Related Posts
Hey Trump, your people are strong and DIVIDED.
Any of you work for CAVA? Before or currently?
Additional Posts in Big Law
Hanging v. not hanging diplomas in office?
Any recommendations for healthy snacks at work?
Nap time anyone?
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Does anyone use "attend to correspondence re X"? I like it if I'm supposed to be reading and following emails but I'm not the main voice in the flow (i.e., I'm not sending many responses or long substantive responses).
This wouldn’t have worked in my practice either. I’d use “review and analyze” and never “attend to.”
Communicate with (as broad a category as your client would allow) re (as broad a category as your client would allow). Reading an email is still communicating. The sender is communicating with you. Talking in person or over chat or phone is also communicating. ;-)
It is client dependent but I would lump together however many emails I could that fall under the topic. The limiting factor is the topic, I think. The topic needs to be sufficiently limited such that it doesn’t look overboard. I think “litigation strategy”might be too broad for some clients. Might have to go one step more detailed.
Coach
I often put “Analyze strategy for addressing [subject matter of email]” but that may be more likely to be written off than saying you’re “communicating” as A1 suggests
Mentor
Review, analyze, and confer re [XYZ] and prepare strategy for next steps.
Anything along those lines.