Richard Susskind – the man who influenced me to build and develop Dynamic Lawyers into what it is today – wrote a part in his book (“The End of Lawyers?”) that I want to discuss here for a moment.  That book is almost like a blueprint for me.  Heck, I even take that book when I go to media interviews.

There’s a part in that book that talks about online legal guidance.  He defines this as a disruptive technology that creates a paradigm shift.  Now you’re probably thinking: “What’s a disruptive technology and what’s a paradigm shift?”  Let me explain…  A disruptive technology, as Richard states in his book, is a technology that will disrupt the law firm (not the client).  This technology is new, innovative, and periodically emerge and fundamentally transform companies, industries, and markets.  A paradigm shift is a fundamental shift, transformation, evolution, etc. in the way something is done.  So with those definitions in mind…   Let’s get to the paradigm shift…

Before you would have to have face-to-face consultation with a lawyer (typically at their hourly rate).  So lawyers would have a monopoly over their knowledge and services.  Now, however, online legal guidance can be provided in a way that gives multiple people simultaneous access to a lawyer at a fraction of the cost.  Richard mentions a few examples, such as Linklaters, Clifford Chance, and American pioneer of online legal self-help, Rirchard Granat.

So onto my point…Dynamic Lawyers is offering legal guidance in various ways to compliment traditional legal services for those people who cannot otherwise afford a lawyer.  First, there’s the Craigslist.org-like make a post, get free quotes form local lawyers.  Lawyers compete so you win.  That’s a disruptive technology.  It sure beats having to go through the yellow pages or having to explain yourself on the phone to a lot of different lawyers. Next, there’s the free legal info that’s being provided through the DL Blog, the Legal Areas, the Stats and Reports, and through our affiliations with other websites (e.g. Legalline.ca, AdviceScene.com, IsThatLegal.ca, LegalTree.ca, etc.).  So prospective and actual users of legal services are becoming better educated.  Next, there’s the FREE Legal Health Checkup, an innovative way to check your legal health (and hopefully avoid nasty surprises later on).  Finally, our new Legal Forms + Video Guides project offers customizable and lawyer-prepared legal forms with a ton of guidance!

So there you have it!  We’ve got lots of more ideas, but we’ll focus for the time being on making the ones above even better!

DynamicLawyers truly is a disruptive technology that’s taking advantage of the paradigm shift we’re currently experiencing in the legal industry.

written by admin \\ tags: disruptive technology, dl, fundamental shift, lawyer, lawyers, media interviews, paradigm shift, Richard Susskind

As a follow up to my last blog about small claims court matters, let’s keep going…Remember: this isn’t legal advice.  It’s legal information.  If you’re looking for a small claims court lawyer in Ontario, make a post on Dynamic Lawyers.

Valuing the Claim
Remember: the amount of damages you suffered must be less than $25,000. If it is over this amount, you will have to reduce your claim to $25,000 exclusive of interest (pre and post judgment) and reimbursement of court costs or legal fees. If you are not prepared to reduce your claim to this limit, then you need to take your case to the Superior Court.

If you claim for more than $25,000 or if you split your claim into smaller portions, each under $25,000 but which altogether are over $25,000, you run the risk of having the Small Claims Court reject your claim, or a party challenging it.

The next question is how to quantify your claim. If your claim is based on an invoice or a contract price or a specific damage that is ascertainable, then you know the value of your claim. Enter this amount on the space provided on page 3 of the Plaintiff’s Claim that says “How Much?” Along with entering the amount of your claim, there is also a space on the form to claim interest. Interest may be based on an agreed upon amount (e.g. as per a contract) or in accordance with the current court rate (as per Courts of Justice Act).

If your claim is not based on an invoice or a contract price and is not readily ascertainable, then you can put down your best estimate of what your total damages will be when the dust settles up to the maximum $25,000. You can also claim interest on this types of damages.

When calculating your damages, some things to keep in mind are: out-of-pocket expenses, lost income, lost opportunities, loss of reputation, loss of value to property, etc. Emotional distress and psychological harm are not easily to quantify and there are stringent legal tests that must be met in order for a court to award damages on that basis. Besides, if you claim these latter types of damages, you may expose yourself to having to open up your medical history through the litigation.

