Court today...when does respect come in?

I had court today and I was up against an attorney whom I had never been up against before. That sounds a little ominous, as if it's going to turn out that he ate me for lunch, or I kicked his butt, or something.

It's really interesting how these hearings go when you are up against an unknown opponent. It's a small world in the family law court. You frequently run into into an attorney you have been up against on a prior case, if you practice in family law long enough.

If you are up against someone you have been up against before, you know their modus operandi, whether they are tough or a push-over, whether they are just in it for the money or if they are in it to protect their client's position at all costs.

So this was the typical operating procedure (I am learning based on the experience I have had of being in this situation) for when I am in court for the first time against an attorney who has been practicing for a while in family law who doesn't know me:

When the attorney arrived, he went to talk to his client. Even though I had spoken to him by phone, we hadn't met in person yet. I had seen his client before, so when I saw her, I approached and asked if her attorney would be appearing this morning, and she said yes. I went to a different area to wait for him.

When he showed up a short time later and went to talk to her, I went up to him to let him know I was there and asked if I could talk to him when he would be ready.

Now, what I am explaining sounds really mundane. "I went up to him to let him know I was there and asked if I could talk to him when he would be ready." How boring. Except that this is all part of the "game."

When I asked if I could speak to him when he was ready, obviously implying that I could perceive that he was talking to his client and wasn't ready at that very moment, he said, "I'll be with you shortly." Except keep in mind that even though that that is a very mundane statement, it is said in a tone of voice meant to show his client that he can tell opposing counsel that he doesn't have time right then, please go wait somewhere else, and when he's ready, he'll talk to me. This is such a game. :)

I wasn't ready to do battle yet, because I just wanted to settle the case, so I said, "No problem. I'll be right over there."

When he came to talk to me, he started playing "the Word Game." The Word Game works like this:

"I know we're not trying to get rich off this case, so let's see if we can get this resolved."

"I never try to get rich off my clients' cases."

"Well, what I mean is, let's see if we can resolve this without causing our clients to run up too much money in attorney's fees and costs."

"I only charge my client for what I do."

It is designed to put the other person in his/her place, or me in my place in this case. Many attorneys say things like this, and we laugh and agree with each other and try to get the case worked out.

But with the "word" game, every statement made is subject to attack or being twisted because the other attorney is trying to find a position of power, I believe. I don't play. I usually tell the other attorney that I am not going to play the word game, and from now on, to put everything in writing.

So I did finally tell the attorney that I wasn't going to talk to him any more, and I left him. He was really irritating.

After the initial conversation, we went into court for the hearing and the judge told us to go out in the hall to see if we could work out a settlement. The attorney was really nice and polite and helpful this time!

Before we went out in the hall the second time, my client told me that the first attorney came out and spoke to another second attorney to whom I had said hello because I was on another case with him. The first attorney had seen me say hello to the second attorney.

My client said that the first attorney approached the second attorney and asked what I was like as an attorney, and the second attorney said that I wasn't a push-over or a "lay down." (I'm glad my client heard that, lol!) So it's interesting that after that, the first attorney was really nice and we worked out the case.

I think attorneys do that to try to get the upperhand. I think there are weaker attorneys who will lay down in the face of strong opposition. I don't lay down. But I do get pissed of, and rather than say something I might regret, I tell them to put it in writing because I will most likely say something rude that will be used against me in court. :)

Pain, Pain, Pain

I have been really busy in court for the last several weeks. And not just busy, but painfully busy.

These cases are too painful to even write about them. There's no humorous anecdotes to brighten them up. Just pain, pain, pain.

I keep thinking that something is going to give way and the calendar will lighten up, but no such luck. Just more pain, pain, pain.

And none of it is satisfying really, yet. Nothing redeeming. Just pain.

A Monday-ish Wednesday and Nasty Attorneys

Today started off as if it was Wednesday, but it turns out is was a Monday IN DISGUISE!

I say it started out as a Wednesday because today is Wednesday, but that's where Wednesday ended and Monday began.

