Ok, but I've seen some attorney websites that have lots of really detailed and weighty information about the law. Doesn't that mean the attorney's an expert, a real " legal eagle"?
Not necessarily. What it may mean is that the attorney spent a lot of time (and money) gathering that information (or having others gather it for him), and then collaborated with experts in legal website design and marketing to make himself look like an expert to you. On the other hand, he or she might really be an expert in one area of the law or another, but simply saying or suggesting it doesn't make it so.
The fact is that no lawyer should graduate from law school unless he or she knows how to research the law, so why should their demonstration of that fundamental ability set them apart from other lawyers? It shouldn't, and it doesn't.
Look at it this way. Remember when you were in high school, or college, or graduate school? You had to do term papers, right? And you wanted your teacher to think you were smart, right? But filling the term paper with scholarly information was only half the battle, wasn't it? I mean, the students who did that usually got a C, but the students who demonstrated a true understanding of the subject matter usually got an A or a B, no? At least that's the way it's supposed to work, isn't it? In other words, knowing the law is not nearly enough. Knowing your client, your client's case, and the Courts - that's what it's really all about....
