Hello fellow Creative Accountants and Masters of Fictionalized Finance,
Your weekly dispatch from the intersection of legal practice and pure, unadulterated fiction. This week, we dive deep into the art form that requires more creativity than any brief: the BigLaw Expense Report. Where “client development” is a state of mind and “miscellaneous” is a treasure trove of possibilities.
Let’s get into it! ⚖😂
| The Test: | Did you mention a client’s name at any point during the meal? |
| Example: | “This salmon is almost as good as the damages model we’re building for Acme Corp.” |
| Ruling: | PASS - name-drop achieved, receipt is defensible |
The Name-Drop Factor is the lowest bar in expense report jurisprudence. You don’t need to have discussed business. You don’t need to have advanced any particular matter. You need to have said a client’s name out loud in the general vicinity of a meal.
Veteran practitioners have elevated this to an art form. The casual mention of a case name while ordering dessert. The strategic deployment of a client acronym when the check arrives. The subtle pivot from “should we get the cheese plate” to “speaking of Acme Corp’s Q4 projections…”
Technically admissible. Entirely unverifiable. The cornerstone of creative T&E accounting since BigLaw was invented.
| The Test: | Does your receipt just list a total, or does it itemize two glasses of Pinot Noir and an artisanal cheese plate? |
| The Catch: | Itemization is a double-edged sword. It proves you ate, but also what you ate. |
| Ruling: | JURY’S OUT - proceed with caution and a poker face |
The Receipt Anonymity Factor separates the experienced from the naive. The naive submit itemized receipts showing exactly three cocktails, a charcuterie board, and a dessert described as “for the table” (there was one person at the table). The experienced know that a total-only receipt is a document of beautiful ambiguity.
Some firms now require itemized receipts above certain thresholds. This is accounting’s revenge. The itemization requirement exists specifically to catch you. You know it. Accounting knows it. The partner signing off knows it. Everyone continues the charade because the alternative is having a real conversation about what “client development” actually means, and no one wants that conversation.
Pro tip from an attorney who does not exist and certainly did not tell us this: the credit card statement shows a total. The credit card statement is a receipt. This has been neither confirmed nor denied by anyone’s expense policy.
| The Test: | Did you send a “Great catching up!” email to anyone afterward, thus creating a paper trail? |
| Why It Matters: | A follow-up email is the CYA of expense reporting. No email? That’s just lunch. |
| Ruling: | CRITICAL - the difference between reimbursed and questioned |
The Post-Meal Email Corollary is the most underrated tool in the expense report arsenal. It costs nothing. It takes 30 seconds. And it transforms “I had lunch” into “I conducted a client development meeting and here is documentary evidence in the form of a follow-up communication.”
“Great catching up, John! Looking forward to continuing our discussion about [vague business matter]. Best, [Your Name]” is eight seconds of typing and $132 of defensible dinner.
The attorneys who forget the follow-up email are the ones whose expense reports get questioned. The ones who remember it are the ones who make partner. Correlation? Causation? Discuss amongst yourselves. Preferably over a meal you’re going to expense.
Verdict: A meal is client development if you can imagine, with a straight face, explaining it to a partner. The more expensive the sushi, the straighter your face needs to be.
You know that moment when you realize you’ve typed the client’s date of birth into six different fields in six different sections?
Again. And again. And again.
Congratulations. You are now a highly compensated data entry specialist.
This is what happens when your case management system decides it’s tired of watching you manually copy facts like it’s 2004.
AIFields by Filevine automatically pulls structured data from your documents and drops it into the right fields in your case file:
No more hunting for where the injury date lives. No more retyping the same fact three times because “this field is different.” No more praying you didn’t transpose a number that will haunt you in discovery.
You review. You confirm. You move on with your life.
Not replacing lawyers.
Just replacing the part that makes you question your career choices.
| Line Item: | “Client Development: $120” |
| Official Description: | “Discussed case strategy over drinks.” |
| The Truth (allegedly): | It was 2 AM at a karaoke bar with a law school friend who now works at the SEC. Strategy involved choosing between “Sweet Caroline” and “Don’t Stop Believin’.” |
| Line Item: | “Transportation: $65” |
| Official Description: | “Uber from courthouse to airport.” |
| The Truth (allegedly): | The detour past their apartment to “grab a quick shower and change” added 45 minutes and 12 miles. The shower was not expensed. |
| Line Item: | “Conference Fees: $1,200” |
| Official Description: | “Annual Legal Innovation Symposium.” |
| The Truth (allegedly): | Spent the entire two days in the hotel spa and business center. Downloaded the PowerPoints. Certificate of attendance? “The printer was down.” |
| Line Item: | “Meals: $38.50” |
| Official Description: | “Working lunch.” |
| The Truth (allegedly): | Ate a sad desk salad alone while watching a webinar on mute. The “work” was pretending to be on a Zoom call to avoid a colleague. |
| TO: | All Associates |
| FROM: | The Partnership Committee |
| RE: | Expense Report “Creativity” |
| DATE: | Before the quarterly budget review |
We appreciate the… narrative flair… some of you bring to the T&E system. However, let’s clarify:
Keep it plausible, people. Our auditors have law degrees too.
Regards,
The Partnership Committee
(Expense reports pending review: 47. Denied: 12. Under investigation: 2. You know who you are.)
Forward this to the associate who once tried to expense a plant for their office (“oxygen optimization for peak billing performance”). Send it to the partner who thinks “client development” is a blank check. Share it with accounting, they need to laugh so they don’t cry.
Remember: In the eyes of the firm, you are not what you bill. You are what you expense.
Walter, Editor-in-Law
Still not audited. Expense report status: “PENDING REVIEW.”
P.S. Want to submit your own (anonymous) expense report fail? We’re collecting tales of creative accounting for a future issue. Names will be changed, and the $47 lunches will be immortalized.
Got an expense report fail that tops these? Reply and tell us. Anonymous submissions accepted. Legal representation not included.
Know someone who needs to read this before they submit that receipt for “networking at the blackjack table”? Share responsibly.