Imagine seeing five different exit signs on the highway for the same destination. Confusing, right? Multiple sites for one firm can be similarly misleading for a law firm’s prospective clients. Some firms come to us with several sites for a single practice. They may have been told that this is a way to get more irons in the fire and dominate the SERPs. While there are a few exceptions, the rule is that a multi-site strategy usually does more harm than good for a firm’s visibility. Let’s cover the whole scope: why multiple websites appeal to law firms, how Google treats a single brand with multiple sites and the SEO advantages of a single-site approach. Why Firms Think They Need Multiple Sites Tricking Google with multiple websites? A delightful illusion, unfortunately, that many lawyers cling to in a misguided attempt to dominate the search engine results pages (SERPs). Firms may feel that they could achieve ranking with several URLs for the same keywords, filling the first page of Google with multiple sites that drive traffic back to the main brand. However, the multiple-site approach to SEO for lawyers tends to backfire. SERP cannibalization often leads to multiple pages and multiple sites from the same company competing for the same keywords. This can confuse search engines and dilute page authority. The result is that none of the pages rank well. Plus, managing multiple sites stretches you thin, requiring unique content and SEO strategies for each site which leads to inefficiencies and inconsistency instead of boosting visibility. Google’s View On Multiple Sites “Duplicate content is not only confusing for users, it’s also confusing for search engines. Creating one great site instead of multiple microsites is the best way to encourage organic growth over time.” –Google Google encourages businesses to focus on a single website. This is especially important in light of new algorithm updates that combat spam. Google ranks pages based on the authority of the site. Backlinks are generally good for SEO, but they can also be very spammy. A huge influx of backlinks, especially on new sites, may be viewed as inauthentic or spammy. Quality Matters More Than Quantity Increasingly, Google is looking at other signals beyond backlinks to assess a site’s authority and trustworthiness. Instead of spreading your SEO budget thin across multiple domains, Google is saying it’s more effective to create high-quality content and build genuine relationships with reputable websites. SEO Disadvantages of Multiple Sites Splitting your resources: Each new site requires time and effort to develop content, gain backlinks, and establish domain authority. Bye-bye budget: The financial commitment to succeeding with multiple sites is significant. Most firms are better off investing in a single, optimized platform. Reputation issues: Multiple sites can confuse prospects. When people encounter similar content across different sites, they may question your firm’s legitimacy. Decreased trust means decision fatigue and decreased leads. SEO Advantages of a Single Site Focusing your efforts on one robust website can more effectively communicate your value proposition and engage your audience. Reputation enhancement: By consolidating efforts into one site, you strengthen your firm’s authority and trustworthiness for both search engines and users. Better ROI: A single-site strategy offers better ROI by streamlining your SEO efforts. This approach simplifies management, reduces costs, and allows more investment in high-quality content, user experience, and technical SEO. Clearer data: A single site makes monitoring analytics easier, offering more accurate insights into audience behavior for informed decision-making. Exceptions There are a few situations where multiple sites might be beneficial. Sub-brands: If you’re experimenting with reaching a whole new audience under an entirely different brand, you might try a separate site to avoid confusing your existing clientele. Perhaps you’ve been serving car accident personal injury clients in Chicago but you want to try reaching farm worker injuries in rural Illinois. In this case, the SEO strategies will be very different regardless. (We should note that we don’t usually recommend creating a second brand to reach different audiences; often when firms try to “branch out” with new brands they struggle with authority signals because the brand doesn’t have any history or momentum.) Microsite: If you’re launching a product or promoting an upcoming event, you may want to develop a one-off site. But the SEO investment in microsites should be proportional. Internationalization: If you’re working in multiple countries, you may need dedicated sites tailored to local markets. These sites should offer content and user experiences that resonate with cultural, linguistic, and legal differences (i.e., it goes beyond mere translation). In each of these cases, separate websites can help ensure that your messaging aligns with your intended audience all while ultimately supporting your broader business goals. Of course, multiple domains make a lot of sense if you’re trying to get ahead of common misspellings or name variations or prevent competitors from snapping up related terms. But these domains will usually point to the same single website. Review and Next Steps The right approach to legal SEO should combine tested principles with personalized tactics specifically adapted to your firm, your market, and your growth goals.

