Attorney Advertising - Personal Injury TV ads

Is your marketing plan failing you or are you failing to stick to the plan? Great marketing begins with a great marketing plan, but the best laid plans are only as good as the follow through. So, here we are, three months into 2009. Doubtless, you started off the year with every intention of doing it right and that included effective marketing.

You made your plans, you were excited. It all looked great on paper, but now you aren't feeling it. You aren't seeing the results that you expected and the year seems to be off to a less than bountiful start. You know that marketing is important, but you keep putting it off. You keep meaning to get to it. Somewhere in the back of your mind you know you had a great plan; a plan that would work. But marketing isn't what you do. It's not your real job, it's a periphery task.

This is the trap that most lawyers fall in to, especially those who are passionate about their work and truly great at what they do. It is the Achilles' heel that turns great artists into starving artists while the mediocre rise to fame and fortune (in their own lifetimes). It is the reason why the best attorneys are not always the most financially successful.

Fortunately, you don't have to be a marketing guru to prosper like one. You only need the business savvy to delegate your marketing needs to the experts while you focus on what you do best. Network Affiliates has been helping law firms since 1981. Attorney marketing is our passion. It is what we do. Period.

If you need help implementing your law firm's marketing plan - or developing an effective marketing strategy, call or email our legal marketing experts today.

Dear Harlan,
I used to work for a state senator who told me that it doesn't matter whether people speak ill or good about you...you should only worry when they stop talking about you!
So...do you have a press kit? Since most press or media people will request a press kit, it's time for you to put one together. A press kit is nothing more than a collection of editorial and promotional materials that are distributed to the media, as well as prospects and clients, which include information about you, your solutions and the reasons you're "newsworthy".
Journalists use these materials to learn about you but a press kit can also be used for many other marketing purposes. When putting a press kit together, it should include a folder with an insert for your business card, client list, testimonials, biographical sketch, prior press releases, professional photo, articles and white papers written by you and may also include case histories, and one page fact sheets. Anything that increases or enhances your credibility should be included in the kit, making it a much more effective marketing tool than the standard brochure most lawyers use.
If you really want the skinny, my good friend Gina Rubel, author of Everyday Public Relations for Lawyers will be presenting a workshop on this very issue on Thursday April 30, 2009 in Warrington , PA. She's a lawyer and the expert so if you really want to get noticed, you should contact her.
Thanks and stay well.
Cole



The Silver Group Ltd.
8 Dorchester Lane, Suite A
Moorestown, NJ
08057
US

If you're getting spooked by the headlines about law firms and layoffs, keep in mind that the personal injury caseload is not dropping. In fact, it may be increasing as people who would normally avoid a lawsuit at all costs, even though it is the appropriate course of action for them, are realizing that it may be the only way that they can stay afloat financially.

The thing is, while we hear about our overly litigious society, people who have real cases often believe that getting the compensation they need and deserve is just a pipedream. The people who need your help the most don't believe that they can beat the insurance companies and big corporations that should be paying out even if they fully believe they deserve compensation.

This is where the right marketing comes in. Here and now, your advertising can deliver the message that it can be done. That the "little man", the individual can and will have the power of a successful law firm, that has not bowed out due to the economy, backing them in their fight with no out-of-pocket expense. Remember, most people, when faced with the prospect of getting what they deserve via a lawsuit, still believe that hiring a lawyer is a luxury reserved for the wealthy.

Now is the time to remind your prospective clients that you are there for them; that you are still there for them. Network Affiliates can help you craft the ads that deliver the message that you are still going strong. That you are a reliable resource for those in need when all else seems to be failing. Contact Network Affiliates today and start reaching the audience that is looking for your help.

Following right on the heels of the Supreme Court ruling preserving injured patients' right to sue drug makers, legislation has been introduced that could have a similar impact on defective medical device cases.

The Medical Device Safety Act of 2009 was introduced Thursday by House Subcommittee on Health Chairman Frank Pallone and House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman. If it passes it would reverse a February, 2008 Supreme Court decision that shielded medical device makers from lawsuits brought under state laws. Based on that decision thousands of lawsuits against device makers were dismissed by lower courts.

The Medical Device Safety Act is supported by a wide variety of groups including the Alliance for Justice, AARP, the American Bar Association, the New England Journal of Medicine, National Conference of State Legislatures, and numerous other groups.

Analysts believe that the measure will pass. If it does, this will be a one-two punch in favor of injured parties. As it stands now, many victims of drug and device makers may be feeling discouraged and hold the false belief that the lawsuits that could help them get back on their feet are a waste of time.

You have the opportunity to help break the good news through your advertising campaigns and to capitalize on the trend toward protecting consumer rights. The creative team at Network Affiliates can incorporate these new developments into your marketing plan and help you get this encouraging message out to your potential clients. Contact Network Affiliates today to find out how you can benefit from these changes.

MARCH 4, 2009, 11:12 A.M. ET
Supreme Court Allows Patient Lawsuit Against Wyeth
By MARK H. ANDERSON and BRENT KENDALL
WASHINGTON -- In a loss for the pharmaceutical industry, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 Wednesday that a Vermont woman can sue Wyeth for injuries she suffered after taking one of the drug maker's medicines.
Justice John Paul Stevens, in the court's majority opinion, said Food and Drug Administration oversight of drug labeling doesn't prevent the filing of state-level consumer liability lawsuits against drug companies.
"In short," Justice Stevens wrote, "Wyeth has not persuaded us that failure-to-warn claims like Levine's obstruct the federal regulation of drug labeling."
Justice Stevens added that "Congress has repeatedly declined to preempt state law" and that recent Bush administration changes to FDA policy claiming "that state tort suits interfere with its statutory mandate is entitled to no weight" in the Wyeth case.
The ruling affirms an opinion by the Vermont Supreme Court.
At issue was a lawsuit by Vermont guitarist Diana Levine, who lost an arm to gangrene after Wyeth's antinausea drug Phenergan was inadvertently injected into one of her arteries during a push IV injection. Ms. Levine had gone to a clinic for treatment of a migraine headache.
Ms. Levine argued that Phenergan's labeling, though approved by the Food and Drug Administration, didn't provide proper warnings of the risk of administering the drug through a push IV injection instead of using an IV-drip. A Vermont jury awarded her $6.7 million in damages. The Vermont Supreme Court upheld the award, ruling that FDA drug regulations don't prevent a company from being sued under state law over drug labeling.
Wyeth argued that Ms. Levine's lawsuit, which was based on Vermont law, should be preempted by federal drug regulations. The FDA, Wyeth said, knew of the drug's risks and benefits and instructed the drug maker to use labeling that accommodated both. Wyeth said it wasn't free to change the warnings on the label.
Joining Justice Stevens in the majority were justices Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Clarence Thomas. Although Justice Thomas concurred with the outcome, he did so under a different line of legal reasoning. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito dissented.
"This case illustrates that tragic facts make bad law,'' Justice Alito said. "The court holds that a state tort jury, rather than the Food and Drug Administration, is ultimately responsible for regulating warning labels for prescription drugs."
The case is Wyeth v. Levine,