Scott,

I agree that the client's objectives and concerns are first and foremost in his legal representation. An attorney needs to keep that in mind, and draft a contract that protects him best in accomplishing his objectives. The contract should be drafted after consultation with the client and both attorney and client are satisfied that the client's interests are protected. However, the use of both language expressly addressing the client's needs in addition to the use of standardized language (although not in every instance) may be in the best interest of the client. I know that I have stardard language (integration clause, choice of law, choice of forum, etc.) that I include in my contracts because I have litigated these issues, and I know that I will win if I am challenged on the issues. I would normally review the final draft of the contract to explain it to him, and make certain that he is satisfied or wanted changes in the draft.

I do agree that the use of standardized language without regard to the client's needs is not something that I would recommend.