Question:
I am a partner in a five lawyer firm in Columbus, Ohio. There are two partners in the firm and four associates. Our practice specializes in corporate business law and is one hundred percent transactional. We do not do any litigation work. Several of our associates started in BigLaw. All of our associates have been practicing for over ten years and some longer than that. None of our associates bring in – originate any client business. They are paid salaries and discretionary bonuses. While we have a billable hour requirement of 1600 hours none of our associates are even close – they are not even hitting 1200 hours. Their salaries are pushing $200,000 and their fee collections are no where they need to be. Any suggestions?
Response:
Looks like you have some real challenges. The salaries that you are paying are what we are seeing for associates and non-equity partners in firm’s your size and that have been practicing for the number of years that your associates have. For years the guidepost has been that an associate’s fee collections should be three times salary/compensation – one third to cover an associates salary, one third to cover overhead, and one third for profit. That was back when overhead was running at thirty percent. Many firms today have much higher overhead than thirty percent. Using three times salary the fee collection bonus threshold would be fee collections of $600,000 for an associates being paid $200,000. The salaries you are paying are in the ballpark with what many other firms are paying. Your issue is not so much what you are paying your people as is their fee production and collections.
Obviously the billable hours are to low as well as the fee collections and this is eating into the profits of the partners. While 1600 annual billable hours is appropriate, based on where your associates are now it may be an unreachable goal and you may want to consider taking baby steps and setting a billable hour expectation of 1400 hours. For years the national average annual billable hours reported in surveys has been 1750 and this was the expectation for many firms for many years and still is for many firms. In the past few years, due to lack of work, work life balance, and other factors some firms have lowered the annual expectation minimum to 1600. Litigation firms, especially insurance defense firms, currently have minimal expectations ranging from 1800 to 2000 hours. Firms that represent individual clients such as general practice firms, family law firms, and estate planning/administration firms currently have minimal expectations ranging from 1400-1600.
I suggest that you look into your situation and determine the reasons for the low billable hours. It could be that they are not putting in the work because the firm does not have enough work for them to do. Look into the following possible causes of their low billable hours and take corrective action:
An approach that many firms are taking is to incorporate performance bonuses such as the following to motivate additional production. Usually these are on top of a base salary. Here are some examples:
Some firms have lowered base salaries when incorporating new performance bonus systems when the current expectation is far below expectation. Other firms are terminating under-performing associates.
Many firms are finding that many associates in small firms that have salaries of $200,000 or more are content and are not motivated by the bonuses available to put in the time to earn the bonuses. Work life balance is more important that earning additional income for some associates. The bonus systems works better for associates that are still hungry or have lower base salaries.
Firms that have had the most success in getting associates past the “entitlement mentality” are those that incorporate goal setting, accountability, and individual twice a month coaching meetings with associates in addition to the performance bonuses.
You might want to consider the following approach to associate compensation:
Good luck with the challenge.
Click here for our blog on compensation
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
Our firm is a 14 lawyer firm in St. Louis, Missouri that focuses on small businesses – both transactional and litigation matters. There are eight equity partners, two non-equity partners, and four associates in the firm. We are managed by a three member management committee and a firm administrator.
While we have been successful over the past fifteen years since the formation of the firm, we are experiencing numerous issues including:
We would appreciate any suggestions that you might be able to offer.
Response:
I understand your dilemma. You are at a difficult size. It sounds like you are facing many of the problems that firm leaders face at your stage of growth. Your leaders must be willing to:
Click here for our blog on management
Click here for our blog on governance
Click here for out articles on various management topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am the founder and owner of a business law firm in San Diego, California. There are 9 associates, four paralegals, and three administrative staff members working in the firm. I founded the practice 20 years ago and I have never had a partner in this firm. I was involved in a partnership in another firm prior to forming this firm. There were partnership issues which is the reason why I left and started my own firm. I have enjoyed the freedom of sole ownership but I now believe that in order to get to the next level, retain quality attorneys, and have a succession plan for myself when I get closer to retirement I need to consider bringing in partners. However, based on my prior firm experience I am fearful. I would appreciate your thoughts and advice.
