Be the voice for those who need justice with Marilynn Mika Spencer

Welcome to Dominate Law, bringing you the best insights and experiences of successful personalities to help your law firm grow exponentially. Hosted by Naranja, CEO of Echo Marketing, you are listening to Dominate Law podcast series, a game changer podcast for lawyers.

Hello everyone. Welcome to another episode of the Dominate Law Podcast show. I'm super excited to have Marilyn Mika Spencer, the founding and managing partner of Spencer Johnson. Mick Cameron, LLP Mika. Welcome.

Thank you.

Um, for those of us, um, who are meeting you for the first time, I would love for you to talk a little bit about yourself. Who are you, uh, what got you into law, and where are you today?

What got me into law is a somewhat unusual story that honestly, I'm not sure many people would relate to, but I can certainly talk about it, uh, on a broader basis. So I was, um, this is my second career. I used to be an accountant, and, uh, even though I was good at it, it was, it's a very isolating kind of work. You know, you're spending your time with numbers and documents more than with human beings. And, uh, this was so long ago, we, we really did a lot still on paper. We didn't use computers that much, so it was spending many, many hours a day writing numbers into little squares on a piece of paper. And it was tedious and boring, even though, you know, you always get a sense of, you always feel good if you're, if you're, uh, competent at something, but it's, it's alienating.

And, uh, while I was in college, I, I was working as an accountant for many years without a degree, and while I was in college to get my degree, uh, the, this was at UCLA, the, the union at that time, the, uh, American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees, which is a public sector labor union, was organizing the employees at UCLA and through a very odd path, they, they got me. And I ended up going to law school, uh, really to learn to be a better union representative. That was my original goal to, to represent the other workers at UCLA. And, and after I went to law school, I never went back to the union, but I did represent labor unions only for many years. Then since I was, uh, I had got married and moved to San Diego, and there aren't that many labor unions here, at least they're even, even 30 years ago when I moved to San Diego. And so I started expanding my law practice to include employees. And now I'd say it's probably, oh, it's definitely more employees and groups of employees, say, in class actions than it is unions. Although there is still, I still represent unions, but, uh, it's not that, it's not something that unions representing unions is not something that everybody wants to do or even understands. I think most younger people now aren't even really clear what a union does. So, rather than talk about that, let's talk, let's focus on the employment law aspect. <laugh>, right. So,

So, uh, so I, go ahead.

Well, you, you asked how I, um, you know, to tell you a little bit about me. So as the years went on, I, one of the things I learned in representing working people is that ma, many, many employment lawyers in California anyway, have fairly small offices. They might be one attorney, two attorneys, a few attorneys. Um, there are some firms on the East coast that are larger in the Midwest, but really, California tends to have smaller firms representing working people. Because of that, it really helps a great deal to align yourself or to be part of an organization. So there are, uh, several organizations that I work with, which really gives you more of a large firm perspective, uh, and greater resources that you couldn't necessarily come up with on your own. And we might wanna talk about that down the road a bit. Absolutely.

So for me, um, the, you know, I, I'm sure you'll hear this from most attorneys, but the, the cases are about the people, uh, in, in this area of law, every single person has a story. And for me, and I think probably many people like me, we use the law as a tool to represent the clients, or to get justice or a resolution. And as opposed to having some sort of fascination with or respect for the law, it's really not about the law. It's about the results the law can give. Um, you know, the, the law is, oh, I suppose you could accomplish things for people by, you know, in psychology or advertising or something. But the tool that I use is law. And, and, and the really, you know, getting a resolution for the client is, is not just about money. And that is something that's very different for people who are on our side, or the employee side of the bar, is the main thing that we do, in addition, of course, to getting the money, is that we can, or at least my firm's goal, is to restore to these human beings.

The, their self-respect, the, uh, dignity and pride in themselves that they had before their employment troubles began for almost everybody. They spend more time at work than they do at home. They, uh, almost everybody is defined, at least to a large extent, by what it is he or she does for a living. And the first thing people ask you when you meet them after they get down your name is what do you do? They don't mean, what do you spend your spare time? Uh, what do you, how do you involve yourself with your spare time? They mean, what do you do for a living? You know, and they wanna put you in a category, you know, are you, uh, white collar, blue collar, pink collar? Are you high paid, low paid? Do you do something that's intellectually stimulating? Are you a grunt? They wanted to define you by your work.

And for most of us, you know, prob, I don't know if I could give a percentage, but for most people, we are proud of what we do. We want to do a good job. We want to have a sense of pride and accomplishment. But when a problem happens at work, it doesn't even have to get as far as a termination, but just some kind of dispute or some kind of a situation where management is, is no longer happy with you. It affects everything about us. It affects our, not just our livelihood, but our, our whole sense of fitting in with the world. And, and it can knock you out of your sense that, uh, that you have a place in the world. You no longer have a place. And so what my firm tries very hard to do is to put people back in their place, give them back that dignity and that self-respect. Does that make sense to you?

Absolutely. It does. Absolutely it does.

