What do you most look for in your lawyers?
[deleted]
[{"id": "f06hjw2", "text": "I like ones that don't count and charge every single second that I'm talking to them.", "replies": [], "depth": 1}, {"id": "f06icga", "text": "Ones that learn the situation quickly, know what needs to be done, stays organized, and keeps things moving quickly.", "replies": [], "depth": 1}, {"id": "f06ohm0", "text": "Be solutions-oriented.\n\nOften bad attorneys will just find all the ways a deal isn't perfect, and smuggly walk out at 5pm. These guys develop a reputation as deal killers and don't get hired again.\n\nClients don't need someone to say why they shouldn't do the deal, they need someone who can craft and implement solutions to the hairy issues. Those people are a pleasure to work with and get hired again and again.", "replies": [], "depth": 1}, {"id": "f07ktu1", "text": "CRE lawyer here - Ive found that the most help I can provide is solving the problem of how deal X be done while still mitigating downside Y. No one is paying me to say it won't work - they're paying me to figure out how it can.", "replies": [{"id": "f07ym6v", "text": "Perfectly worded response.", "replies": [], "depth": 2}], "depth": 1}, {"id": "f07yj74", "text": "1) Lots of experience in the kind of real estate transaction I'm working on. 2) An ability to push hard on the IMPORTANT points of the contract, and be flexible on the ones that don't matter... an attorney who digs in aggressively on every small issue, every time is not a good attorney if it's killing the transaction. Their job is to advise on the mitigation of risk, but there can be completely legitimate business reasons to accept more risk in a given situation and they need to be able to take that into account.", "replies": [], "depth": 1}, {"id": "f08sfe9", "text": "Responsiveness \nBrevity\nReasonableness \n\nGet back to me quickly so that I know the problem is in your hands and not mine.\n\nIf a sentence works don\u2019t use a paragraph. If a letter works don\u2019t use an amendment. \n\nThere\u2019s a difference between fighting for my interests and fighting for my position. If we get into a \u201cdown in the trenches knife fight\u201d because you and the seller\u2019s counsel can\u2019t agree on stipulated guarantor entity size requirements for post close liability... and the seller is PIMCO Bravo Fund or some institutional evergreen fund - you\u2019re not doing me any favors, you\u2019re dragging out my deal, running up my closing costs, and tainting the transaction experience / undercutting my brand.  Be tough for the right reasons and know that if you dig your heels in on an item I\u2019m willing to give on, I might just make you tuck your tail and retreat.", "replies": [{"id": "f09p5sv", "text": "Ya kind of \u201cmic dropped\u201d me a few times with this comment. Boom!!! Boom!!! Boom!!!", "replies": [], "depth": 2}], "depth": 1}, {"id": "f107s4q", "text": "Make it clear what your risk tolerance is. A lot of real estate is a grey area and it's important that your clients or boss understand your thought process. If you are ultra conservative or risky that should change how your advice is received.\n\nIt's annoying when outside attorneys start providing their opinions on deals. I have had multiple deals fall apart because the sellers attorney was giving them bad non legal advice. Specifically, we had an attorney on a $10MM+ deal refuse to accept less than a 5% deposit because he felt that was customary in the market. I have had an attorney tell a client that it was impossible to sublease part of an HOA owned building because they had never heard of something like that before even though we pointed to where it was explicitly allowed in the condo docs.", "replies": [], "depth": 1}]