Response:
Do You Really Want Partners
You may want to ask yourself whether you want employees or partners. What is the criteria for becoming an equity partner? Is client development part of that criteria? Should they contribute capital? If they are not adding value to the firm – growth – you may be diluting the earnings pool and reducing the size of the pie for yourself. Personally, I think in small firms criteria for becoming an equity partner should, among other things, include client development and a capital contribution. They should have some skin in the game, contribute capital, and signup for their share of the liabilities. I also believe they should then be included in the inner circle.
Then, depending upon whether you are considering equity and non-equity partner tiers, you should develop non-equity and associate career progression plans – associate to non-equity partner and non-equity partner to equity partner – outlining timeline for consideration, the consideration process, the criteria, and the responsibilities and expectations for each. (What partnership means)
You may believe that you have identified the right person or persons whom you believe is the right person or persons for partnership. However, just because the associate has been a good associate does not mean that the associate will be a good partner – the relationship will be different. But at least the associate is somewhat of a known quantity since you know the associate and have worked with the associate for several years.
Here are a few ideas you might consider:
Hiring Associates That Can Be Effectively Groomed for Partnership
Years ago it seemed that all the associates working in law firms wanted to eventually become a partner in the law firm. This has changed as a result of the new mix of women and men graduating from law schools and entering the legal profession, changing attitudes toward work life balance, other opportunities outside law firms, and other variables. While partnership/ownership is still important to many – don’t assume that all the associates that you hire will even want to be equity partners – especially if it means a hefty capital contribution and signing personal guarantees for a large amount of firm debt.
A question that I would ask – have you really discussed with your associates their interests in equity ownership? As a group? Recently an associate, whom the firm had written off, advised me that while he was not interested now due to his present situation in life, he would be in maybe five years – especially if others also were brought in as well – in other words he did not want to have the responsibility alone and be an equity owner by himself.
I suggest that you talk with your people and see where they really stand. Help them to begin developing client development skills. Depending on your retirement timeline – and if you have “no takers” you may have to consider other options such as laterals or merging with another firm.
A key suggestion is to look for entrepreneurial associates when you hire. The desire for ownership of a business if often in a person’s blood. Don’t start the interview with a discussion from law school until the present. Dig deeper into hobbies, general interests, etc. that will provide clues as to whether you may be hiring someone that just wants a law job or someone that eventually wants to own or be a partner in a law firm.
Typically a buy-in or capital contribution is not required for non-equity partners nor do I recommend such. Typically non-equity partners are salaried and may participate in some form of an incentive bonus system tied to individual, team, or firm financial performance. They are also not required to assume any responsibility for any of the firm’s financial liabilities or debts.
If you intend on bringing in the associates as equity partners that is another matter. I believe that all new partners should be expected to contribute capital and have some “skin in the game.” Whenever a firm admits a new partner, the firm should require the new partner to contribute capital. Increasingly, a partner’s capital requirement should bear a relationship to the partner’s share of profits. You may want to allow new partners a reasonable period of time to fund their capital accounts – say five years or help them arrange favorable terms at your bank to finance their capital accounts.
Some firms have a buy-in tied to either the cash-based book value of the firm or the accrual-based book value (includes accounts receivable and work in process). This is not the typical practice although I do run into it. Usually capital accounts are tied to working capital needed to operate the firm and the percentage of ownership/income that each partner will have.
There are only three ways to increase a firm’s working capital to cover cash flow requirements and fund growth:
1. Have partners put more money in
2. Have partners take less money out
3. Borrow
Many firms use bank credit lines instead of capital contributions to pay routine firm expenses and partner draws during periods when cash flow is tight. It has been my experience that firms that follow this practice have ongoing financial challenges and problems.
The reality is that many firms are under-capitalized – don’t become one of them!
Make the criteria tough and resist the temptation to make everyone a partner.
Click here for our blog on partnership
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am the owner of a three attorney law firm in Rockford, Illinois. While we do a lot of business litigation we are primary a general practice firm that serves individual clients. There are two associates in the firm in addition to myself, two paralegals, and a receptionist. We outsource the bookkeeping work to an accounting firm. We have been having issues with the accounting firm and I am considering bringing the accounting in house and hiring a bookkeeper that can also handle office management responsibilities as well that I currently have to perform. I know that many law firms now days have law firm administrators. Should I consider hiring a professional firm administrator?