And sometimes no amount of money can restore that, but a good relationship with your attorney actually can. There may be nobody who has listened to the employee, nobody who's listened to my client other than me. You know, the employer won't listen. The family's sick of the whining. The friends don't wanna hear it. There is nobody who will hear them out other than their attorney. Right. And in that regard, we're, we're more than just, um, a tool for, for justice. We are also a personal tool or an emotional tool.

That makes sense. Let me ask you, I just wanna kind of divert the conversation, because I was reading today on news that amazon.com has these bracelets that they have the, that they give to the warehouse employees. And supposedly the bracelet will ping them when they do a, when they're doing something right, and ping them when they don't do something right. Like, for example, uh, they took too long to pick up that package and, you know, uh, that product and put it in a box or something. Right. Uh, you live in California, right? The land of technology, the land of innovation. Uh, and I'm sure you know that probably 10, 20 years from now, you know, computers and robots will do more and more things. How do you think about this? Because I, I know for a long time, you know, uh, a lot of us got meaning from work.

Um, you know, that's kind of what gave us our place in the world. And we, we were somebody, uh, we went to school, we studied, and, uh, we had a career. We did it for 30, 40 years. And, um, and then we retired, and then we enjoyed life. And, uh, we had kids, we took care of our kids. Um, hopefully we saved up some money, and hopefully we had a decent retirement. Right? All of that is changing, right? I mean, imagine a world where robots are doing everything and, uh, you know, you don't need people anymore. So how do you, I don't know, just, have you ever thought about, I mean, being in California, is this something that, like, how, how, how do you think about the changes that's happening in the world because of technology and how that affects people and the sense in the world, and

It depends on the field you're in, there are certain things that I can't see them successfully going to technology. Uh, so some fields require a personal touch. I know that there are many more things being done by, say, video conferencing, even even surgical operations, uh, mental healthcare, uh, those kinds of things are being done increasingly remotely. But there is something about human beings that it, they, I don't know if it's innate or conditioned, I don't know that it matters, but we want to have face-to-face con contact. We want to interact with the human being. We want to see how they respond to us. We want to read their body language. We want to know, are they listening to us? Are they leaning forward? Are they texting while they're talking to us? We wanna see them. We want to, you know, hear their breathing even, you know, we want to get sort of immediate assessment on, um, on feedback on how, how we're doing.

The bracelet that you're talking about is, uh, it kind of turns my stomach right. I think that it, it makes me, especially a bracelet, it reminds me of, um, being chained to your job, right? Of being, uh, like a cattle prod when you do something wrong. And it's, it's dehumanizing. It sounds horrible, and I would never hold Amazon up. Is any sort of, uh, virtue in terms of, from the employee's perspective, I understand, of course, it's a, you know, inordinately successful company financially. But if you look at the various, uh, even the litigation, it's been involved in it, you know, uh, disputes with its employees. It's not a very employee friendly company. It's a certainly a, a, a, been great for, its its owner, but it's, it's, it's a really dehumanizing place to work.

Right, right. And do you think it's gonna happen more and more because of technology, or do you think, well, it has

Been

Right?

It has been, it has been. I have clients, for example, all over the country who I have never met face to face, although we try to Skype or, or use, you know, visual, some kind of visual chat. Uh, and it, and this would never have been possible, you know, 20 years ago, 15 years ago, maybe not even 10 years ago. So it's, it's increasingly possible. It gives us in, in some ways more opportunity, but it's not as human. And, and I will say also, the clients that I've met, uh, virtually as opposed to face-to-face, um, the relationships have tended to not be as good. They, they don't know me as well. I don't know them as well. It's a different sort of conversation. I mean, even this conversation with you being done, not in person, but, but using technology is very different because I can't see your face. I can't see how you're responding. I don't know when you want to speak. I have to listen for, uh, uh, an audio clue as opposed to looking at you, you know, raising your finger or something. It's a, it's just a different way of communicating. Right. And all of the, the ways that we've learned to understand how people are responding to us, um, are different. They're different.

Right. So give us a kind of a quick summary of your career as an attorney. In other words, when did you, you know, start working as a lawyer, and when did you go on your own? Uh, just so that, because I wanna kind of dive a little bit deeper about, uh, a little bit about the kind of work you do, and then of course, learn from you. Uh, so I think to set the context, okay, if you can tell us a bit about, uh, your legal history or the professional history, that'll be great. Okay.

Uh, I started out as a law clerk, uh, while I was in law school, and I worked all through law school.

When was this?

Uh, I started law school, let's see, it's my second career. I think I started in 87. Yeah, I started in 87. Uh, so I was already, uh, older than most people, way older, <laugh>. So I'm, I'm, I'm, uh, 64 now. So, and I've been practicing almost, almost 28 years. Right? And, uh, one of the things that I intentionally did while I was in law school, uh, and because I knew what type of law I wanted to do, I knew I wanted to represent working people, and that I would not be working at one of those big downtown firms. Uh, I intentionally selected, uh, law clerk jobs where I would have real work to do, not just computer research and editing and writing, but I would be able to interact with human beings, with clients and, and get that kind of experience as well. So I, I worked at small firms all through law school.