Whether you’re confident in your social media skills or still think it’s something “the kids use,” social media can give your networking efforts a significant boost. Social media is just one tactic in your toolbelt, and how you use it depends on your goals. Let’s explore eight ways social media can enhance your professional networking and development. If any of these align with your goals, it’s time to make social media a key component of your strategy. 1. Professional Networking Social media platforms, especially LinkedIn, offer incredible opportunities for professional networking. Lawyers are particularly comfortable with LinkedIn, which allows you to connect with peers, join professional groups, and engage in discussions. By following thought leaders, industry experts, and professional organizations, you can stay updated on legal trends, developments, and best practices. Tip: Follow relevant hashtags that resonate with your practice areas or client interests, and engage with content in those spaces. 2. Client Outreach & Education Social media is a great way to raise awareness about your services. Posting educational content ensures that your clients see you as a go-to resource. However, it’s crucial to know where your audience is. While LinkedIn is excellent for engaging with other lawyers, your clients might be hanging out elsewhere. Find the platforms where your clients are most active and meet them there. 3. Storytelling for Deeper Connections Storytelling is one of the most powerful tools on social media. Sharing success stories, client testimonials, or your personal journey can foster deeper connections with your audience. Whether it’s highlighting the impact of your legal work or demonstrating your expertise, stories make your posts more engaging and humanize your work. Interested in learning more about storytelling in legal? I’d be happy to chat further on how to effectively use this tool. 4. Advocacy & Promoting Causes Social media can be an effective platform for promoting causes, raising awareness for social justice issues, and advocating for legal reforms. By sharing success stories and engaging with community-based initiatives, you can build support for important legal work. 5. Building Community Relationships Social media helps you build stronger relationships within your community. You can answer general questions, provide real-time updates, and promote workshops or community events. It’s also a great platform to promote legal clinics and reach a wider audience. Remember: Always be mindful of the platforms your community members use most frequently. 6. Professional Development LinkedIn provides excellent access to webinars, online courses, and resources shared by other attorneys. By staying engaged with these opportunities, you can continue developing your professional skills and expanding your knowledge. 7. Building Your Reputation By consistently sharing valuable content and engaging with other professionals online, you can establish yourself as a knowledgeable and trustworthy legal professional. Social media also offers an opportunity to connect with potential collaborators, including legal professionals, nonprofits, and community organizations. 8. Managing Your Social Media Presence Maintaining professionalism on social media is crucial. Always uphold confidentiality and legal standards when engaging online. To build engagement and trust, be consistent with your posting, respond to interactions, and use a mix of multimedia to make your content more engaging. Maximizing Your Strategy: Connecting with Community Partners Even if your focus is on in-person engagement, social media offers valuable insights. Here’s how to leverage it: Follow them on social media: Learn more about your community partners by following them on platforms like LinkedIn to stay updated on their latest news and events. Google Alerts: Set up alerts for mentions of your key contacts in the news, helping you stay informed about their activities. Leverage mutual connections: LinkedIn makes it easy to see if you have mutual connections within organizations you’re trying to engage. Utilize these relationships to build stronger ties. Networking at Events: Enhancing Your Efforts If you’re attending a networking event, social media can be a powerful tool before and after: Connect with attendees: If you have access to an attendee list, reach out via LinkedIn with a personalized note explaining why you’re connecting. If not, follow up with people you meet after the event. Build thought leadership: Consider developing your own thought leadership content based on the interests of your target companies. Engage with their posts by commenting, sharing insights, and starting conversations. Developing Your Own Platform While platforms like LinkedIn are great for sharing content, I always advise creating your own platform—a place where you own your content. This could be a blog or a personal website. Why? Social media platforms can change or disappear, taking your content with them. Having your own space ensures you maintain control over your thought leadership. Final tip: Use relevant hashtags and engage with the discussions happening in the comments and replies. Sharing posts of interest to key contacts helps keep you on their radar. Engage Fully with Your Social Media Presence When using LinkedIn, identify a few groups that align with your interests. Engage by asking questions, posting comments, and sharing relevant content. This active participation will not only expand your network but also generate new content ideas and opportunities for collaboration. By incorporating these strategies, social media can transform your networking efforts, making it easier to connect with key contacts, develop professional relationships, and build your reputation as a thought leader in the legal community.

