The Personal Touch of a Small Firm

  The law office maintains the personal touch and cost-effectiveness of a small firm.
One of the virtues of selecting a small law firm is that it allows the client and attorney the opportunity to interact more frequently.   Absent the bureaucracy of a large law firm, the client does not have to worry about having work siphoned off to inexperienced subordinates, or being billed for small items, such as phone calls and photocopies, the way large firms do.   The small firm model offers a cost-effective alternative to the large law firms, whose high billing rates are often based more on reputation than performance.

The Effectiveness of a Large Firm

  Although small, the office has the firepower of a large firm.   With a recent United States Supreme Court victory - KP Permanent Make-Up Inc. v. Lasting Impression I, Inc., 543 U.S. 111 (2004), and victories and settlements in cases where millions of dollars were at stake, the firm can handle the largest and most complex of cases.   Indeed, the firm has successfully handled civil and criminal cases against large, powerful opponents, such as The United States Government, The Federal Republic of Germany, and Fortune 500 giants.   Mr. Machat’s experience and energy level is part of the reason that the firm can compete with much larger firms; also, the firm makes superior use of computer technology, in drafting documents and performing legal research.   The firm’s ability to handle difficult cases is supplemented by the practice of entering into partnerships with outside counsel, on occasion, due to the complexity of a case, the sheer volume of work, or the legal topics involved.

Working with Entrepreneurs

  As a small firm, founded by an entrepreneur, the law office enjoys assisting other entrepreneurs take a business from zero to grossing millions.    The firm has obtained settlements and judgments in the hundreds of thousands, and even in excess of a million dollars.

  On various occasions, the firm has taken on and defeated larger law firms that have far more resources at their disposal.   For instance, Mr. Machat’s recent victory before the United States Supreme Court -KP Permanent Make-Up Inc. v. Lasting Impression I, Inc., 543 U.S. 111 (2004), came against a 1000-man international law firm and the Man who wrote the book on trademark law.   Of course, the firm also represents larger and more powerful clients.