And so upon graduation, I already had a much better experience than a lot of people who get out of law school and work for larger firms where they, uh, didn't have the, the breadth of experience that I got. So, uh, the place I was a law clerk at the time that I passed the bar, uh, hired me as an attorney. Uh, in part they knew me and they knew what I did, but I also had the experience they needed because they trained me a part of it. And I was there for several years. Um, that firm hit hard times because of the type of, uh, practice, the, the type of clients that represented there. Uh, they represented a lot of labor unions in the building trades, and there was a hard time at that time in California for construction. And, uh, even ultimately, I, I got laid off is what happened.

And, uh, I was the only law clerk, and I was the only non clerical employee, but the firm wasn't able to, uh, sustain that. So I went to work for another firm, which was, um, probably the worst job I've ever had in my life. Uh, was an attorney who had many, many employees, did a real sort of, uh, oh, more on, you know, get 'em in, get 'em out, get 'em in, get 'em out, get 'em in, get them out practice, which is not something that I'm interested in. I'm not interested in just forms and pieces of paper. I'm interested in the human aspect. And it's also a much better way to practice law, of course, is to, I mean, laws about the, the clients, about the individuals, just by, by definition and not, these stories don't all fit into the same form. Certain types of law practices are more form based than others. Uh, so workers' compensation, um, some aspects of family law, bankruptcy, certain things where the same story comes up over and over and over again. But what I do isn't that kind of law. So, uh, I was not happy trying to, you know, put all my, my various shaped pegs into the same shaped hole. And, uh, I left, I resigned, and I immediately opened my own law firm. So that was only four years into being a lawyer.

So what year did you open your law firm?

Uh, 90 must have been 94 or so. 94,

Right?

I passed the bar and got, and was admitted in 1990, so it must have been 94. And the reason I was able to open my firm was because of the type of experience I'd had, because I had worked through law school and I worked for smaller firms. So I had a much, uh, much broader experience. I didn't know any of the management side of running a business or running a small firm except what I had learned from being an accountant. But that's also very different. So, uh, I made various mistakes in the beginning, in, in running my own business. Uh, and I learned a lot very quickly, because you have to,

Right?

So one of the things I would say for, um, a new attorney is that as soon as you possibly can to hire very qualified support staff, somebody who can be a, a secretary, receptionist, um, um, interview potential clients and things, these are not going to be the cheapest people, at least expensive. Because what you need is somebody who's actually knows more than you do, right? You still will train them to do it your way, but you need somebody who has more business sense or business experience to help you get on track, help you set up your systems, you as a, as a new attorney or as running a new firm, you won't necessarily know that unless you have some kind of unusual background. And that was where even with my, uh, years in accounting and my, which is a kind of business area, and my, uh, three years clerking in law school and my four years practicing as an attorney in smaller firms, I still didn't know all kinds of things that, that, I mean, it, some of them were really basic.

So, for example, I didn't even know the benefit of having a desk as opposed to a table. And, and I'm not exaggerating. I had a table and I had all my, my pens and all my influences on, in, in containers on the desk. Well, I didn't realize the benefit of having a very cleared off desk looking smooth and clean and crisp. And, uh, it helps your mind, helps clear your mind. It gives you, um, the ability to focus on what's going on in your head or what you're trying to think about instead of getting distracted by all the Judas on your desk. And that, that seems like a very basic and simple thing, but I didn't know it,

Right?

Know, I thought I could be innovative and not have a desk. <laugh>

<laugh>. So somebody with experience, um, even though they're expensive, especially the support staff can really help you through that.

Well, they, they understand office systems. Systems, and you, you know, I understood law better than, than my initial clerical support, but they understood office systems, and that made a difference, right? They understood workflow better than I did. Uh, and it, it, they also understood, you know, you also want somebody, um, with some life experience because you want another person with whom you can discuss a potential client. You know, does this person seem honest and genuine? Does this person seem like a scammer? Does this person's story make sense? Does it seem like there's something missing? And until you develop, uh, as an attorney, your own, um, something beyond your gut, something based on experience, you will make mistakes in assessing potential clients. One thing that that newer attorneys often don't think about is the practical part of running a case. They think about, this person's got a good story.

This person might even be really attractive to a jury. But how are you going to fund the case? Do you have enough savings to, to fund it? Does the, the client, excuse me, who's lost her job? Have the resources to fund the case. Uh, if you don't have much to fund the case, how are you going to do it? Are there other lawyers you can partner with? Is there a loan you can get? Do you really wanna to put your own financial wellbeing on the line for this particular client? Do you, um, can you do the case with a lower level of technology? You know, increasingly now, uh, juries want to see a video. They want to see something that looks like a movie or like television. Uh, they don't wanna see you with a chalkboard or with a, a sheet of white paper drawing a picture.

They want to see something much more realistic. And that costs money. Do you have the money for that? Can't, is your case, the kind where you can forego that, decreasingly that the cases are like that. And if you consider that whenever you do a case, uh, each side that sets in, it's a, uh, employee versus employer, each side has access to pretty much the same facts. Everybody knows what happened, and everybody has access to the same body of law. So in some ways, it's all equal. How do you win a case? Well, sometimes, of course, your, your, your story is more accurate and believable, but often it is, you present it, it's the way you present it that persuades the jury. Or sometimes if you have a, a judge trial, a bench trial, you're persuading the judge. Uh, we want to be able to move the jury into the, the shoes of our client. So, so the jury can not just see from the outside, but really experience along with the client what she's gone through, because you can't, you can't win a case, uh, if it's abstract, right? That, that people don't relate to it.