Having served as a mediator for over 30 years, I have observed in-house counsel trying, with varying success, to manage outside counsel and others in the mediation process, including the neutral. Optimal results in mediation are not assured simply by retaining highly qualified outside counsel and mediators. As a result of my experience, I offer in-house counsel the following practical tips to make better use of these chosen professionals to achieve more favorable outcomes for your company. These tips also provide guidance to outside counsel and other neutrals as they seek to work with in-house counsel and each other to improve their own effectiveness as well as that of each participant in this important dispute resolution process. One of the most critical steps in optimizing use of outside counsel and mediators is to establish clear roles and expectations from the outset. This clarity helps prevent misunderstandings, streamlines the process and helps everyone work toward the same goals. When working with outside counsel, start by drafting a detailed negotiation strategy that outlines: The scope of the negotiation strategy Key performance indicators (KPIs) and success metrics Reporting requirements and frequency Budget constraints and billing procedures Decision-making authority and escalation processes Make clear to your mediators: The desired outcome of the mediation from your company’s long-term business perspective Any non-negotiable terms or deal-breakers The level of settlement authority granted to the mediation team Whom you may need to consult to obtain different authority, either as to amount or non-monetary terms By setting these parameters early, you create a framework for accountability and efficiency. Regular check-ins to review and adjust these expectations as needed will help maintain alignment throughout the process. Effective communication is the cornerstone of any successful litigation management strategy. As in-house counsel, you play a pivotal role in facilitating open and transparent communication between all parties involved. Implement the following practices to enhance communication: Schedule regular status meetings with outside counsel to discuss case progress, strategy adjustments and any emerging issues. Establish a secure, centralized platform for document sharing and collaboration. This procedure helps provide all parties with access to the most up-to-date information and reduces the risk of miscommunication. Encourage direct communication between outside counsel and key stakeholders within your company when appropriate. This action can help outside counsel better understand the business context and tailor their strategy accordingly. Create a clear escalation protocol for urgent matters or decisions that require immediate attention. Consider organizing and participating in pre-mediation conferences with the mediator to discuss case dynamics, potential roadblocks and strategies for moving negotiations forward. By fostering a culture of open communication, you will be better positioned to address challenges proactively and capitalize on opportunities as they arise. Many in-house counsel make the mistake of viewing mediation as a last resort or a mere formality before trial. However, engaging with a mediator early in the dispute resolution process can provide significant advantages. Consider the following approaches: Involve the mediator in case assessment: A skilled mediator can offer valuable insights into the strengths and weaknesses of your case from a neutral perspective. This can help you refine your strategy and set realistic expectations for settlement. Use the mediator to facilitate information exchange: In complex cases, mediators can help structure and oversee the exchange of key information between parties. This procedure can streamline the discovery process and potentially lead to earlier resolutions. Explore creative solutions: Mediators often have experience with a wide range of dispute resolution techniques. Engaging them early allows for the exploration of innovative settlement structures that may not be available through traditional litigation. Address emotional barriers: In high-stakes disputes, emotions can often hinder productive negotiations. Skilled mediators can help diffuse tension and create an environment conducive to settlement discussions. Conduct pre-mediation sessions: These sessions can help identify and address potential roadblocks before the formal mediation begins, increasing the chances of a successful outcome. By leveraging the mediator’s experience throughout the dispute resolution process, you can often achieve more favorable outcomes more efficiently. While outside counsel will be responsible for much of the day-to-day case management, as in-house counsel, you play a crucial role in developing and overseeing the overall case strategy. This strategy should align with your company’s broader business objectives and risk tolerance. To develop a comprehensive case strategy: Conduct a thorough risk assessment: Work with key stakeholders to identify potential impacts on the business, including financial, reputational and operational risks. Set clear objectives: Define what constitutes a “win” for your company, whether it is a specific settlement amount, preserving a business relationship or setting a legal precedent. Develop decision trees: Map out various scenarios and decision points to help guide your approach as the case progresses. Allocate resources effectively: Determine which aspects of the case require the most attention, and allocate your budget and personnel accordingly. Plan for contingencies: Anticipate potential challenges or setbacks, and develop response plans in advance. Align the strategy with business goals: The legal strategy should support the company’s overall business objectives and should not create unintended consequences. By developing a comprehensive strategy and sharing it with outside counsel and the