Has anybody heard anything about this company?


Views: 1713

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I know they post for a lot of work on this website but have not heard anything negative about them.  If you hear anything, please let me know - good or bad.

Offshoot of Esquire, founded by Rosalie Margolis, salesperson.  Based in Philly, haven't worked for them yet.


Debbie, I have taken depos for them in North Carolina and they have paid fine every time but one.  It was an asbestos case.  They indicated since the deposition was an O+4, that they don't charge the plaintiff's attorney for the O+1.  That's apparantly how they hook the plaintiff's attorneys on these cases.  I, of course, told them that I was never told that, nor would I have agreed to that so they paid me.


I hope all is well with you.

So the O&4, which I presume is 3 copy sales, you worked for 3 copy sales and an appearance?  That is the equivalent of O&1 and about 1.2 copy sales.  However, you have a rate sheet (presumably) and also a precedent with them so I would hope that they paid you according to how you billed them.    That's why I have a rate sheet, to avoid unpleasant surprises later.

I billed them for an O+4 and was promptly paid on three copies.  I waited for a while for payment on the original assuming it was an oversight.  I finally called to ask when they were going to pay me on the O+1 and was at that time informed they don't charge the noticing attorney if there are at least three copies.

Sorry, I never agreed to that arrangement, nor would I had they informed me in the beginning.  

Other than that experience, they have paid promptly.

I know them and like them a lot and yes, they do pay promptly.  This is totally unacceptable.  You might have declined the job knowing the truth upfront.  Do not like one bit.

Is it the Plaintiff's attorney or one of the defense attorneys that is not getting charged the 0&1?

Usually the of the defense attorneys take the depo and then the plaintiff's attorney orders a copy, as well as other defense attorneys.

In this case, the plaintiff's attorney was taking the depo.


It seems like the only thing that matters to the plaintiff taking attorney is if the defense side orders at least three copies so that way the plaintiff taking attorney does not have to pay anything. 

I understand the concept of the plaintiff's attorney not paying if there are three copies.  I did plaintiff paralegal work twice, once for six years, once for one year.  I did everything in the office, which included scheduling depos (getting a reporter), and getting the reporter bill.


Plaintiff's attorneys are like deadbeat dads.  There are some great plaintiff firms, but most are solo attys.  There is no such thing as getting the reporter bill, taking it to the attorney, and him writing a check, and the reporter firm being paid.  Plaintiff attys, everything comes of of the attorney's operating account - and hopefully, he is bringing in a regular cash flow to finance his own litigation cases.  Plaintiff clients don't pay the attorney.  The attorney generates a cash flow through either settling a case for X dollars or winning in trial.  Most plaintiff cases are smalltime cases - meaning no big pay to the attorney.


Defendant attorneys send a monthly bill to their insurance carrier, who reviews the bill for unbillables ("I didn't agree to that and won't pay it"), and pay the bill.  Attorneys make copies of those depos and don't pay the reporters anyways.  I see the point in giving plaintiff attorneys a free copy if there are three copies.    On a regular depo job, getting three copies is good.  After three copies, giving a free copy to the plaintiff attorney - who won't pay until he absolutely has to (threatening him) - the reporting firm saves the hassle and time associated with trying to get a deadbeat attorney to pay.




To get an idea on Magna's view of gift-giving, go to this link:

That is so cheesy and despicable.  Wow.


© 2024   Created by Kelli Combs (admin).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service