> Do you know this, or do you just believe / hope this?
Good question, the answer is obviously I can't say its' true for 100% of the cases but do this thought experiment.
You are going to court against someone else, you get a public defender, your opponent brings in a team of 10 lawyers costing $100,000 a week.
If the evidence makes the case look like its 50:50. What is your chance of success? I think almost everyone would agree that its much lower than 50:50 after you factor in the lawyers.
It's easy to do that thought experiment at the extremes, but that's not what the article is about. It's talking primarily about corporate law, and a public company isn't going to hire a public defender.
More realistically, you're a company and you choose a $400/hr law firm instead of a $600/hr law firm. Are you necessarily going to get worse advice? I'd argue that would often just depend on how much experience each firm has in the particular subject you're hiring them for - and neither firm is adjusting their rates based on that.
Just yesterday I came across a situation where a major law firm was working as investor counsel on a type of deal they almost never advise on (because they're the clients usual firm for other types of deals) - I'm sure they didn't offer the client a discount because they have less experience than a lot of cheaper, less prominent law firms.
> It's easy to do that thought experiment at the extremes, but that's not what the article is about. It's talking primarily about corporate law, and a public company isn't going to hire a public defender.
Good question, the answer is obviously I can't say its' true for 100% of the cases but do this thought experiment.
You are going to court against someone else, you get a public defender, your opponent brings in a team of 10 lawyers costing $100,000 a week.
If the evidence makes the case look like its 50:50. What is your chance of success? I think almost everyone would agree that its much lower than 50:50 after you factor in the lawyers.