Paralegal vs Attorney?
Paralegal vs. Lawyer From a Lawyer’s Perspective
When a client asks, “Do I need a lawyer?” It is usually because they are considering representing themselves in a legal matter. In that situation the answer is almost always, yes, you need an attorney. Self-representation rarely works and can lead to damaging results. But if the question is based on budget it presents a true dilemma.
When a client asks for legal help that doesn’t require a lawyer there is an alternative thanks to the Oregon State Bar’s recognition of paralegals as a resource. The answer again lies in the question of budget. A paralegal can perform many tasks as well as a lawyer for far less cost. However, a paralegal cannot offer you legal advice and cannot represent you in court.
Knowing when to use a paralegal instead of a lawyer is relatively simple. If both can perform the task, choose the paralegal. If that finishes the job, you’re done. If it doesn’t, move forward with a lawyer. Even if you end up needing a lawyer in the end, you will still have saved money, which in the end may be used for unresolvable issues.
For example, say you want to file a divorce. First you need to file a Petition for Dissolution. The lawyer will charge substantially more for the preparation of the petition. Say you have reached an agreement with your spouse. The paralegal can probably draft the settlement. Your spouse contests the divorce. You’ll likely need a lawyer. But you will have saved money for conflict resolution that would have been spent on drafting and filing.
In the end the paralegal and the lawyer can work as a team continuing the process of dividing tasks during the litigation to allocate costs and resources effectively.
Thanks to the new Oregon rules the client can benefit by paying on a task oriented scale. I have been a domestic relations attorney for 30 years. I have implemented the new paralegal/lawyer rule and found it to be highly effective. I have also experienced much greater client satisfaction.