…Next Up: Schedule A…

written by admin \\ tags: best estimate, contract price, court matters, courts of justice act, emotional distress, interest interest, invoice, judgment, lawyer, lawyers, legal advice, legal information, legal tests, plaintiff, pocket expenses, psychological harm, reputation, small claims court, superior court, types of damages

Thanks goes out to Marc Saltzman (tech guru; CFRB1010 host; guy who talks about new tech products before your movie starts in the theatre, etc.) for his great profile on Dynamic Lawyers.

Here’s the link on Marc’s Sync-Blog profile about Dynamic Lawyers.  Marc basically asked me the following 5 questions:

1. What is DynamicLawyers.com?
2. Please walk us through how the process works from start to finish.
3. How is this process better than traditional ways of seeking legal help?
4. If it’s free to the consumer, what’s the business model?
5. Finally, what’s your plans for expansion?

See my answers by checking out Marc’s blog.

written by admin \\ tags: business model, guru, lawyers, legal help, marc saltzman, new tech products, sync

Dynamic Lawyers is pleased to announce that it has issued a brand new report on the Victoria, B.C. lawyer, Lloyd Duhaime of Duhaime.org.  The latter is a free legal information website (it’s got a legal dictionary, history of Canadian law, crazy laws, how to guides, etc.).  Lloyd is a law + technology guru, a social entrepreneur, and an access to justice advocate.  You can check out the full profile report here:

written by admin \\ tags: lawyer lloyd duhaime, lawyers, profile report, victoria

Dynamic Lawyers is looking for a GTA real estate lawyer to respond to a new post (i.e. someone is looking for a GTA/Toronto real estate lawyer to help them with: assignments, double closings, lease option/sandwich lease options).  Here is the public post. If you are or know a GTA/Toronto real estate lawyer who does this type of work, please give me a shout at michael@dynamiclawyers.com or sign up here.  Remember: Dynamic Lawyers is currently having a 1 month free trial period for new lawyers who sign up today.  There’s no risk and no obligations!  What are you waiting for?  Register today!

written by admin \\ tags: free trial period, lawyers, lease option, lease options, real estate lawyer, sandwich, toronto real estate

Please note that the information provided herein is not legal advice and is provided for informational and educational purposes only.   If you need legal advice with respect to drafting non-compete agreement, questions about their validity and enforceability, or resolving disputes about non-compete clauses, you should seek professional assistance (e.g. make a post on Dynamic Lawyers).  We have Ontario independent contractor agreement lawyers registered on the website who can assess your business needs and help you draft, understand, negotiate, and resolve disputes involving non compete agreements and clauses – I should know, I’m one of them!  If you want to speak with me directly, you can contact me at michael@dynamiclawyers.com.

In this blog, I’ll be discussing non-compete or non-competition clauses in Ontario.  In the next blog, I’ll be discussing some Ontario caselaw dealing with non-compete clauses.

Non-Compete Clauses Generally
Non compete clauses or a covenant not to compete appear in commercial contracts and are designed to protect one party by preventing the other party from competing during and after the term of the contract for a set period of time.  The idea is that a party which is privy to the confidential information of another party should be prevented from simply leaving that party’s employ or partnership or engagement and competing with all the benefit of such information.  Therefore, parties relying on non compete clauses want to provide themselves the right to bring an interlocutory injunction (think of it like a mini trial prior to the trial) to the court to require the allegedly offending party to stop competing (due to the irreparable harm they caused) until the entire matter is disposed of at trial.

Validity and Enforceability of Non-Competes
Since the non-compete is a contractual provision, the principles of contract law apply to its validity, interpretation, and enforceability.  In Ontario, this means that this particular provision must be clear and certain enough (i.e. not too vague or missing information) to be enforceable.

There must also be “consideration”.  “Consideration” is a necessary element for every valid and enforceable contract.  It is a fundamental exchange.  Consideration is generally defined as an act, forbearance (i.e. not doing something the forbearer is legally entitled to do), or promise by the promisee undertaken in exchange for the promise.  Consideration requires that some benefit flow from the promisor or that there is some detriment to the promisee in exchange for the promise.  Consideration must move from the promisee.  The party seeking to enforce the promise must show consideration.  Motive or desire to make a promise does not constitute good consideration.