mediator, you are increasing the likelihood that all efforts are aligned and focused on achieving the best possible outcome for your company. The conclusion of a mediation, whether successful or not, presents a valuable learning opportunity. Conducting thorough post-mediation debriefs can help you refine your approach for future disputes and continuously improve your use of outside counsel and mediators. Key elements of an effective post-mediation debrief include: Outcome analysis: Evaluate the mediation outcome against your initial objectives. Identify areas where you achieved your goals and where you fell short. Strategy assessment: Review the effectiveness of your overall strategy and tactics. Determine what worked well and what could be improved. Team performance: Assess the performance of both in-house and outside counsel. Identify strengths to leverage and areas for improvement. Mediator effectiveness: Evaluate the mediator’s performance and consider whether you would use them again for similar cases. Lessons learned: Document key takeaways and insights that can be applied to future disputes. Process improvement: Identify any procedural or systemic issues that hindered the mediation process, and develop plans to address them. Client feedback: If appropriate, solicit feedback from key stakeholders within your company about their perceptions of the process and outcome. By consistently conducting these debriefs, you create a feedback loop that allows for continuous improvement in your approach to dispute resolution. As in-house counsel, effectively managing outside counsel and mediators is crucial to achieving favorable outcomes in complex legal disputes. By implementing these five tips—clearly defining roles and expectations, facilitating open communication, leveraging mediator experience early, preparing comprehensive case strategies and conducting post-mediation debriefs—you can significantly enhance the value you derive from these professional relationships.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has revolutionized content creation, turning what was once a time-consuming task into a smooth, efficient process. With AI tools, marketers can now produce high-quality content faster, allowing them to focus on strategic goals. But how can law firms leverage these advancements to enhance their marketing efforts? In this article, we’ll delve into the top types of AI-generated content, insights from HubSpot’s State of AI survey, and practical tips for integrating AI into your law firm’s content strategy. 1. Top Content Types for Generative AI AI-generated content is becoming increasingly popular among marketers. According to HubSpot’s State of AI survey, 46% of U.S. marketers regularly use AI to create marketing content. The most common content types include: Emails and Newsletters: AI can optimize email timing, generate catchy subject lines, and perform A/B testing to boost engagement. Social Media Posts: AI helps create content ideas and headlines and even optimize posting schedules based on audience behavior. Blog Posts and Long-Form Content: AI tools assist with topic generation, drafting, and personalizing content for specific audiences. Product Descriptions, Landing Pages, and Whitepapers: AI helps create concise, impactful messaging for various marketing channels. 2. AI-Generated Marketing Content in 2024 As AI continues to evolve, its role in marketing will only grow. In 2024, the global market for AI in marketing is projected to reach $2.6 billion, driven by businesses leveraging AI to create personalized, scalable content. Law firms can use AI to produce high-quality content across platforms like social media, blogs, and email marketing. With AI, you can automate repetitive tasks, freeing time for more strategic activities like client relationship management and case strategy. 3. Pros and Cons of AI-Generated Content Marketing Pros: Efficiency and Scalability: AI tools allow you to generate content quickly and efficiently, maintaining a consistent online presence. Personalization: AI analyzes client behavior, enabling more personalized content that resonates with your audience. Cost-Effectiveness: Automating content creation reduces labor costs, allowing your firm to allocate resources more effectively. Data-Driven Insights: AI can analyze vast data sets to uncover trends and optimize content strategies. Cons: Quality and Authenticity Concerns: AI-generated content can sometimes feel generic or disconnected, requiring human review and editing. Ethical and Privacy Issues: AI tools rely on large data sets, which can raise privacy concerns. Ensuring compliance with regulations like GDPR or the CCPA is critical. Dependence on Technology: Over-reliance on AI can stifle creativity, so it’s important to maintain a balance between AI-generated content and human input. 4. AI-Generated Content Marketing Tips Treat AI as a Collaborator: AI should enhance, not replace, your content creation process. Use AI to generate outlines, research, and initial drafts, then personalize the content with your firm’s unique insights and expertise. Automate SEO and Content Distribution: AI tools like HubSpot’s content assistant and SEO platforms can optimize your content for search engines, ensuring your law firm’s content is always relevant and visible. Focus on Dynamic Content Optimization: Leverage AI to monitor real-time data on how different segments of your audience interact with your content. Use Creative AI Prompts: When brainstorming, AI-generated prompts can inspire unique angles or topics that you may not have considered. This keeps your content fresh and engaging. Key Takeaways AI has the potential to transform your law firm’s marketing strategy by streamlining content creation, enhancing personalization, and providing data-driven insights. While AI-generated content offers efficiency and scalability, it’s essential to balance its use with human oversight to ensure quality and authenticity.

CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT Civil Procedure/Discovery City of Los Angeles v. Pricewaterhousecoopers, LLP (2024) _ Cal.5th _ , 2024 WL 3894042: The California Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeal decision that had reversed the trial court’s order concluding that plaintiff had been engaging in an egregious pattern of discovery abuse as part of a campaign to cover up its misconduct, and ordering plaintiff to pay $2.5 million in discovery sanctions to defendant. The Court of Appeal concluded that the trial court did not have the authority to issue the order under the general provisions of the Civil Discovery Act concerning discovery sanctions, Code of Civil Procedure sections 2023.010 and 2023.030. The California Supreme Court disagreed, concluding that under the general sanctions provisions of the Civil Discovery Act, Code of Civil Procedure sections 2023.010 and 2023.030, the trial court had the authority to impose monetary sanctions for plaintiff’s pattern of discovery abuse. The trial court was not limited to imposing sanctions for each individual violation of the rules governing depositions or other methods of discovery. (August 22, 2024.) Employment Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc. (2024) _ Cal.5th _ , 2024 WL 3611975: The California Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeal’s decision that had affirmed the trial court’s order denying motions, by other employees who had filed separate PAGA actions against defendant employer, to intervene in this PAGA action and submit objections to the settlement and to vacate the judgment. This case involved what has become a common scenario in PAGA litigation: multiple persons claiming to be an “aggrieved employee” within the meaning of PAGA file separate and independent lawsuits seeking recovery of civil penalties from the same employer for the same alleged Labor Code violations. The California Supreme Court observed that a PAGA plaintiff may use the ordinary tools of civil litigation that are consistent with the statutory authorization to commence an action such as taking discovery, filing motions, and attending trial. However, the California Supreme Court concluded that it would be inconsistent with the scheme the Legislature enacted for PAGA cases to allow other PAGA plaintiffs to intervene in an ongoing PAGA action of another plaintiff asserting overlapping claims, to require the trial court to consider objections to a proposed settlement in that overlapping action, and to allow other PAGA plaintiffs to move to vacate the judgment in that action. This conclusion best comports with the relevant provisions of PAGA as read in their statutory context, in light of PAGA’s legislative history, and in consideration of the consequences that would follow from adopting the interpretation requested by the other PAGA plaintiffs. (August 1, 2024.) Torts Rattagan v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (2024) _ Cal.5th _ , 2024 WL 3894629: The California Supreme Court answered a question posed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Under Robinson Helicopter v. Dana Corp. (2004) 34 Cal.4th 979 (Robinson), may a plaintiff assert a tort claim for fraudulent concealment arising from or related to the performance of a contract? The California Supreme Court said the answer is a qualified yes. A plaintiff may assert a fraudulent concealment cause of action based on conduct occurring in the course of a contractual relationship if the elements of the claim can be established independently of the parties’ contractual rights and obligations, and the tortious conduct exposes the plaintiff to a risk of harm beyond the reasonable contemplation of the parties when they entered into the contract. The economic loss doctrine does not apply if defendant’s breach caused physical damage or personal injury beyond the economic losses caused by the contractual breach and defendant violated a duty flowing, not from the contract, but from a separate, legally recognized tort obligation. (August 22, 2024.) CALIFORNIA COURTS OF APPEAL Arbitration Anoke v. Twitter (2024) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2024 WL 4230621: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order denying plaintiffs’ petition for an order compelling defendants to pay plaintiffs’ arbitration-related attorney fees under Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.97 for failure to pay the initial arbitration fees within 30 days of the original invoice. The arbitration provider sent an