More on this when I get over the project hump.
There is a business in America that is essentially a marketing club. What they do is advertise lawyers throughout the country as “Super Lawyers”. (I am not sure if you get a cape with that.) It used to be–and I know that this was the situation in New Jersey–that the supreme courts frowned upon this kind of advertising and considered it unethical for many decades. But, in recent times, the United States Supreme Court decisions about advertising have knocked down the barriers that the profession had put up on what lawyers could actually say about their services. Also, what others, like advertising clubs, could say about other lawyers.
“Super Lawyers” uses some win-loss criteria in determining who the business feels is a super lawyer. Using these yardsticks, it forces lawyers who want the designation to try and game their stats–so that they continue to have the valuable marketing designation–and/or cape.
I feel that this scheme, then, gets in the way of doing what is best for the client. Sometimes, it is better for the client to dialogue and settle. But not for the lawyer who’s in the Super Lawyer game!
[more when I get a chance]