Finally, even if the non compete is clear and certain enough to be valid, arguments may challenge its enforceability on the basis that:

• the party agreeing to the provision did not have legal capacity (e.g. they were a minor or mentally incapacitated) to enter into the non-compete agreement;
• the party agreeing to the provision was under duress or undue influence;
• the non-compete was unconscionable (i.e. substantively and procedurally unfair);
• the party agreeing to the provision relied on a misrepresentation (e.g. fraudulent, negligent, etc.) made by the other party; or
• the party wanting to rely on the non-compete had fundamentally breached the agreement;
• the non-compete is contrary to public policy;
• the non-compete is not justifiable;
• etc.

Non-Compete template langauge
I’ve come across a lot of non-compete provisions.

They basically say that the same thing…something along the lines of:

That Party X shall not, during the term of the agreement and for a period of X years after the expiration or termination of the agreement (irrespective of the time, manner or cause of the termination), either directly or indirectly, as principal or agent of any party, in any manner whatsoever (e.g. as employee, partner, shareholder, manager, independent contractor, joint venturer, etc.) compete in the business of Party Z within a certain geographic area.

Here, the word “compete” can be embellished upon in very specific or very general wording.   For example, the business of Party Z could be defined in the recitals of the agreement.

Right after the non-compete, you also typically find acknowledgments by Party X saying that the non-compete is fair and reasonable in all respects, having regard to Party Z’s business within the geographic area.

written by admin \\ tags: caselaw, commercial contracts, contractual provision, independent contractor agreement, interlocutory injunction, irreparable harm, lawyers, non compete agreements, non compete clauses, period of time, professional assistance

The podcast of my 30-minute radio interview with Dale Goldhawk on Goldhawk Fights Back (AM740) is now available here.  Just scroll down to the bottom.  Recall that this live interview dealt with Dynamic Lawyers, legal fees, access to justice, contingency fees, what to discuss with a lawyer at the initial consultation, etc.

written by admin \\ tags: dale godlhawk, goldhawk fights back, lawyers, legal fees, podcast

If you’re looking for a great legal forum, then you should check out Advice Scene – a new place where people can post their legal questions and lawyers (and even law students, paralegals, and judges) can register and respond.  BEST OF ALL: it’s FREE for the user and allows responding parties to showcase their knowledge in a particular legal area.  The information provided on Advice Scene is not legal advice, but rather legal information.  The website is a great resource for other things as well, including a lawyer directory, free legal forms, Canadian legal links, the Thin Skull Blog, and a unique morality meter (which asks questions and allows people to rate their answers).  It’s all great because it promotes access to justice…

written by admin \\ tags: blog, cool website, free legal forms, law students, lawyer directory, lawyers, legal advice, legal forum, legal information, legal questions, paralegals, place where people, showcase

We’re looking for a lawyer who practices wills and estates in the Mississauga/Brampton area.   Someone has made a new public post looking for such a lawyer.  Here’s the nuts and bolts of the post: “How much does it cost to get a Will, Living will, and Power of attorney for a couple? In Mississauga or Brampton.”  If you are a lawyer who can respond to these prospective clients, then you should register asap on Dynamic Lawyers.   Just go here and register as a lawyer.  After payment is processed (it’s only $50/month for the year), your account will be activated and you’ll be able to sign in and respond to these users.

written by admin \\ tags: Dynamic Lawyers, lawyer, lawyers, mississauga, Mississauga Brampton wills and estates lawyer

I am pleased to announce that, as of July 1, 2009, Dynamic Lawyers will post the hour-long video from June 3rd, 2009’s taping of Goldhawk Live (courtesy of Rogers TV).  In that video, in case you missed it, I was one of the panelists (along with Lorne Sossin of U of T and Pro Bono Law Ontario, Judy McCormack of Downtown Legal Services, and Justice Harvey Brownstone – author of Tug of War).  We discussed the issue: “Are Lawyers Too Expensive?” for the whole hour.  Be sure to tune in when the video comes out!

written by admin \\ tags: brownstone, lawyers, panelists, pro bono law ontario, rogers, tug of war, tv spot