Absolutely. Um, let me go back to 1994, and you shared a really insightful tip, uh, to our listeners, which is, um, get good, a good support team or hire good experience people, right? Because you may not know what you're doing. Um, anything else? Uh, perhaps you learned the hard way when you set up shop that you would share with the younger attorneys who are perhaps in their early or mid careers running a practice?

Yes. Yes. Uh, I think I mentioned when we were casually talking, uh, before the call that, or maybe it was during the call, that as a small or solo practitioner, uh, you don't have, uh, right at your hand a whole, uh, slew of lawyers who know different parts, different things. Uh, if you align yourself and, uh, work with organizations of lawyers, you have access to all of those resources that you won't necessarily have on your own. So, for example, for, uh, in my case, my main bar association that I, that I work with most, uh, intimately is the California Employment Lawyers Association, or Sila. Uh, the California Employment Lawyers Association has, uh, I can't remember exactly how many, at 1200 or to 1300 plaintiff side employment attorneys in it, it is the largest plaintiff's employment bar in the state, and I believe it is the second largest in the country.

The, the only larger one being our national, uh, uh, uh, uh, compatriot, I guess, of the National Employment Lawyers Association. And, uh, because California is so large and, uh, has probably, and because we have better laws in some other states, uh, we have just a very large bar organization through this organization, I have access to a brief bank. I have access to, you know, over a thousand lawyers whose brains I can pick. I have access to, uh, experiences, to educational programs, to, to, uh, other people's mistakes so I can learn from them. And I would not have gotten this kind of information, this kind of support any other way. I, I mean, I'm not part of a 12,000, I'm sorry, 1200 member law firm, and I won't be giving right, given the type of law that I do. But this gives me that, that those, that level of resource.

And so you're saying, I didn't, so in the beginning, I didn't want to pay dues to an organization because, oh, it was too expensive, blah, blah, blah, and I was new. And there I have, um, there is not one year where in my first week after paying dues, I didn't make the money back by the time I saved, right? And that also go, that the same is true of, um, uh, certain kinds of, uh, educational programs. So yes, it's expensive, but if you consider your time, uh, not necessarily just at what you bill, because that is a higher rate that covers your overhead and covers the, the cases you lose and covers everything. But consider your time even at, um, even a hundred dollars an hour, uh, which is low for an attorney in California. Although I understand in some parts of the country, there are still lawyers who, who bill at that rate. But, uh, even at a hundred dollars an hour, if I spend $400 on, uh, a legal education program, and it saves me more than four hours, I've come out ahead. Does that make

Sense? Absolutely, it does. So you're saying it's definitely worth the investment, you know, the associations,

It, it's more than worth the investment. It's, it's, in a way, it's, it's fool hearted to not do it. So, uh, for example, um, many people, when they're considering taking the bar, they don't want to pay for a bar review course. You have to do it, not because, not so much because it gives you an advantage, but because you're disadvantaged if you don't do it, because so many people do it. It's an equalizer, and you have to be at least equal, as I was saying before, because everybody has access to the same body of law and the same facts. You need something to put you at least, uh, uh, equal to your, your adversary. You can't be behind the behind the line. You have to be, at least at the start in line with them, and ideally ahead of them. Ideally, you have something they don't have.

Some of that is going to be jury appeal yourself, your own ability to connect with the jury and your, your ability to read human beings and, uh, help your client learn how to tell his or her story to the jury in a way the jury can really understand. And some of that comes from life experience. Some of that comes from, uh, learning what's important to a jury. But a lot of that comes from the, the intimacy between a lawyer and, and her client. How you interact with your client, um, the respect you show the client, so that the client trusts you enough to open up and tell you what you need to know so you can help the client shape the story, that the jury will know who the client is and why it's important to the client, why the client should win. It's not just about law.

I mean, I, I know many, I've, I've interviewed enough juries jurors to know that sometimes they form their opinion, uh, during opening statement. They're looking at the, at the parties, and they're deciding who they like better. And we all do it. We all, you know, assess people immediately. That's what I was saying earlier. People ask you immediately, you know, when they first meet you, what do you do for a living? Because they all wanna, they wanna start assessing you. They wanna start figuring out who you are and, and categorizing you, if you will. So juries do the same thing. I'm not saying that they, they can't change their views during the course of a trial, but I'd rather them, uh, I'd rather them start with a favorable view than, and, and not have to work up to it. But I'd like them to start there. So even things like the way your client dresses, the way your client sits, how your your client, uh, pays attention to what's going on. All of these things can affect a juror's, uh, initial perspective.

