Our fourth question of the month. At this point, you know what to do.
As always, please use the comments box to add thoughts, glosses, and, well, commentary.
Is the prohibition against non-lawyers having an ownership interest in a law firm still a good idea?
- No, because the prohibition impedes firms' ability to recruit talented business professionals who are increasingly necessary to address the complex business challenges firms are facing. (40%, 59 Votes)
- No, it's an anachronism better suited to an earlier era. (24%, 35 Votes)
- Yes, to ensure clients' interests and lawyers' professional judgment are insulated from conflicts of interest that can come with outside ownership. (19%, 28 Votes)
- No, because it unfairly deprives law firms of access to alternative sources of capital and therefore limits their opportunities. (10%, 14 Votes)
- Hard to say in the abstract: The only way to find out is to repeal the prohibition and let the market decide. (7%, 11 Votes)
- Yes, because lawyers better understand the unique challenges of running a law firm. (0%, 0 Votes)
Total Voters: 147