Ross is a former litigator, Marketing Director, and Marketing Partner. Today, as an internationally known law firm marketing and management consultant, Ross analyzes the issues thoroughly, knowledgeably, and credibly.
A Fellow of the College of Law Practice Management
He has received dozens of international marketing awards from the ABA , ALA
He has trained tens of thousands of lawyers worldwide, and speaks knowledgeably about all types of marketing and business development techniques, and the full range of tools used by 21st-century law firms.
These include branding and reputation development; sales techniques and client development; online and digital marketing, including PPC / AdWords; social media like LinkedIn, Google, Facebook, and Twitter; the history and development of marketing law firms and other professional-services firms; and many other areas.
Ross has been hired as law firm marketing expert witness in two prominent cases relating to marketing, branding, ethics, and technology.
In the first case, an international law firm was sued by a regional law firm in atrademark-infringement case involving the use of the shorter version their firm name they used following its rebrand. When the international firm opened an office in the regional firm's home city, the local firm sued, claiming marketplace confusion.
Ross was hired as a defense expert, to analyze the marketplace issues, consider legal industry and market trends, and offer an opinion. The case was settled appropriately, under the approximate terms Ross had suggested.
In the second case, Habush Habush & Rottier vs. Cannon & Dunphy, two competing leading Wisconsin law firms waged aggressive marketing campaigns. One tool Cannon & Dunphy used was a pay-per-click campaign via Google, Bing, and Yahoo. Briefly, the Cannon firm bid on the words in the Habush law firm name, so that a search for example that included the word "Habush" would show a shaded Sponsored Link that would send a reader to the Cannon website.
The plaintiff believed it to be unethical and unreasonable and sued under a Wisconsin Invasion of Privacy statute. Ross's expert report showed that this behavior, while aggressive, was both reasonable and ethical.
The case was decided on motion for summary judgment, in which following an apparent battle of the experts on this issue, the judge found as a matter of law that defendants' conduct was not unreasonable:
"Lastly, [Judge] Kahn noted that Habush offered scholarly opinion that buying another lawyer's name as a search term was ethically questionable, and therefore unreasonable. The defense offering contrary expert opinion."
For further information, the defense's lawyer was Milwaukee
