U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Cross-Examining a Legal Auditor

NCJ Number
166972
Journal
Thomas Jefferson Law Review Volume: 18 Issue: 1 Dated: (Spring 1996) Pages: 41-51
Author(s)
J P Schratz
Date Published
1996
Length
11 pages
Annotation
Given the admission of overbilling by a significant percentage of the legal profession and the corresponding belief by clients that they are being overcharged, the auditing of legal bills is likely to increase; this article provides some practical suggestions on how to determine whether the legal auditor who is employed to question a law firm's billing practice is competent to do so.
Abstract
This paper identifies and discusses seven questions that should be considered for the cross-examination of a legal auditor employed by the plaintiff in the case of a fee dispute or by the prosecution in a case of criminal fraud. One question is whether the auditors conducted an on-site review of the files, and another question is whether the auditors have sophisticated software and the necessary computer system to assist in reviewing the bills. A third question is whether the auditors review all of the billing entries for both fees and expenses, or merely review a sample of the entries. A fourth question is whether the attorneys on the auditing team have litigation experience. A fifth question is the nature of the basis of the methodology of the audit. A sixth question involves whether the findings of the legal audit are supported by exhibits so that someone can determine the basis for the numbers in the report. The seventh question involves how the auditors are compensated. Additional suggestions are to obtain the audit report as soon as possible, to depose the auditor, to use the internet to exchange information about expert witnesses, and to obtain copies of all correspondence between the expert and the attorney and/or client. 10 footnotes

Downloads

No download available

Availability