Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Determining Who Should Serve As the Billing Partner

By Joel A. Rose
November 01, 2019

Due to a law firm's team-oriented approach to business development and client service efforts, it is not always clear who should logically and most efficiently serve as the billing partner for a client or a particular client matter. A person should only be a billing partner if he or she is or will be performing the functions outline herein.

Typically, a partner who "gets the call" on a new matter for an existing client should, as a partner courtesy, confer with the person who has primarily served as billing partner before opening the matter. If the person who has historically served as billing partner is continuing to fulfill the billing partner responsibilities (see below), he or she should usually be the billing partner for the new matter, absent any other circumstances which might dictate otherwise. "Getting the call," by itself, does not mean that the person should be the billing partner on the new matter. It may be that the historical billing partner has done an outstanding job of cross-selling, is continuing to fulfill billing partner responsibilities (including those for the new matters), and should continue to be the billing partner for the new matter. Similar considerations apply for new clients.

On the other hand, because a person was the billing partner on the first matter ever opened does not necessarily mean that he or she should be the billing partner on all subsequent matters. Such would be the case if the billing partner has not been performing the functions outlined herein and has had no role in developing the new matter. By way of illustration, Partner A gets a call from a mid-level manager to perform a small project for a client. Partner A performs the work, closes the file and has no further contact with client or with client decision makers. Later, after independent marketing efforts by Partner B to other decision makers in the organization, client retains the firm to perform a major project. Partner A has had no role, or even knowledge, that the marketing effort has taken place. In fact, the client does not even know that Partner A had done a project previously. Partner A should not reasonably expect to be the billing partner on the new matter.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.