Response:
Generally a firm your size would have a office manager/bookkeeper as opposed to a firm administrator. A firm administrator is generally a higher level position with responsibilities and expectations such as the following:
A firm administrator usually has a strong financial background, higher level of education than a office manager/bookkeeper, and often a CPA or MBA in larger firms that facilitates the candidate’s acceptance by other attorneys in the firm as a peer professional as well as provide the candidate with the academic tools needed to carry out the expectations of the position.
A firm administrator is rare in a firm your size and for firms under 10-15 attorneys. Many firms your size have office managers/bookkeepers. The downside to establishing an administrator such a position in your firm will be the salary that you will have to pay – more than some of your attorneys – and turnover in the position when an opportunity from a much larger firm comes along.
I have a few client firms your size that do have firm administrators. Sometimes for the first year or two there is a lot of administrative work – employees handbooks and procedural manuals to be written, new billing systems to implement, office space renovations and relocations, etc. But after major projects are completed there is not enough work to keep them busy. These firms have made the position work by adding client billable functions to their role. For example:
There is no magic size. We just completed an engagement recruiting an administrator for a seven attorney firm. We also have law firm clients with over 40 attorneys that don’t have an administrator. I believe that an administrator, or office manager, is appropriate in firms of all sizes. It is a matter of attitude and commitment on the part of the partners and whether they are willing to delegate responsibility and authority to an administrator to run the day-to-day operations of the firm. The firm should start with a job description and then decide whether the firm is willing to delegate responsibility and authority. If not, the firm should not hire an administrator.
Click here for our blog on career management
Click here for our blog on human resources
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am a partner in a seven lawyer firm in Mesa, Arizona. There are five partners in the firm. We are a boutique business litigation firm that was formed seven years ago. I am 64 and the others partners are 62, 60, 55, and 53 respectively. I would like to retire in the next few years and our firm has never really discussed or planned for partner retirements. We don’t even have a partnership agreement. I would appreciate you thoughts.
Response:
At a personal level, you should admit to yourself that, regardless of your current age, you are getting older and you will eventually retire – one way or another. The sooner you begin thinking about this the better prepared you will be. I have many clients that have started their succession/transition planning in their mid-forties and early fifties. Unfortunately, many have waited until their mid-sixties and early seventies. For these folks there has been little time to make adequate preparation and often adverse consequences have resulted. At an absolute minimum, you should start your succession/transition planning five years before you plan to begin your transition. It simply takes this long to put your house in order, to locate or groom succession/transition candidates, find a candidate law firm interested in your practice, and transition clients and management responsibilities. Here are a few ideas that I suggest to multi-partner firms and sole owner/solo firms:
Multi-Owner Firms
Sole Owner & Solo Practices
A plan – a roadmap that outlines the process and helps you decide on where you want to
go and how you will get there.
Timeline – a disciplined implementation timetable keyed to your
Succession/Transition/Exit Plan.
Start Early – Getting ready for exit takes time. Start early – 5- 8 years before you are
ready to retire or exit.
Decide – When do you want to leave the practice?
Decide – How much cash you will need when you exit.
Decide – To whom you want to transfer your clients or practice.
At a firm level, especially if you are a member of a multi-partner firm, start sharing your ideas and plans with your partners. Have an ongoing dialog with you partners. Review the firm’s partnership/operating/shareholder agreement. If the firm has a succession/transition plan review the plan. After reviewing these documents, determine how the firm’s policy regarding retirement will affect your retirement timeline, compensation, and payout. Does the policy require mandatory retirement at a certain age? Ascertain whether the policy provides for phasedown. How does the phasedown handle management and client transition? Is there an “Of Counsel” provision after retirement? Reach an agreement with your partners concerning your retirement timeline, client and management transition, and retirement payout or return on invested capital.
Click here for our blog on succession/exit strategies
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am a 64 year old lawyer that owns a small general practice law firm in Springfield, Illinois. There are two associates in the firm and two staff members. I have been thinking about retirement and how I should begin planning for it which I have not done. I love the work that I do for clients and have very few other interests. I get satisfaction and fulfillment from my work. I really want to work for ever. I would appreciate you thoughts.