The phones were extremely busy all morning with existing clients/new clients, plus trying to get paperwork done for the various hearings that are coming up. This is why I call it "Monday" because this is how Monday usually goes, not Wednesday.

And at first it was just busy with existing clients/new clients, but then at around noon, it turned into nasty attorneys and nasty insurance people. Houston and I spent from noon until about 3:00 p.m. dealing with nasty attorneys and nasty insurance people. Actually, this lasted later than 3:00. I took a couple of calls from one nasty attorney on my cell phone.

She was one of those ugly female attorneys that thinks that rather than find out why you are filing a motion for a hearing, it's better to make threats that she's going to ask for sanctions against you. Forget that her client is currently facing criminal charges for domestic violence. Let's just threaten sanctions!

And then tonight I have had to prepare documents for tomorrow. I'm not done yet. I'm annoyed, and I'm stressed. Stressed because tomorrow morning I have to deal with the nasty attorney. I'll be back with an update.

Good Day in Court, aka Free the Criminals!

I had a good day.

About a month ago, a mom came to see me because she didn't feel like her son's attorney was doing a good job. The son had been charged with felony grand theft. The attorney had initially said that he would be able to keep the son out of jail, as the son didn't have any priors, but after a few appearances, the attorney told the mom that although the attorney could get the charge reduced to a misdemeanor, the son was going to have to do 90 days. The mom was very distressed.

And what I hate about taking over on a case like this is: What if I can't get a deal for the defendant that's any better than the deal that the prior attorney was getting? I would feel bad charging additional money for my time if I can't do any differently.

But the mom understood this. I explained what I could do that was different from what the prior attorney had done, and that I had had success with my tactics in previous cases, but that I couldn't guarantee a different outcome.

I made one appearance about 2 weeks ago, met the D.A., and he said he wasn't budging on his offer to the prior attorney. I figured that, and I had told the mom to expect this result at the first appearance I made.

Today, though, I asked for a chamber's conference and the unexpected happened. The judge undercut the D.A.! My client got the charged reduced to a misdemeanor, 30 days caltrans, and 500 hours of community service. No jail! And if my client goes back and shows proof that he enlisted in the service, the judge is going to dismiss the charges.

Now, I am taking credit for having the insight or experience to know to ask for a chamber's conference. But I can't take credit for the fact that my client got lucky that he got this judge. I'm not going to say who the judge was, or where, but there are reasons (I found out) for why the judge undercut the D.A.

This wasn't supposed to happen this way, but I'll take it.

I almost forgot to add the ditzy parts. I had gone into chambers to talk to the judge and the D.A. and I thought the judge said it would be charged as a felony, so I filled out the felony plea forms. But it didn't make sense that the client would be able to go into court and show proof of enlistment if he had a felony on his record. If you have a felony, the military won't take you.

I went back in to talk to the judge and he explained that the kid was being charged with a misdemeanor. I had already told the kid and his mom that he was being charged with a felony but that if he did the military thing, it would be dismissed. You can imagine their relief when they found out that the kid was only being charged with a misdemeanor.

But it gets better. I had put on the form that he was still looking at 3 years in prison if he violated probation. Turns out that because it was reduced to a misdemeanor, he was only facing 1 year if he violated probation.

I kept looking better and better and ditzier and ditzier. Good thing I did such a good job.

New paralegal didn't work out

It's unfortunate, because I thought an ADDer would be just what my office needed, but it turns out that a young 22-year old ADDer is not appropriate in a law office when the attorney is already an ADHDer.

She hasn't found her passion yet, I think. See, my passion is law. I will do whatever it takes to overcome my ADHD-ness and get the job done. I love what I do.

However, if you don't love what you do, don't you think you will be distracted by every little thing that comes along, if you are an ADHDer? I'm distracted by everything, but I have to eventually put it all aside and get the work done. It's not called "procrastination." It's called, "I'm ADHD and I'm not going to do it until it's the absolute last minute."

She was texting by phone, emailing, IMing, etc., to her friends and family throughout the day. She had downloaded a half gig of music. She was distracted by the "love of her life" whom she had only known for a short time, and he lived in New York.