Absolutely. I was, um, I've been fascinated by this topic of influence. And, uh, there's a person by the name, I'm sure you may have heard of him, called Robert Cini. Uh, he wrote a book called Influence. And, um, he studied the principles of influence. And, uh, he, I think, talks about, um, like in, in, like, for example, you're showing video evidence, right? Mm-hmm <affirmative>. If the person, um, is looking into the camera, people tend to trust the person more than the person is, you know, see the back of them. You know? So even tiny, tiny little things without even realizing it, you know, like for example, a lot of people think the cops are always right, right? So, um, that bias, you know, depending on the person who's, you know, um, who's, in other words, cops are honest and so forth, right? Depending on the background of the person who's in the jury, their biases, their mindsets will impact how they see it.

And it's almost, it's so, um, mind boggling to realize how much some of these things influence us. And, uh, you know, like our old mindsets and all com, you know, all thoughts. Like, another program I saw recently is about how they caught, uh, you know, um, the Unibomber. And, uh, the biggest problem the FBI had was they never had a person like him before who, you know, 'cause a lot of people have motives, and, you know, they looked at the evidence and there's no evidence with this guy, you know? Um, anyways, this was in the nineties, right? So they didn't have, as, you know, the technology they have today. So, so I guess what you're saying is understanding psychology and understanding how people perceive things. These are things you have to develop as a lawyer. It's not just knowing the law, it's about human beings, the jurors, the, the clients and all the other stuff.

Absolutely. But it's also a lot more complicated than what you were talking about. So for example, in, uh, traditional culture in the United States, looking directly at a person is a sign of, uh, forth, uh, you know, being forthright, being right, forthcoming, being honest and open. But in other cultures, making eye contact can be seen as disrespectful. Or there are different, you know, you might be, you can make eye contact with somebody who's your social peer or subordinate, but not somebody who's your superior. And in certain cultures, it can be, uh, very damaging to your case or to your life to, to make eye contact with the wrong person at the wrong time. And there's, in addition, and there are things, um, like body language. Um, in some cultures, if a woman leans forward, it means something different from if a man leans forward, if a woman sits with her legs a certain way, it means something.

And it might be perfectly acceptable in the United States in most parts of the United States. But, uh, you know, increasingly we have a very multicultural, uh, society, and we have to consider all of those different cultures and, uh, backgrounds when we, when we're training or when we're, um, prepping our client for, for even the deposition or trial. And then there are other aspects. There's, uh, something you may have heard of called implicit bias. Things we're not even aware of that affect the way we think. So we might automatically think somebody, uh, um, is, let's say, we might automatically think women are because of our, our socialization women should be this and not that, uh, professionally. Yeah. And, you know, even though we consciously don't, we're not aware of it. But, you know, I grew up, um, in the fifties and sixties, and, and I grew up with all those situation comedies on TV where the woman, um, wore a string of pearls around her neck, and she wore heels around the house, and her house was impeccable, and she was the one responsible for family and cooking.

And daddy came home from work wearing a tie, <laugh>, you know? And that was actually what my family was sort of like, although my mother didn't wear pearls and, and heals, but my father went out to work and my mother stayed home with the family. And that's not the reality these days. But in my head, on some level, that's what I think of when I think of a family, because that was how I was raised. And it's also what I had all around me growing up, right? The younger generations have a very different world. The, the, um, if they're in a traditional nuclear family with a, a male, a female, and 2.24 kids, or whatever it is, um, those roles are, are very different. And they have been for decades, you know? Uh, but people in my generation don't necessarily, we're not necessarily aware of how much it's changed, you know?

And, and silently inside us, there's part of us still saying, women are this men, or that, and we have to fight against it in our own selves and also convey to the jury why this woman who they may think should be home cooking dinner, even if they don't, they're not aware that they think it, but deep inside them, they think it on some level why this person is entitled to be or is qualified to be a CEO, or why she was, you know, she was passed off, passed by for management, uh, in favor of this whole string of men who were less qualified. Why is that? We have to fight against all this. We have to educate people, and we have to start educating the jurors, uh, during voir dire, just by the questions we ask. We, we educate them.

You know, before we started this, uh, recording, you know, you made a comment that lawyers overthink. So you're saying in some sense, you have to overthink, you have to be aware of all these things simultaneously. You know, there's several jurors Yes. And <laugh>.

Well, if you're, you're constantly finessing or balancing, uh, the law, uh, the facts, the, the who's on the jury or who's on the other side of the case, you know, um, this other lawyer on the other side is, is she going to be more persuasive? Does she seem like she knows what she's doing more than I do? I mean, there, and there are just, it, it's really kind of mind boggling. I mean, I read a study a few years ago about, um, jurors, but many, many jurors juries had been polled. And the result of this study was that juries jurors, um, believe a female attorney more if she is wearing makeup. Wow. Yeah. And that's, I mean, I don't wear makeup, right? So that's upsetting. You know, does that mean I should wear makeup at, at when I go to trial? Is that what I should do?

It's not what I, it's not who I am, but you know, it's all about my client. It's not about me. You know? And then, and then what do you do? If the most qualified expert, the person who has the best technical skills, the best background, and understands the facts of the case better than anybody else is happens to be, um, you know, a person who's in a demographic that's been discriminated against. So that there, it's very possible that there are people on the jury who will discount that expert's opinion because the person is female or a particular race, or has an accent, or whatever their bias is. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. So do I use an expert witness who is not as competent, not as qualified, because that is, that expert is, um, uh, a white male who speaks a certain way, who we've been taught through growing up through life, that this is, this is what a competent person is like, right?