Response:
You are not along. I have many lawyer clients that are in the 80’s and still working and going strong. I had a personal injury plaintiff attorney in his mid 80’s that tried a large medical malpractice case last year and obtained a very large jury verdict in the case.
Many lawyers, more so than many other professionals, are high achievers that are married and addicted to their law practices. They believe that their self-worth is reduced if they are not accomplishing something important. Psychologists refer to this as “achievement addiction.” In his book, The Psychology of Retirement, Derek Milne advises that surveys in the United States suggest that over sixty percent of retirees “un-retire” and continue to work in some form of paid work, then “re-retire” or semi-retire” later on in their retirement (Milne 2012, 11-05). A major challenge for lawyers that have an achievement-focused personality will be to find ways to replace the sense of achievement that they have experienced from the practice of law after they retire. While playing golf may be a worthwhile recreational activity for those that enjoy it, it will not be enough to fulfil the needs of those with an achievement-focused personality. These individuals will need activities where they can contribute and make a difference and continue to fulfil their self-actualization and self-esteem needs. Activities such as mediation, teaching, consulting, volunteer work and community leadership often fulfil these needs.
Identifying Other Interests
Many of us have heard some of the stories of unhappy retirees ranging from poor health, depression, and premature death. Years ago when my mother passed away my father’s boss asked my father what he could do and how he could help. My father told him, “keep me working.” My father’s boss kept my dad working and he worked every day of his life until he passed away at 84. Dad used to tell me that when you enjoy your work and your work is your hobby, it is not work. For some people the best way to retire may be to continue working.
For others, rather than being a time of easing back and retiring into old age or continuing to work in one’s old job or career, it can be a time of personal growth and an opportunity to explore other interests, callings, and vocations. It can be a time of freedom to do what you always wanted to do but could not because you had to earn money and the pressure of work prevented you from pursuing you dreams and interests that were in tune with you values and beliefs. Here is a list of a few areas that you might want to explore:
Planning Your Retirement
One way to begin to visualize getting older, your mortality, and retirement is to think about the amount of time that you have left on this earth. If you are sixty-five you may live to be eighty. Thus, you have fifteen years left and this is your planning horizon. Retirement planning is deciding on how to use this time. It is about the process of deciding what you will do in your retirement and putting a plan into practice. As the amount of time left to you decreases, its value increases to the point where it will be more valuable to monetary assets. It will be more valuable that a new house, a new car, a new boat, or a chest full of cash. Time enjoying life, being with your family, and spiritual renewal will become more important than earning money. The greatest change when you retire is how you will use your time.
Retirement planning begins with taking the time to think about how you will use you time. If you live fifteen years beyond your retirement your will have 28,800 hours that will have to be filled with retirement activities. (five days a week, eight hours a day, 48 weeks, for fifteen years) Start by creating an interest activity list, a time plan, and then DECIDE, PLAN, and ACT.
Options include:
If you decide to keep working you need to begin thinking about your succession plan when and if something happens to you. It may be time to consider bring lawyers in the firm into equity ownership or at least have in place an arrangement or agreement with them in event that something would happen to you – a practice continuation agreement.
Click here for our blog on succession/exit strategies
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
Our firm is a four attorney estate planning firm in Orlando, Florida. I am the owner of the firm and the other three attorneys are associates. We have three paralegals, a bookkeeper, and two administrative assistants. Approximately sixty percent of our practice is estate planning, thirty percent probate and trust administration, and ten percent elder law and special needs planning.
Our major challenge is finding and retaining paralegals. Over the years it has been our practice to hire experienced paralegals with three to five years experience. While this worked for us in the past we are currently experiencing high turnover, poor quality of work and performance, and high compensation cost resulting in our overhead getting totally out of control. What are other firms doing? Any suggestions and recommendation that you may have will be most appreciated.
Response:
These are tough times for finding, attracting and retaining paralegal and lawyer talent. Law firms are having difficulty hiring experienced paralegals at an affordable salary and then retaining them. You may want to consider growing your own and begin hiring recent graduates from paralegal programs at colleges, junior colleges, and paralegal schools. These schools offer bachelor degrees in legal/paralegal studies, two year associate degrees, and post bachelor graduate programs.