She called in sick at least once, she didn't show up once (and didn't call in), and she was late several times. She also left early on several occasions.

One day, at about 4 p.m., I asked her to help me file documents that were stacked up in the conference room. She would take documents into the filing room, and then I would have to go find her (usually standing in the filing room texting) and drag her back into the conference room to get more documents. It was making the whole process more difficult.

Finally, I said, "I think you're done working for the day. Why don't you take off?"

She laughed and said, "You are so funny!" But she left immediately. I don't think she realized I wasn't trying to be funny. It was difficult to make her work. Might as well let her go home since her mind wasn't on her work.

So far, she caused me to miss 2 hearings and so far I had to pay to the psychiatrist who was involved in one of those hearings $250. I was able to get the judge to continue the hearing I missed this morning, which the new paralegal was supposed to calendar. She scanned the document, but she didn't calendar it.

Since she left, we have found many of the files mis-filed.

She had the balls to ask for a $3.00/hour raise on the day she packed up her belongings and quit, in anticipation of our rejection of her request. She left a note saying, "I think I have the potential to be able to earn the extra $3 per hour that I am requesting."

The POTENTIAL??? First, show me the potential, and then I'll show you the $3.

What is wrong with people? I have been through so many paralegals. All I want is for someone to do some filing, talk to clients, calendar some stuff. I'm not asking for a rocket scientist.

Can't anyone work for a wage these days?

New website and new picture

Houston has been redesigning my website. Now, instead of having just one, I have several. We are making 3 different websites for the 3 different areas in which I am practicing: criminal, family and construction defect.

Here's the picture Houston took of me for display on the websites, and I think it came out very well:



Here is one of the links.

I've been fired!!

I was fired by a client! I am stunned.

I posted a while back that I had done a really good job on this client's case. I got him everything he wanted. And then he said he thinks that, even though I did a really good job, he should get a family law specialist!

How could a specialist have done any better than I did???

Tom said he thinks the guy is going on emotion rather than logic. That would make sense. If all your friends are telling you that you need a family law specialist, then I guess you are worried if your attorney isn't a family law specialist.

The other party had a family law specialist representing her. Didn't do her any good, though, did it?? I won!!

Sheesh.

Victory in Court

I won a trial on a restraining order today. I was nervous, as I was up against an attorney who has been a certified family law specialist for 10 years. She was pretty aggressive, too. Because we wouldn't agree with her client's demands of "no visitation except every other weekend", she kept saying, "Let's go to trial" as if she knew that I was petrified of going to trial and might concede to her client's wishes.

After she finished putting on her case, and after I poked several serious holes in her client's testimony, the judge mentally nudged me and asked if I wanted to make a motion. I'm no dummy. I immediately moved for a dismissal based on a lack of evidence.

See, technically, the next thing that would happen is I would then put on my case, and I was going to put my client on the stand to give his side of the whole story. But when the judge asked if I wanted to make a motion, I knew that the judge had already ruled in our favor and so I made the motion and the judge said he was going to grant it, and here's why:

While my client had taken her cell phone and tried to leave the house with it, she actually chased after him to try to get it back. She chased him down the stairs, blocked the front door, chased him out the back door when he chose to leave that way, and chased him into his car and clawed after him to try to get her phone back. The judge said that whether my client took the phone was beside the point. He was trying to leave and she was the aggressor.

It was kind of funny, really. The wife had put in her declaration that my client wouldn't allow her to have friends, and wouldn't let her have any money or credit cards. However, I presented her with a credit card statement that showed purchases she had made in the last month, and I also got her to admit that she had been out with friends several times since January.

Oh, yeah, let me dumb this down for OCD:

Today I went to court and we had a good time pointing and yelling and gnashing our teeth. And when it was all over, we all went home. The end.

Success at trial, another asshole attorney

I spent a lot of time preparing for the trial that was scheduled this morning. I was fully prepared for the opposing attorney to be an asshole. He was an asshole at the last hearing, and he didn't disappoint me today.

When I first arrived at court, he handed me a document that was entitled "Declaration re: Meet and Confer."