Is often focused and not the case. But do I use somebody, do I give in to the bias or do I try to educate and, and go beyond the bias? And what's my role as a lawyer? Is it just for the client? Is it, you know, is it to move society in a direction? Uh, I'm an officer of the court. Uh, what does that really mean? Does that mean that I, that I, that I cave into people's biases? Do I cave into my own biases? I mean, it's, it's, it's far more complicated than just presenting the law. And there's a whole slew of jury consultants and storytellers and videographers and professionals, um, in the legal field who, and, and trainings who do nothing but train lawyers on how to present their story so that it's persuasive without being bigoted.

Right.

That can be difficult. That can be difficult.

Absolutely. Yeah. This leads to a interesting question I have. I know unlike other lawyers or, you know, some of your colleagues, perhaps you go after this, you help, you take on smaller cases. Why, why did you do that? Or why do you do that?

Okay. Well, there, there's certain kinds of cases that I particularly, um, focus on more, well, not focus on so much as I'll accept, because I think they're important to society. So, for example, the smaller cases, uh, it can take as much work to do a small case by small, I mean, with a low economic value as a large case. But to the client, it's just as important. It's probably even more important because people who have smaller cases tend to have fewer options in life, right? And they have certainly fewer options for attorneys. So anybody with a really good case, with a lot, with very high damages and great facts, is going to have, um, you know, they're gonna have no problem finding legal representation. Somebody with a small dollar value case is, is going to have a hard time, somebody who's perhaps not as articulate and communicating what happened, somebody who is perhaps not physically attractive because jurors respond to physical attraction as the rest of society has been, um, conditioned to, I shouldn't have said attraction so much as attractiveness.

Um, if the, the many in employment law, many of the laws that we use have something called a fee shifting provision, which means that the, the plaintiff, if the plaintiff, the complainer, the, the employee wins the case, then the other side, the employer pays the attorney's fees. And that's what makes a contingency case possible. Contingency cases are those that, uh, the, the, uh, attorney's fees are contingent upon or dependent upon winning the case. So if you win the case, then you get, um, a percentage, you get, uh, a chunk of change, if you will. And, and the attorneys can take a percentage of that. Many people think a contingency case is, um, you're gonna get paid no matter what. The lawyer, somehow, there's some pipeline of money that the lawyer gets regardless of what happens at the end. And that's just not true. You know, the money has to come from somewhere, and law firms might a tool for justice, but they're also businesses, and you have to be able to keep your doors open.

So if there's, if there are clients who, uh, have cases that fit into a legal theory that allows ultimately the other side to pay the fees, then we're able to take those cases more, because ultimately we'll get paid if we're very careful with our case selection, so that we increase our chances of winning. Of course, we lose sometimes because if you, if you don't lose, then you're not trying enough cases. You know, you're, you're just taking the safe ones. And, uh, those cases, you know, the really good cases almost always settle anyway. It's the, uh, iffy cases that go to trial. So the small, the people who don't have as many options need legal representation as much or more than people who have a lot of options. And it's part of my sense of giving to society that I will take those cases and my firm will take those cases. And it's not just me, but it's my law partners also. We all have the same mindset that, uh, you can't be, uh, you can't contribute to society if all you do is perpetuate the same, everybody who already has just gets more, uh, I'm not sure if that's clear, but we want to make sure that people who have fewer resources have the benefit of good legal representation.

In your case, has it also turned out to be a good business decision, or is this one of those things you just do it because it's the right thing to do?

Uh, a little of each, but I, i, I wanna say something else about the case selection. So hold on just one moment please. Great. About that. Um, there are two other types of cases that for, um, uh, social purposes or moral or ethical purposes that I, I look for or that I prefer. One of those is people with disabilities, uh, and in particular, people with mental disabilities, because they might be among the most difficult people to work with. Uh, because your, your expectations are often not realized. Uh, there's a, uh, sometimes there's a communication difference. Sometimes there are, uh, other, other problems that make the case just more time consuming or more challenging. People who are really, uh, sort of so dismissed by society, so stigmatized, uh, taking those cases, uh, it's sort of a David and Goliath thing, you know, you're, you're really fighting for the, the powerless.

And they're, those cases in particular make me feel, um, like I've done something good for society, which is important to me because the, the hours that lawyers work and the, uh, some of it's very, very tedious going through, you know, thousands and thousands of pages of documents and learning what's in all those documents and categorizing them and marking them, you know, that can be weeks and weeks and weeks of drudgery. And what what makes that possible is knowing that the person for whom I'm doing this is somebody who really needs help and won't get it if I don't do it, or is not likely to get the help. I mean, even, even many really, really excellent attorneys, um, shy away from cases involving clients with mental disabilities just because they're harder. So that's one area. And, and I, a really large part of my practice is people with disabilities.

