Working With EHI
Awards & Accolades
GT’s dedication to client service is evidenced by our attorney and practice awards and accolades. Recent recognition includes:
- 1 for 12th Year: Greenberg Traurig has the Most Attorneys in Best Lawyers in America
- Greenberg Traurig Attorneys, Practices Recognized in Chambers USA 2018
- Greenberg Traurig Recognized in 2018 Legal 500 U.S. Guide
- Fourth Time, Greenberg Traurig Receives Chambers USA Award for Excellence in Real Estate
- 32 GT Attorneys Recognized as IP Stars by Managing Intellectual Property Magazine
- Greenberg Traurig Honored as National Law Review ‘Go-To Thought Leader’ on Business Immigration
- Greenberg Traurig Receives Most Overall First-Tier Rankings in U.S. News-Best Lawyers 2018 ‘Best Law Firms’ Edition
- Greenberg Traurig is a Top 20 Firm on the 2018 BTI Brand Elite Report
- Greenberg Traurig Tops the Law360 400
- 70+ Greenberg Traurig Attorneys Recognized on the IFLR1000 Financial and Corporate 2019 Rankings
- Greenberg’s Class Action Group Tackles High-Value Cases
As we further develop our relationship with EHI, we look forward to introducing you to new attorneys across our platform and discussing with you in greater detail the ways in which we plan to partner with EHI to further expand our engagement, provide greater efficiencies, and deliver increased value.
Alternative Fee Arrangements
GT is a leader in creating and implementing alternative fee arrangements that provide value for our clients. Nearly 20% of GT’s work annually is handled under alternative fee arrangements, representing over 1,000 clients in all industries. We have no preordained policy that must be followed. GT gives our shareholders ultimate flexibility to negotiate equitable and reasonable fee arrangements designed to meet a client’s needs and objectives for specific matters. We understand that one size does not fit all. We work closely with our clients on these arrangements to help predict and reduce overall legal spend.
From our experience, these types of arrangements are best utilized when they are focused on specific types of matters or objectives. The best and most effective arrangements require input from the client; the open sharing of information; and a clear understanding of, and alignment with, the client’s business objectives. In light of this, we have provided a brief sample of approaches we have used with various clients that we can adapt to be of value in reducing and controlling legal spend.
Fixed Fee Arrangements
Fixed fee arrangements can be highly beneficial to clients in that they can assist in fostering a level of predictability in an engagement, while creating a baseline for forecasting. These approaches can range from the utilization of fixed fees for handling a portfolio of routine matters (e.g., single plaintiff/ low-risk claims; routine IP filings) to the implementation of fixed fees for certain phases of more complex matters (e.g., complex litigation, potentially including certain types of class actions).
- Fixed fee for entire matter: A set fee is charged for a pre-determined scope of the engagement. This arrangement is best suited for routine or highly predictable matters.
- Fixed fee for specific phases of an engagement: For more complex matters, the engagement is broken into phases each with its own fixed fee. Typical matters would include complex commercial litigation and large real estate or corporate transactions.
- Portfolio Pricing: For consistent, recurring matters, typically within a legal specialty, a fixed fee per matter or retainer may be charged to handle a specific volume of matters annually. Examples include routine employment litigation and charges; patent, trademark and copyright prosecution; visa applications; etc.
- Collar Arrangement: When the client and GT agree that there may be a high level of uncertainty in regard to the range of possible activity in a matter, or a high level of variability in a portfolio of matters, a collar arrangement may be used to manage the risk. In this situation a flat fee will be set, and a range of acceptable variation above or below the flat fee is established. If actual activity is below the established range, the client receives a rebate or credit, and if actual activity is above the established range, the fee is adjusted.