I already knew what was going to be stated in it. He was going to try to make it sound like he had tried to hook up with me to discuss the case, as ordered by the judge the last time we were in court, and then he would say that I didn't "meet and confer" as ordered.

He had his office call me about 2 weeks before the hearing to schedule the "meet and confer." We scheduled the "meet and confer" for a week ago Friday to talk about the case. I was doing something, I forget what, but there were several emergencies that week, and I probably couldn't get on the phone at that time. But I called him back. He wasn't available.

Then his office called again and I again wasn't available. But I did call his office back, and he, again, wasn't available. The person I spoke with on Monday last week said he would be out of town all week.

When we were in court, and he handed me his document entitled "Declaration re: Meet and Confer," I knew it would be full of shit, such as, as he stated in open court when our case was called, "I telephoned Ms. Healy's office and scheduled an appointment, and she wasn't available. I called again another time, and again, she wasn't available." He never mentioned that I called his office back, both times. He did say he was out of the office, but he said he was out of the office at the end of the week, when it was actually ALL week.

There were other misrepresentations, but I'm not going to bore you. (Maybe I already have.)

When he first handed me that declaration, before he made his statements to the judge, I looked at it and knew what it would say, so I handed it back to him and said, "I don't have time to read this right now. Mail it to my office." He shouted at me, as I walked away, "You've been served!"

Phhht. I kept walking.

Then the judge called our case and that's when he stated, in court, what was probably contained in that declaration. When he was done making his bullshit statements, the judge said, "Go out in the hall and see if you can reach an agreement."

I said to the judge, "He's already stated half-truths and even downright lies. I don't know why I should go out there and try to talk to him, but if that's what the court wants, I'll do it." The judge, basically, sighed.

I was so pissed.

When the other attorney and I went down to the attorney room to see if we could work it out, he handed me a set of documents with his clients Income and Expense Declaration on top. Hiding underneath was the "Declaration re: Meet and Confer." I handed it back to him. He again yelled at me, "You've been served!"

I said again, "I don't have time for your bullshit!" Or something like that. I also called Tom, my husband/office manager and said, loudly enough for the asshole to hear me, "I need you to stay on the phone with me so that if this attorney wants to make up bullshit again, at least I have a witness."

The asshole didn't speak to me again after that except to hand me documents showing what his client would be paying for spousal support. It was actually a reasonable amount! However, I think it was a reasonable amount because his client is hiding more income than he is declaring.

All the preparation I had done the day before, which took me 12 hours, was for naught. We got what we wanted. The client was happy. No trial.

At one point changes had to be made and the asshole said he would make them and submit them, but then he asked me, "If you trust me to do that?"

I said, "No, I don't trust you." So he made the changes where I could see them.

I hate this type of attorney, where half-truths are made and I have to keep track of everything and refute the lies.

I wish I could find a picture of an attorney who looks like an asshole. If we all knew what an "asshole attorney" looked like, we would know what to avoid.

I love/hate trials

I have a hearing tomorrow on spousal support. It may not be a big deal, and then again it might be. It depends on the judge and the opposing counsel as to how difficult this will be.

I am representing the wife who is requesting spousal support. She is earning about $1200 per month, while he is earning about $6200 per month. There's just something not right about that.

Typically, women go into the toilet while the man does better, after a divorce. I'm not particularly fond of women going after men for money, but when the woman gave up her career to stay home and take care of the family, and now she's in her 50's and has no way to make a decent living, he should at least help out until she can get some kind of training so that she can earn more than $8 per hour.

I love trials because I love what I do, and I'm competitive. I hate them because of the stress of the responsibility of what I do.

I have already been in court once against this attorney, and he wasn't very much fun. He says things that are misleading, so you have to stay on your toes and be extremely focused. I think I have all my papers in order and I think I've become very familiar with the case. We'll see.

Fun with Attorneys!

I was informed by OCD that my posts were too "attorney-ish" and that I needed to "dumb down" my posts when I write about legal antics. Fine.

Once upon a time, on a sunny day in Orange County, California, I went to a room that was in a big, official-looking building where there was a man who wore a long, black robe and was sitting up high behind a big, big desk.