And, and I, I do represent people with physical and mental disabilities. And then another area that I, I, I choose to practice in is representing federal employees, people who work for the federal government. Uh, one reason is that very few attorneys, uh, certainly in, in Southern California, very few attorneys will represent those clients. Uh, it's, even though the law, some of the law is the same, uh, the discrimination law is the same, but the procedures are extremely different, and the deadlines are really, really short. So you might have 45 days or 30 days to file your, to take your first step in representing, uh, a federal sector employee compared to an entire year with an ordinary employee in California. And, you know, most people don't realize they have such a short timeframe, you know, and, and most attorneys can't work that quickly because we have, you know, scores of cases or dozens, however many cases we have, and we have all these, uh, deadlines imposed from, from outside, but from the, the rules from the court, the local rules of the court, from the rules of civil procedure, from whatever, uh, from just responding to our opposing parties.

So you have to move really quickly if you represent federal employees. And a lot of attorneys just aren't, aren't structured that way. But one of the main reasons I want to represent federal employees is because they are still, regardless of whether or not they have a union, federal employees still have good benefits, and they have retirement, and they raise the borrower, they set a standard for the entire country. You know, why, you know, if you're an employee, you have the option to work for a private employer where you get paid less, or you have no job security, you have no benefits, versus a federal government employer where you have benefits and make maybe a little bit more, even a little less, which are you going to do? You know, I want people to have benefits. I mean, 20 years ago, even most of my, most of my clients had benefits from work.

They had medical coverage, they had vacation, they had sick leave. Now, fewer and fewer employees do. And I mean, it's, it's so much so that, you know, California and other states have had to pass laws requiring employers to, to provide some kind of sick leave, you know, larger employers. And this used to be something born by, uh, each employer, and it no longer is. And that's part of the, what we hear happening increasingly, uh, not just in this country, but all over the world where, you know, the rich get richer, the poor get poorer. But how increasingly wealth in the United States is owned by a smaller and smaller percentage of people, profits are going more, uh, toward the top then sideways or toward the bottom. And, uh, for most working people, their real income is far less than it was 20 or 25 years ago.

I mean, my, my father, um, was able to work. Um, you know, he was a chemical engineer. He worked, he supported, uh, four kids and a wife, and we always had a very nice home. Now I know he worked his way up. He didn't start out there, but ultimately got there. And now it's really, it's really unusual for a younger family to have one wage earner. Now it's almost always both, both parents are earning a living because they have to, right? The federal employers still have, um, a lot of what used to be, and I would like that to continue. I like, I like that being part of society, because I think that's the right thing for, for employers to do, is to, to think of their employees more. And the better you treat your employees, the more you give them, the longer they're going to stay, the more responsive they're going to be to you, the the happier they'll be.

And, you know, if you wanna look at it this way, the more productive they will be. And, and certainly enough studies have shown this, but by representing federal sector employees, we keep going, uh, a whole body of a very large workforce that has, uh, uh, job security benefits and the kind of employment situation that most employees used to have, and that we should have in our society just as, as a, as a social issue. So, uh, that's, so I've made a decision that, that even though those cases are harder and they take a lot longer, and there are pain in every possible way, it's still important to do.

So. My question is, um, why do you do it? My second question, is it because it's the right thing to do, or is it because you found a way to kind of do it in an efficient way? So other people are not optimized for, let's say, taking on federal ca you know, employee cases, but you have figured out a way to kind of, you know, like, for example, the quick deadlines and so forth to really, well,

It can't be either or, it's if, if you make the decision to do it, which I did, then you have to figure out how to, how to make it work,

Right?

Uh, it, it, there isn't anybody who's going to figure out how to make it work, just, you know, as a little abstract thought and then say, okay, I know how to make it work, so let me do this. Uh, it's not that area. It's not that, that kind of mindset, why would anybody think about how to make it work until it comes through the door? I mean, attorneys are, we, we learn new things when we have a client who we want to help, and we have to learn those things to, um, to help the client,

Right? So you, you really focused on these types of cases and you figured out or built a practice that was able to do them in a way that's better than the competition.

Yeah. So, so while money is always an issue, um, some lawyers are, and some lawyers are more interested in their own income than in getting a good, good result for their clients. Uh, we're part of a social system, you know, that helps the entire country function. Uh, without having lawyers, without having a civilized, uh, effective method to fix wrongdoing. You know, the options aren't good. People rise up in rebellion when there's no path to resolution. I mean, that our, our country was founded for, for just that reason. Uh, so when politicians and, and some lobby groups, uh, complain about lawyers, uh, you know, that they're, they're, they're saying that, that we don't wanna equalize the power differences in society. You know, um, they, they, they want one side to have all the tools or all the clout, and that's not a way for a civilized society to function. If you, if some of us focus on justice, if we're focusing on righting wrongs, then, um, then that has a good social effect for, for the entire country,

Right?

You know, and, and that doesn't mean that, that, you know, most lawyers, uh, do okay, you know, um, it's a white collar profession and it pays well, and there's no question about that, that living well doesn't mean you have to live, live lavishly,

Right?

I, I learned a lot from you today. Anything else you wanna leave with our listeners?

