Freelance lawyers work on a project basis, typically at a much lower rate than lawyers at “traditional” law firms. Freelance lawyers typically set their own schedule and pick and choose the projects they work on. They might do project work for in-house counsel, or they might be hired by a lawyer to handle specific projects (e.g., only specific aspects of a certain case or transaction). It’s not uncommon for a freelance lawyer to spend part of his or her time working on legal projects, and the other part pursuing other business interests.

Geoffrey Gussis, who runs the InHouse Blog - News for Inhouse Counsel, republished an article by James Hartt about freelance lawyers and whether they are a valuable alternative for in-house counsel. The argument against freelancers, says Hartt, is that in-house lawyers have a fear that a freelancer’s work won’t be of the same quality as that found at a traditional law firm. However, many freelancers are lawyers who were trained in those very same law firms, but who are looking for more flexibility and freedom with their schedule. Hartt argues that companies could save a lot of money on “everyday issues and tasks” if they would set aside their fears and work with freelancers whom they feel comfortable with. Indeed, both in-house counsel and smaller law firms could become more efficient if they could find reasonably-priced, qualified freelancers to handle one-off legal projects.

Freelance Attorneys: A Valuable Alternative For In-House Counsel . . . Sometimes [www.inhouseblog.com]