It might sound like he was a priest...



but he's called a "judge"...



There were people sitting around at other, smaller desks, writing things down on paper and speaking to each other using their "quiet" voices.

When I went into that room, there were also people arriving, just like me, wearing dark clothes and appearing to be very sinister-looking.



We all used our "loud" voices when we spoke to the judge.

At times it got r-e-e-a-l loud, and at other times it got r-e-e-a-l quiet.

When the judge pounded his gavel, we all abruptly stopped talking! Oh my!



And when the judge was done talking, everybody picked up their toys and went home.

I can't find a picture of kids leaving the park, crying, but you get the idea.

Idiot Attorney, Part Deux

We had the hearing at 2:00 p.m. today. The idiot attorney showed up. It was pretty funny at first. The judge started off the hearing by saying to the idiot attorney, "Yes, you are the guy who wants sanctions upon sanctions upon sanctions."

The idiot attorney started off by telling the judge that I had not served him with the opposition papers. The judge asked me if I had served him. I said, "Yes, your honor. My office manager and my paralegal are 5 minutes up the street on Broadway and if the court wants to hear testimony, they will come in and testify that we did in fact serve him."

The judge then turned to the idiot attorney and asked him if he wanted a continuance in order to prepare a response to the opposition that I had filed. The judge said, "Do you want to drive all the way back up here from San Diego (a good 2 hour commute) to come back to argue about this?"

The idiot attorney blustered for a second and then said no, he didn't want to have to drive all the way back here to argue this a second time. (He wasn't an idiot for this brief second.)

Then, the attorney became a idiot again (as I thought he would, which is why I brought in the recent spate of emails as evidence) and told the judge that I had not agreed that I would pay he sanctions (as I thought he would say) and that he had to drive all the way up from San Diego to "take me to task" in court for my refusal.

I, however, had brought in the emails that he and I had exchanged wherein I had told him that if he was going to accept the court's tentative ruling, I would abide by the ruling. I gave them to the judge to read.

The judge said his tentative ruling stood, and we were dismissed.

I had a short 5-minute drive back to my office. The idiot had a 2-hour drive back to his hovel.

Idiot Attorney

There's this idiot attorney trying to mess me up. He's only been practicing for 3 years. He's like a little chihuahua, nipping at my heels. We have a court hearing today at 2:00 p.m., but the court's tentative ruling was to deny his motion for sanctions and to have me reported to the state bar. (Yes, another complaint, this time by an idiot attorney. It's a cruel world out there.)

A long story that I'll try to keep short:

2 years ago, I represented a woman who was 72-years old in an action where her son and son's girlfriend caused her house, where she had lived for 40 years, to be refinanced to the point where there was $100,000 in equity in it, even though at one point there was $500,000 in equity.

The son and his girlfriend were able to get this attorney, who was paid a lot of money, to fight this thing. And fight it he did, even to the point where he was acting unethically, and finally the house went into foreclosure and my client lost her home. It's a long story, but this is enough of a synopsis to give you an idea of what is behind going to court today.

Last summer, just before I got off the case (another attorney was taking over because a conservatorship had been established), the idiot attorney had been trying to get me to respond to discovery on behalf of the old lady. However, I subbed out of the case and didn't send any responses.

Little did I know that he had filed a motion to compel! He didn't serve it on me, I didn't file a response, and when he went to court last August, when the motion was heard, I was ordered to pay sanctions of $480. I didn't find this out until September, however.

When I found out, I was really annoyed. I asked for copies of his motion because I had never received them. He kept saying he was too busy to send me a copy.

I finally told him that he could have the money for sanctions that I was ordered to pay out of the sale of the house, because I didn't want to have to take time to draft a motion for relief from the order awarding sanctions from the hearing on his motion. They were about to settle the case (was my understanding) and I hadn't been paid for most of my work. So I told the new attorney representing my client's conservator that I would waive my fees, but to pay to the idiot attorney the sanctions out of the proceeds from the sale of the house.