Small law firms generally do not have effective training programs and the training resources needed to do effective on the job training. This is the primary reason that small law firms hire experienced paralegals rather than growing their own. Larger firms have training resources such as paralegal supervisors, trainers, written procedural manuals, and other training tools. While a small firm such as yours can’t have all of these resources maybe it is time to begin to develop some of the following tools so you can grow your own.
Homegrown employees often prove to not only be less costly but in the long more committed to your culture and processes, more dedicated and loyal, and more likely to stay with your firm for many years.
Many of my law firm clients are telling me that finding clients is no longer their primary concern – their top strategic concern is now finding, hiring, and retaining lawyer and staff talent. During these times it is imperative that law firms get creative and think outside of the box. Flexibility is key. Here are a few things that some of my small law firm clients have done that has resulted in successful experienced paralegal and attorney hires:
Successful law firms must attract both clients and talent in order to be successful. All law firms are suffering and having a hard time attracting and retaining attorneys and staff. This also means that other law firms are desperate and may try to steal you lawyers and staff with better pay or other incentives. You need to review all of your benefits and policies as well as compensation to make sure that you are more that just competitive – you need to be on the cutting edge and ahead of the pack. Employees now expect more flexibility, remote work, etc. than ever before.
Click here for our blog on career management
Click here for our blog on human resources
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
Our firm is a twelve lawyer business law firm in San Antonio, Texas. We handle business transactions as well as ligation. Three of us partners started the firm seven years ago and the firm has grown since then. Currently there are seven equity partners and five associates in the firm as well as six legal assistants/paralegals and a bookkeeper. One partner serves as managing partner. The managing partner handles all of the administration except for the basic bookkeeping. Many management decisions require the approval of all of the partners. We are beginning to feel that we have outgrown our management structure. Excessive time is spent by the managing partner. He is spending 40 percent of his time on firm administration. His practice is suffering as well as revenues. An inordinate amount of time is spent by the rest of the partners on administrative and management decisions. We have monthly firm meetings and virtually all of the time is spent on administrative matters. It takes us forever to reach consensus. Recently it took us six months to reach a decision on getting the carpet cleaned.
We would appreciate any thoughts or suggestions that you might have.
Response:
While the firm’s management structure worked for the firm in the past when the firm was smaller, more structure will be required if the firm hopes to grow and be more profitable in the future. Growth will require structure at the partnership and administrative level. The managing partner is spending way too much time on administration as well as the other partners.
The partners should consider hiring a firm administrator to handle all administrative matters and the managing partner or a three partner management committee should focus on higher level management matters. The full partnership should weight in only on matters reserved for their vote and approval. As the firm grows the partners should involve others in management without micro-managing.
A problem facing most firms is lack of long-range focus and the amount of partner time that is being spent on administrative matters as opposed to higher level management issues.
Partners in many law firms spend more time on administrative management matters rather than higher level management/leadership concerns such as lawyer management, attorney compensation, process, business development, mentoring, and long-range planning.
Management deals with those issues that relate to overall control of the firm, including those decisions that should be made by equity partners and the selection of an individual or individuals who will manage and administer the firm. The clear trend today is for centralized management, with substantial authority being delegated to whoever is selected for management and administration.
Specific policy matters that might be reserved for full equity partner vote include:
Specific policy matters that might be the domain of managing partner or management committee might include:
A firm administrator appointed by the managing member or co-managing members would direct the business/operational affairs of the firm and would report directly to the managing member/partner or co-managing members/partners.
Administration
When we discuss administration, we are referring to the everyday management of the firm as it relates to finance, staff, and systems. Clearly, today’s trend in administration is to hire competent professionals at the level that suits the firm. Administration is the execution of management policies established by the equity-members and the managing member/partner, co-managing members/partners, or executive/management committee.
At your size I believe that you are ready for a firm administrator. The firm revenues presently being lost will more than pay the salary of an administrator and still leave additional profit to pay additional compensation to the partners.
