When deciding whether to accept an engagement or not, it’s important to look into factors
that will help someone avoid undesirable clients that may be risky. I would consider and
thoroughly screen the engaging attorney because attorneys have a common goal of helping
their clients win a case, even if it means sacrificing/hurting the expert’s reputation (Rufus
et al., 2014). Rufus et al. (2014) explained some signs of a potentially risky client: An
attorney who demands rush assignments, fails to provide material evidence, pushes the
expert outside their areas of expertise, fails to sign and return an engagement letter, or has
a reputation for slow or no payment (Rufus et al., 2014). Another factor that I would look
into is gaining an understanding of what competencies are required of this engagement and
evaluate whether or not my education/skill set qualifies me to do this job. I would consider
what is being asked of me and the conditions of the engagement. Is their available and
reliable data? What are the travel requirements? Also, it’s important to consider the
payment arrangement. How and when will payments be made?
In this situation, attorney Joseph Leslie seems like he would be a difficult client to work
with. He doesn’t treat his staff well as he makes them work long hours and requires them
to provide information very quickly. He also doesn’t pay his consultants and experts on
time. These are all red flags. Based on his reputation, I personally wouldn’t work with
him. If someone else chose to work with him, I’d recommend certain circumstances be
met before accepting him as a client. I’d recommend accepting him as a client only if he’s
paying an hourly fee with a retainer. This way is pretty straight-forward and the expert’s
work is billed as work is performed. The retainer is a payment that is collected ahead of
time for services before they are performed (Rufus et al., 2014). Since this attorney
doesn’t pay on time, or may not even pay, this requirement is necessary. Although an
engagement letter is not required, I’d recommend having one. This is a contract that
protects all those involved, explains the legal relationship, and lays out the expert’s
understanding of their responsibilities (Rufus et al., 2014). If this attorney changed things
up during the engagement that was not in alignment with the expert, then the expert can go
back to the engagement letter to support their stance.
Reference
Rufus, R., Miller, L., & Hahn, W. (2014). Forensic accounting. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson Education.
