However, I don't see the need to pay twice as much until we have an actual course of action.
The link I provided explained that, but I'll quote the important part for your reference.
The client might want to learn about alternative options to the recommendation by his or her primary attorney.
(This would include an alternative course of action)
Once you've started on a course of action, by then, it is often too late. You can't reverse time.
I'll give an example. One law firm may suggest applying to the SEC for their interpretation of whether or not BTS tokens are considered securities.
An opposite law firm might suggest, no don't do that. Once you do that, you're giving them subject matter jurisdiction right from the beginning by appealing to them for their opinion. You'd be better to wait for the SEC to make the initial contact, and that way you can defend yourself. You can then use the fact you never even contacted the SEC because they was never any speculation or intent that the tokens were even in a grey area from the very start. (Which will side with your
mens rea -- a legal term with significance)
However you end up cheating yourself by starting a course of action without a second opinion.
Law firms have a primary principal...
to generate revenue to keep their law firms doing well.
Their secondary principal is to follow the first principal while still helping their clients the best they can. The legal profession is a business like any other business. It must always generate a profit otherwise it can't help anyone.
By realizing this as a client, you can make use of this primary principal by feeding that principal by retaining two different law firms and creating a small competition between them. Competition will yield you higher accurate answers when both firms are in agreement. When there is difference of opinion between 2 law firms, it gives the client the opportunity to select the best recommendation based on what each law firm comes back with.
Trusting a reputable law firm, doctor, or mechanic is good, but in the end, they are still humans who are prone to mistakes. Having more than one opinion limits those unintentional mistakes.
Go into this with 2 law firms. The benefits will be obvious in the long run.
I'm not going to continue to speak about this issue. I have a friend who has recommended these things and is not part of this forum. His suggestions feel this has said enough. Those of you who support this should say something.