invoice to all counsel for the initial fees of defendants of $27,200. Plaintiffs’ counsel paid the fees the same day. When defense counsel checked the system the next day, the arbitration provider’s system showed the fees were paid in full. Plaintiffs’ counsel notified the arbitration provider of his mistake this same day. The arbitration provider sent a refund to plaintiffs’ counsel, and later sent an invoice for defendants’ initial arbitration fees which defendants paid within 30 days of that invoice. The trial court properly denied plaintiffs’ petition. Because the arbitrator nullified the first invoice after plaintiffs’ attorney mistakenly paid it, and defendants timely paid the second invoice, defendants met the statutory deadline. (C.A. 1st, filed August 27, 2024, published September 18, 2024.) Insurance Fox Paine & Co., LLC, et al. v. Twin City Fire Insurance Co. et al. (2024) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2024 WL 4093921: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order sustaining demurrers, without leave to amend, by two defendant excess carriers named in plaintiffs’ third amended complaint against three excess carrier defendants alleging, among other things, that they had failed to pay covered claims in underlying litigation and alleging causes of action for breach of contract, declaratory judgment, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duty . The trial court properly overruled the demurrer of defendant excess carrier Twin City Fire Insurance Company (who issued the first excess and third excess policies), properly concluding that plaintiffs had sufficiently alleged exhaustion of the primary insurance policy such that the first excess coverage policy was triggered. The trial court properly sustained, without leave to amend, the demurrers of the other two excess carrier defendants (who issued the second and fourth excess policies), properly concluding that plaintiffs did not allege exhaustion of the underlying policies. The trial court also properly rejected plaintiffs argument that excess carrier defendant St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company had waived or was estopped from asserting lack of exhaustion as a coverage defense because it had settled with other insured entities in a separate action. (C.A. 1st, September 5, 2024.) Legal Malpractice Grossman v. Wakeman (2024) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2024 WL 4034844: The Court of Appeal reversed the judgment for plaintiffs, following a jury trial, that awarded plaintiffs damages totaling $9.5 million. Plaintiffs were the sons and grandchildren of decedent Dr. A. Richard Grossman. Defendants were the attorney (and his law firm) who represented decedent, Dr. Grossman, in preparing estate planning documents in 2012 which disinherited plaintiffs. Decedent left his entire estate to his fourth wife, Elizabeth Grossman, whom he married in 2000 and whom he remained married to until his death in 2014. The jury concluded that plaintiffs were the intended beneficiaries of the estate planning documents, and defendants had breached the standard of care owed to plaintiffs in the preparation of the documents and plaintiffs were damaged by defendants’ negligence. The Court of Appeal disagreed, concluding that the evidence was insufficient to show that defendant owed a duty of care to plaintiffs because there was no clear, certain and undisputed evidence of decedent’s intent to benefit plaintiffs by leaving his estate to them instead of to Elizabeth Grossman. (C.A. 2nd, September 4, 2024.) Torts Kim v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (2024) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2024 WL 4259284: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff’s action for personal injuries suffered when his car was hit by an Uber driver who had turned his Uber App to “offline” about four minutes before the accident and more than a mile away from the accident site. Plaintiff argued that Uber drivers can go from “offline” to “available” within 30 seconds and they are able to see an Uber map showing areas of high demand for rides even when they are “offline,” claiming there was a triable issue of fact as to whether the driver was operating his vehicle with the intention of switching back to available status at the time of his collision with plaintiff. The trial court properly concluded that plaintiff’s arguments were speculative and properly granted the motion for summary judgment. (C.A. 2nd, filed August 30, 2024, published September 20, 2024.)