Oh, there's, I mean, I could talk forever about all the mistakes I've made, uh, when I was learning to, to run my own office. Um, you know, one thing I'd like people to know is that when, uh, if they're going into an area of law that works, that deals with human beings as opposed to say business law representing businesses, but something where the, the human part makes a difference, whether that be family law or personal injury law or employment law, um, it makes a big difference for the, the first contact that somebody has with your firm, uh, that that person be a human being, not voicemail, not, um, not one of the technological, uh, devices that you were talking about at the beginning of this discussion. Uh, not even an answering service, which has a whole different quality, has a different voice quality, a different interaction with people, somebody who is signaling to the potential client that your firm is going to listen to them as a human being.

That makes a huge difference to somebody who's scared. These usually are people who've never called an attorney before, don't know what it's like, and are, are, are nervous about it. So somebody who can put them at ease makes a big difference, makes, makes your law firm more welcoming. So even that one thing can, can, can make a huge difference. And when you're a new lawyer, you, um, you might not think that it's important. You might, it might not, or you might think it's not important enough to spend the money on, or you might not have the option. And if you don't have the option, then it can make a good sense to, to locate your office in a, um, like an executive suite where you share office. You, you have your own office in a building or a floor with other attorneys, and somebody, um, answers the phone for every, every office in the building.

At least that's a human being. That's a little, that's more personal than a, an answering service. Uh, or you answer the phone yourself and don't think it's beneath you or, or undignified. You know, you're signaling when you answer the phone yourself that you're not an elitist, that you're not a snob, that you, um, that you want that individual contact. And, and if people make a crack about it, which they sometimes will, oh, you ain't got anything better to do. Say, no, I, I have, I have a lot to do, but I've chosen to answer the phone because I want to know who's calling my office. This is my office. I, I want, I want it to remain my, you know, you can come up with a very humane way of responding to that, when in fact you might, part of it really is that you don't have a lot to do yet. Although, as a new attorney, I, I can't imagine not having a lot to do because you must spend so much of your time understanding and learning and, and, uh, you know, one of the best things a new lawyer can do is go to the courthouse and sit down and just watch what happens in the courtroom. Right. Not at all. Like, not at all, like on tv. Um-huh. Uh,

If, if I were to summarize a lot of what you said today, it has a lot to do with, you know, it's the human side of things, right? I mean, like you said, answering the phone, you're dealing with somebody who's afraid, who's worried. So even that person answering the phone can make a huge difference in whether that, um, you know, client picks you versus somebody else. Uh, you shared, um, lots of other insights about, you know, the biases and, uh, all these things we have as jurors and clients and, you know, all of those things. So, um, so it's, it's almost like you have to really become an expert in human beings. If I were to summarize it in one sentence.

Yes, yes. And the human beings are not just your clients. They're, you know, your the human Yes. Your clients Yes. Your own staff. Yes. The jurors, the judges, the other side, you know, um, all of it. Absolutely. You have to understand the, the human part. So when you were speaking earlier about the technology and it replacing a lot of what we do, uh, yeah. For some aspects of law, maybe that's going to be possible. I know some lawyers already outsource their legal research, and maybe you can do that in some areas of law, but when you're representing an individual who's got a a particular story, uh, you can't automate it because human beings are not, are not robots, you know, we are, we are,

Yeah. Human beings breathing.

Yeah, exactly. Yeah.

So you're saying you're not gonna be worried about robots replacing you one day,

<laugh> No, not at all. And, and, you know, I, if I, if I wanna be replaced, the only thing I wanna be replaced by, and this sounds perhaps corny, but I want to be replaced by a society that doesn't have employment strife where everybody has Right. Useful, meaningful work to do, and is treated with respect. Right. And can live on whatever income they make from work. Right. If I become obsolete for that reason, that's good, but I, I don't see that, and I don't see what I do becoming obsolete or replaced by robots at all.

Right. I really enjoyed our conversation today. If somebody wants to, you know, get ahold of you or talk to somebody in your firm, is the best thing to do is to just go to your website?

Yes. They can go to our website, or they can call the, the website is www the spencer law firm.com. Some people leave out the, the, but it is the spencer law firm.com, or they can call us at area code (619) 233-1313.

Perfect. We'll include your website and your phone number along with the notes, uh, of the podcast. Okay. Uh, I do wanna thank you, Mika, for taking your time. Uh, I know you're busy and I know you, you are the managing partner of a successful practice in California, so I do appreciate, uh, you taking your time to share your thoughts, your experiences, and being very open about, you know, the good and the bad, and, uh, what did you learn and the mistakes you made. So I think people will benefit from this. Thank you for your time.

You're welcome. Thank you for asking me to, uh, participate.

Thank you very much.

Okay. Bye-bye.

Bye. Hello everyone. Thank you for listening to another episode of the Dominate Law Podcast Show with Mika.

Thank you for listening to Dominate Law podcast series, brought to you by Dominate Law Marketing. For more information, please visit our website@www.dominatelaw.com. If you like our podcast, rate us or leave us a review on Facebook, please subscribe via Stitcher or iTunes, and also find us on Instagram and Twitter.