Click here for our blog on management
Click here for our blog on governance
Click here for out articles on various management topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
I am one of eight partners in a fourteen lawyer insurance defense firm located in Indianapolis, Indiana. Besides the partners there are six associates working in the firm all of which are newbies. The partners ages are 70, 68, 65, 62, 60, 58, 54, and 51 respectively. We have several partners at retirement age and we are looking for ideas on succession planning and how to encourage retiring partners to properly transition clients. We have had partners retire in the past and we did a poor job of client transition and the firm lost clients as a result. We appreciate any thoughts that you might share with us.
Response:
There needs to be a process established for retiring partners with specific agreed to activities on the part of the retiring partner with firm management. Steps should be taken to allow and assist other designated partners (transition partners) within the firm to develop a direct relationship and have responsibility for managing these clients. Such a process should include:
Don’t Forget the Money – Financial Incentives To Transition Clients
Generally, the compensation of those partners who are transitioning towards retirement will be determined in the same manner as compensation for all other partners, taking into account partner origination collections, client liaison collections, matter origination collections and working attorney collections, together with other factors that the managing partner and members of the management/compensation committee may consider relevant. However, with respect to the retiring partner, the managing partner and members of the management/compensation committee will pay particular attention to the former’s performance of the transitioning duties assigned. If it is determined that the retiring partner is satisfactorily performing the transitioning activities, the retiring partner will continue to receive full credit for those fee collections from clients being transitioned, in the various categories considered by the managing partner and members of the management/compensation committee in setting compensation. However if it is determined that the retiring partner is not satisfactorily performing the transitioning activities, or if the fees generated from these clients increase or decline, those factors will also be considered by the managing partner and the management/compensation committee in setting the retiring partner’s compensation, and the compensation may be increased or reduced appropriately.
Consider Dual Credit for Client Collections
In order to provide incentive to those partners to whom clients are being transitioned, and to insure that those attorneys are fairly compensated for their efforts in transitioning and maintaining these client relationships, the partners designated to be the transitioning partners for the client to be transitioned will also receive credit under the categories as may be applicable, for the fees generated by these clients during the transition period, provided that the managing partner and the members of the management/compensation committee determines that the transitioning partners are making satisfactory efforts to accomplish the transitioning of clients.
Assignment of credit to the transitioning partner should not reduce the amount of credit allocated to the retiring partner, unless the retiring partner is not satisfactorily performing the agreed to transition activities.
Click here for our blog on succession/exit strategies
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Question:
My husband’s ( Robert) practice is located in Alexandria, Virginia. The practice is a general practice with a focus on estate planning, family law, and real estate. He is now sixty and suffering from Alzheimer’s. He has three legal assistants and two associate attorneys. The associates are newbies each out of law school less than three years, are risk adverse, have no client book of business, and have no desire to own a law firm. As my husband’s physical health has declined his mental acuity has declined as well. However, rather than examining possible succession alternatives he has continued to practice and the quality of his services to clients has declined. Clients have taken notice and many have taken their business to other law firms. Recently I, who serves as the firm’s office manager, approached several law firms regarding possible sale of the practice. All of the law firms that I approached have rejected my proposals advising me that since the firm is “uniquely my husband” and without a lengthy transition, they do not believe that there is sufficient value to warrant a practice acquisition. Four weeks ago, I approached both of the associates and both advised me that they did not wish to acquire this or any other law practice. Last week both associates gave their notice and advised that they were joining other law firms in the area. Based upon the medical advice of my husband’s doctor he has decide to close the practice and has asked me to handle the logistics of closing down the practice.
Response:
Unfortunately Robert’s failure to plan for his succession and transition has resulted in:
Had Robert reconsidered his attitude of having partners, hired and groomed entrepreneurial associates with a desire to own a law firm, institutionalized the firm’s brand to be less uniquely Robert, and put in place both a short-term practice continuation plan and a long-term succession plan, the story may have ended differently.
You may not have much choice but to close the doors and windup the practice. You should check with your state bar association regarding your state court’s rules for the proper procedures for doing this. In many states a court may step in when a solo attorney:
Because clients’ cases, funds, and confidential information must be protected, the court ensures there is a responsible lawyer to manage the transition. Typically the court-appointed attorney (sometimes called a practice administrator, trustee, or receiver) is authorized to:
They do not usually take over the cases themselves unless the clients choose to hire them separately.
The goals are to:
Click here for our blog on succession/exit strategies
Click here for articles on other topics
John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC