Klob Legal, LLC

I've made it my policy not to respond to any substantive emails involving disputed issues after 12 PM on Fridays. In my experience, the potential for misunderstanding or miscommunication during the final hours of a typical work week almost always outweighs any benefit of a prompt response. As a workers' compensation attorney where I deal directly with insurance companies on behalf of injured workers, I always assume that my counterparts with the insurer will either have left work by mid-afternoon on Friday, or that the providers with whom we must resolve medical treatment issues have otherwise done so. Sending out an email in haste when under either a real or perceived sense of time pressure almost never yields a positive result. This can be particularly true in my line of work when I learn that an insurer or their attorney has denied benefits or treatment to one of my clients, and where I must then convey the impact of this decision to a client and cannot effectively take further action until the following week. There are attorneys out there, and we have all encountered them, who appear to have perfected the art of filing motions or taking other actions at what seems to be the most inopportune time for their opponents. Some of these attorneys do this on purpose, and for the most part, we all know who they are. Most of our colleagues should be given the benefit of the doubt, however, and particularly in a volume practice like workers' compensation where one is always going 90 miles an hour and where the concept of being "caught up" on all of your cases or with all communication is elusive. If you feel you must compose a response to an email on a Friday afternoon, by all means do so, but just don't hit the send button. You can always send it out on Monday morning instead, and thereby ensure that your opinions and emotions are still the same after you have had sufficient time and space to reflect. History is replete with examples of the benefits of not sending out angry correspondence in haste, including anecdotes about the practice used by both Abraham Lincoln and Mark Twain of drafting letters that allowed them to express their thoughts on paper but that were never actually sent. This practice is even more beneficial in the world of electronic communication, where it is much easier and quicker to compose and send an email in haste as opposed to having to take the time and physical effort to actually put pen to paper. If I had followed this practice at earlier points in my career as a lawyer, I could have avoided a lot of unnecessary conflict and misunderstanding. In addition, I cannot think of one instance where sending a response on a Friday afternoon actually made a substantive difference in a case. Hopefully I can continue to practice what I preach here, and I commend this practice to you as well.

Suicide is something that impacts all of us, particularly when it involves a close friend or family member or when it involves someone whom you never thought would be at risk. It has been a couple of years now, but I lost a friend and colleague with whom I had worked closely and who was the absolute last person I would have imagined needing intervention. While news like this is never something you see coming, this one hit me particularly hard.    While my friend had battled depression her entire life, she was also a counselor with a doctorate in psychology, and someone to whom I frequently turned for assistance and guidance with my workers' compensation and disability clients. She was particularly skilled in listening and helping my clients deal with PTSD and trauma. In addition, she was one of the few counselors to whom I would turn in any instance where I might need counseling as well.   During my Army career, I underwent significant training in suicide awareness and intervention. Since leaving the military, I have continued to support Stop Suicide USA, a nonprofit aimed at providing resources on how to recognize and effectively intervene in situations where individuals are contemplating suicide. The training available through Stop Suicide USA is invaluable in recognizing the warning signs and taking action to intervene in an effective and nonjudgmental way.   Despite this training, however, I can honestly say that I didn't see my friend as a significant suicide risk. After all, she had helped guide many of my clients through some of the darkest periods of their lives. Just days before her suicide, she and I had talked of the things in which we both found happiness - family, rescue dogs (and cats), craft beer, and all things related to Ford Mustangs. There were no significant warning signs here. I often tell my colleagues and friends that my job as an injury and disability lawyer requires the skills of both a lawyer and a social worker. While I would like to say that I am equipped to recognize and intervene in situations where my clients are at risk for suicide, and while I can point to situations where I have effectively recognized the signs and have made the appropriate referrals, I can also point to situations where I did not recognize the warning signals in time and where I was unable to provide timely intervention. For my colleagues, know that you are not alone. Seek help from your family, friends and colleagues. Don't let the perceived stigma of requesting help be seen as a sign of weakness, but instead as a sign of the strength. Use the resources available from the State Bar and maintain your relationships and support network. In addition, for those of you who know me, or even those who do not, feel free to reach out to me for assistance if I can help in any way.    Our job is to be there for our clients and to share their burdens. Our ability to do our job for our clients depends on us being there for each other as well.

Compassion burnout is real. As an attorney who represents injured workers who are often at one of the lowest points in their life due to the second-order effects of their injuries, my primary role is to help take some of the pressure off of them and to carry their burdens for them as much as I possibly can. While rewarding, however, this is by no means easy. Representing individuals and helping make their lives better is meaningful work. Unfortunately, some of the most meaningful work can also be some of the most stressful work. One of my son's first full-time jobs out of college was a social work position with the Salvation Army where he helped homeless individuals with rapid rehousing. He quickly realized that the stated mission of his job with respect to securing housing for his clients also required that he solve other problems for them as well. More than once, he would state after a long day's work helping others words to the effect of "Dad, you and I basically have the same clients." Caring about your clients is essential to mission success as a plaintiff's attorney, but it can also prevent you from being able to ever fully disengage from the stress that comes along with being responsible for the potential lifetime impact that your actions can have in their lives. A wise colleague said it best when she stated that representing injured workers or disability claimants is about half law practice and half social work, since it is simply not possible to separate the legal claim from the secondary impact on every aspect of a client's personal life. I wish I could offer some advice here as to an absolute fix for the stress that comes along with being an advocate for others, but two things have helped me along the way and I share them here for the good of the order. The first thing is to not be afraid to take a break and do something else at various periods in your career, and preferably before your compassion burnout reaches critical mass. The second is to reach out for help and get over the stigma that many of us feel about counseling to realize that seeking help is actually a sign of strength and not weakness. One resource available to Georgia lawyers is the "Use Your Six" program that is a benefit offered at no additional cost with your annual bar dues. This program provides six free counseling sessions per year and can be used to seek counseling for situational issues related to either one's professional or personal concerns, or any combination of both. I'm not ashamed to share that I have used this program in the past, and that I also plan to use it again with the top-notch counselor that was able to help me work through some issues. When it comes to work-life balance and preventing compassion fatigue, I don't have all the answers. In fact, I don't even know at this point if there are any clear answers, but I've reached a point where I'm not afraid to seek help in order to maintain my effectiveness on behalf of my clients.

Over the past few years, I've witnessed seasoned fellow attorneys at large law firms fired without cause and without notice, sometimes even by teleconference instead of in person, despite their exceeding production and revenue generation standards. In some of the more egregious cases, I've even seen experienced attorneys fired on short notice despite serious health conditions, or where they were attempting to maintain high productivity standards despite life threatening illness, and where they were then left without insurance or other employer-provided benefits necessary to maintain their health. When I started my career with the highway department in the late 1980's, we had engineers who had designed and built the interstate system and who were legends in their fields of expertise. They seemed indispensable, but when they retired, they were quickly replaced and somehow the roadbuilding process continued. It really struck me how quickly memories could fade and how someone who might seemingly be an integral part of an organization would seldom be mentioned or remembered only a few weeks after their departure. Having served in the military, I've seen seemingly indispensable leaders relieved of command on short notice, but there's little or no cause for the same approach in the civilian arena. The military model is based on the premise that everyone can and will be replaced, but at least they're up front about it, and it's understood going in that everyone's life is on the line as a condition of employment. As an attorney representing injured workers, I frequently see employers cast aside loyal and productive employees the minute their injuries diminish their ability to contribute to the employer's bottom line. Trying to help my clients process the emotional impact on their sense of self worth and trust, particularly where they are a long-term employee and where they may have previously had a good relationship with their direct chain of command, is one of the most difficult aspects of my job. In the civilian arena, and particularly in businesses that otherwise market themselves as desirable places to work or as more than just another workplace, employers and business owners need to practice what they preach and take care of their people. One expression in the military context sums up what should the goal of any well-run and well-balanced business: "Mission First. People Always." It's disheartening to see when civilian employers view their employees as expendable, and where loyalty is often demanded but rarely reciprocated. Employers can and should do better, particularly in the legal profession where our primary job is to take care of the needs of our clients. Regardless of the fact that there will always be some employers who fail to put people above programs and systems, however, understanding the spirit of the age here can also bring clarity, peace and a sense of perspective and balance in one's attitude toward their employment.

Managing client expectations is critical in the attorney-client relationship. In some cases no matter how well communication is maintained, however, there comes a time when a lawyer and client need to part ways. Often, a client will become dissatisfied with their lawyer for any number of reasons. Some of these reasons are valid, such as when a lawyer fails to maintain timely and effective communication with their client, or where the lawyer and client reach an impasse with respect to their goals and trial strategy for further handling of the case. In many other circumstances, however, the reasons for which a client will terminate a relationship with their lawyer are invalid or otherwise unwarranted. A few of the invalid reasons for a client to terminate the relationship with their lawyer are situations where the client’s expectations are unreasonable and beyond the scope of what the law related to their case allows. An example in the field in which I practice, workers’ compensation, is where a client expects to receive compensation for the human losses associated with pain and suffering when the workers’ compensation system only allows income replacement benefits and medical treatment within strict statutory guidelines. Another example in workers’ compensation is where a client’s expectations for settlement exceeds the mathematical maximum that the best-case scenario for their claim could ultimately provide. Lack of communication is one of the primary reasons for a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship and one of the most common issues raised in bar complaints. Providing a client with regular updates with any new developments in their case and informing the client from the outset of any key timelines and milestones that will warrant further communication is key here. This must be balanced, however, with a clear understanding on the part of the client as to when and how a lawyer needs to communicate with them and what a reasonable expectation should be for their lawyer to provide them with substantive updates on the status of their case.

The State Bar of Georgia and the Georgia Supreme Court have produced an Aspirational Statement on Professionalism which sets out the ideals to be pursued by attorneys in their dealings with clients, opposing counsel, and the courts. With respect to clients, one of these aspirational goals is to "communicate promptly and clearly with clients." Workers' compensation is unlike some other practice areas such as personal injury in that there are rarely any lengthy periods where there are often no other significant developments other than gathering records for long periods of time. With most workers' compensation claims, there is an ongoing action and reaction dynamic between the injured workers' attorney and the insurance company and their attorneys. Maintaining client contact and communication is therefore more difficult in workers' compensation than in some other practice areas, but it can be done so long as both attorney and client work together and so long as clients ensure that they give voice to any concerns in a timely manner. While my goal is to reach out to every client on a regular basis to ensure that they have an update on any new developments in their respective claims, the volume practice nature of workers’ compensation often makes this a challenge. Due to the dynamic nature of the workers’ compensation claims process, it is simply not possible to communicate with every client daily. On the other hand, and as long as expectations are set early on, it is possible to maintain prompt and clear communication on new developments or strategic objectives and to respond to client inquiries by phone, email, or text. I tell all new clients that it's impossible for me to fix a communication-related problem if they don’t make me aware that there is a problem. Many problems can be avoided, however, where the attorney clearly sets forth what the client can expect in terms of frequency and extent of communication from the outset of the attorney-client relationship. In addition, I make it a point to inform clients that one of my primary roles is to take as much of the burden off them as possible throughout the process, but that this must be balanced by their keeping me informed of any new developments in their case or any concerns that need to be resolved between us.

There is always more that can be done to prepare for hearing. No matter how thoroughly you prepare, however, there is also always the risk of an adverse outcome no matter how well you present your case. Knowing when to move forward to trial requires balancing the need to move the case forward as quickly as possible versus ensuring you are fully prepared in order to increase your client's chances for a favorable outcome. Some of the soundest advice on this front was shared by John Sweet, one of the best workers' compensation lawyers in recent memory and one of the best client advocates I have ever known: 1. Winning a case does not mean I did a good job. 2. Losing a case does not mean I did a bad job. John was right in that the ultimate outcome of a case is always to some degree beyond our control. Another solid piece of advice I try to keep in mind is that my clients are often less concerned about the ultimate outcome than I might think they are. Being a former engineer and a perfectionist makes remembering these truths particularly difficult at times. I always have several cases at any given time where I am doing everything in my power to move my client's cases forward, but where it sometimes seem like I am repeatedly taking one step forward and two steps back. In other cases, my clients and I are often at odds in terms of our respective expectations with respect to trial strategy. Often, I am required to explain to my clients why moving their case to hearing without first obtaining all required evidence is not in their long-term best interest. While I continue to lose sleep over these cases, I also try to remind myself that my efforts for these clients is the only chance they have for getting a level playing field in the employer-oriented workers' compensation system. One of the phrases commonly used in the Catholic faith tradition with respect to one's burdens or concerns is "offer it up." This expression is a reminder to me that there will always be things beyond my control. This approach should not be taken in the passive sense, however, nor should it be mistaken for resignation or abdication. This approach instead requires an active faith. Instead of resignation or passivity, therefore, to offer up my concerns and fears on behalf of my clients means that I am duty bound to do my best, to give everything I can do my maximum effort, but that I am also required to leave the ultimate outcome to God.

When I graduated engineering school in the late 1980's, the oil economy in Texas had gone into a decline and job prospects for engineers were negatively impacted just like everything else. As a result, during my last year of engineering school, we had several new (yet older) students who joined our ranks in my senior-level civil engineering classes. These new students were experienced petroleum engineers who had already been in industry for several years, and who had been laid off due to the downturn in the economy. My first real job out of engineering school was with the Georgia Department of Transportation, and this was back in the day when the old school "State Merit System" still meant that public employees enjoyed some measure of job security compared to their private sector counterparts. Despite the relative security and safety of a government job, however, I soon came to realize that there is no such thing as complete job security and even a secure public sector job can be eliminated with changes in legislative priorities and funding. When I left state government and entered the private sector, first as an employed attorney with a law firm and later as a solo practitioner in private practice, the tenuous nature of employment and financial security really hit home. No longer was my salary dependent on which step or paygrade I was on in the government pay scale, but instead completely dependent on my ability to obtain clients and produce results. The only thing that is certain in our world today, and this goes for lawyers and law practice as well, is uncertainty. As a workers' compensation practitioner, I am keenly aware that my entire area of law practice could be changed by one or two sweeping legislative changes, particularly given the relative disparity in power between the insurance industry and that of individual injured workers. When I see my colleagues on the other side of the workers' compensation bar pushing for various "reforms" in the workers' compensation system, I remind them that their efforts may ultimately "reform" us out of business. Living with uncertainty is difficult. Heraclitus is attributed with stating that "No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man." This is particularly true for those of us in the legal profession where the law and every aspect of our individual client cases is a constantly moving target. The only way to deal with uncertainty, therefore, is to embrace it, accept it, and move forward.

Rita Mae Brown was right: "Good judgment comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgment." Along these lines, my judgment has improved significantly over the past 60 years. In fact, to paraphrase the words of Freddy Mercury, I've even made a few bad mistakes over the course of my life. Without passing judgment, however, I strongly suspect that I am not alone in this regard. A few years ago, I represented a client in a Social Security disability claim who had suffered a severe motor vehicle accident as a younger man where he sustained both severe orthopedic injuries as well as concussion-related cognitive impairment. Since his accident, he had drifted in and out of various jobs, and ultimately found himself in prison due to some bad judgment (and quite likely some bad lawyering). He spent 20 years in prison. When he was released, his attempts to reintegrate into society were difficult at best. While I knew his case would be an uphill battle from the start, and that few if any disability lawyers would take it on, I decided to represent him because taking on the occasional crusade and representing those who would otherwise not be able to obtain representation is one of the reasons most lawyers decide to become lawyers in the first place. While my client could have been bitter from his experience, I was surprised to see that he was not. While he realized that he had made some mistakes, including some errors in judgment as to how he put up a defense in his trial, he was able to maintain a positive mental outlook despite his adversity. During his adult life, he had lost everything, but he still maintained a sense of perspective that most others in his circumstances would be unable to do. One of the things my client shared with me during his case was this: "If you had never made any mistakes, you would be the stupidest person imaginable, and the first time you did ultimately make a mistake, you would be devastated because you wouldn't know how to deal with it." We were ultimately unsuccessful in our attempt to obtain benefits in my client's claim, in large part because it was impossible to obtain key medical records from Grady for my client's accident-related treatment 25 years prior. Even though we did not ultimately prevail, however, my client appreciated the effort on his behalf and that all attempts to obtain benefits on his behalf had been exhausted. As one of my colleagues reminded me years ago, and as I must often remind myself, when we have done our absolute best, our clients are often less concerned with the outcome of their cases than we think they would be. Mistakes are painful. It is difficult to move past mistakes, particularly when you are a lawyer with perfectionistic tendencies in an extremely demanding and unforgiving profession. But mistakes will be made, and the only way to benefit from past mistakes is to learn from them and move on.

One of the most important elements of an attorney-client relationship is trust. Without trust and confidence, even where an attorney is the most competent attorney possible and where they have their client's best interests at heart, the potential for a successful outcome is unlikely. Trust and confidence are a two-way street, however, where the client must trust their attorney, but also where the attorney must trust their client as well. One of the first things I tell new clients is that they must always be completely truthful with me. Nothing good ever happens when I am surprised later with information that a client may have withheld or otherwise failed to disclose. I have had a few cases in the past where I have had to withdraw from representation due to my client not being completely truthful with me from the outset, and where I am unable to continue to represent them in good conscience as a result. In other cases when I am surprised by previously undisclosed information, I am unable to obtain a favorable result for my client where I otherwise could have done so if I were able to address the adverse information from the outset. The relationship between attorney and client is one that requires trust, confidence, and honesty always. Without this bond of mutual trust, it is impossible to forge a successful working relationship or to effectively work toward a common goal. In the rare circumstance where I determine that my client and I have different goals for representation, or where I determine that the relationship of trust and confidence between us has broken down, I attempt to first restore the relationship or to otherwise to withdraw from further representation if restoration is not possible. The stakes are simply too high to do otherwise.