefore need to retain someone.

I don’t know if this helps…….

[NicePete]

I don't know that reputation is so much what matters in a case like this. You want someone who is experienced and competent in the area involved. If this a firm that specializes in cases like yours, chances are they are experienced and at least "know the ropes". Chances are they also know the players, i.e. the judges and other lawyers who practice family law.

Lawyers self-promote like anyone else, so who knows if this firm's claims are true. But I do think it would be a good idea to hire a divorce "specialist."