However, in December the idiot attorney sent a new email around saying that the house had been foreclosed upon and that there was no equity left (market had just gone into the toilet) and no one would be getting anything. Turns out his client quit paying on the mortgage and my client couldn't afford to pay the $4000 per month that he had run the mortgage up to. The idiot attorney was now telling me I had to pay the sanctions to him because there was no money from the sale of the house.

He filed a motion in January asking for additional sanctions of $1500 because I hadn't paid the original sanctions, and he asked that the court report me to the state bar for disobeying a court order.

I file an opposition explaining to the court what happened, and the court has now ruled (tentatively) that there will be no additional sanctions and no report to the state bar.

The idiot attorney is such an idiot. I sent an email asking if he would be going to court to argue against the tentative, and he said that he was going to argue unless I promised that I was going to obey the court order to pay the $480.

I explained that the one thing didn't have anything to do with the other. The only point to arguing against the judge's tentative ruling is if he disagreed with it. It's not about whether I agree to it. I can show up and argue against it, too. The point it, either he agrees with the judge's tentative and doesn't need to show up and argue against it, or he disagrees with it and he shows up to argue against it because he wants to explain to the judge why there should be additional sanctions.

I told him that if he isn't going to argue against the tentative, I would call the clerk and tell her that I accept the court's ruling.

He then asked AGAIN if I was going to comply with the court's ruling. See how he's an idiot? I said I was going to call the clerk to inform her that I would accept the court's ruling. This means I will pay the sanctions within 15 days as ordered by the court in its tentative ruling. He doesn't understand, and he even finally said that he will assume by my silence that I don't intend to pay the $480. I told him that I don't have to answer to him.

Even if I say, right now, that I refuse to pay the money even though the court has ordered it, this doesn't change the court's ruling. If I don't pay it within 15 days, then I will probably be reported to the state bar.

He doesn't get it. He called my office this morning to ask if I was going to pay it and I told him that I wasn't going to teach him how to practice law. I hung up on him. He's probably going to go to court and tell on me.

The other attorney, who was also implicated in the idiot attorney's request for sanctions and for referral to the state bar, and who also worked for free on this case, was happy that my opposition to the motion won because he hadn't filed an opposition. But because of my opposition, the judge ordered that neither of us would be reported to the state bar, and neither of us had to pay any additional sanctions.

By the way: Funny side note is that the idiot attorney asked if I had filed an opposition, which I had. He said he didn't receive it and thinks I am pulling a fast one. I told him I had witnesses who saw me take it and mail it. He asked if I would email him a copy. I told him yes, just as quickly as he mailed the motion to compel that I didn't receive the year before.

The New Legal Assistant

We hired a new legal assistant a few weeks ago, but she didn't work out. She had called in sick twice, and then called to come in late, so we just decided to cut our losses after one week rather than keep going and find out that she wasn't suited to the job after an investment of several thousand dollars.

We immediately replaced her with someone else who turns out to be possibly the person I hope to keep with me for a long time.

This girl is actually kind of funny, but in a good way.

For instance, she took over the back room, which I told her was "her" office, and within a couple of days, she had reorganized it and made it her own.

Then at the end of her first full week, she came to me with a picture of a desk that she saw advertised and said she would be happy to purchase it and take it with her if she ever left, but THIS was the desk at which she would feel most comfortable working. She actually found a really good deal, when you consider how much desks are going for, and how it fits into the general decor I have been trying to promulgate. Of course, I told her that I would purchase it.

The desk at which she was working was actually a table with a lot of clutter on it, and I feel bad now that we were expecting her to work on that clutter desk. However, in my defense, I had told her, when she first started, that for now she could work at that table and if things went well, I would go find a desk. But she decided things were working well and she needed a new desk.

She also has commented on how interesting it will be for her to train someone to take over the more menial tasks she is now performing, as she becomes more experienced at the things that she is currently performing.

I think that is funny because I had said the same thing to Houston when I thought things were going well.

The new paralegal has been making sure to go through the new mail every day, going over the messages, making sure I have been doing certain things that I need to do, etc. She has even stayed an hour late on a couple of occasions.

I really, really hope that this becomes a permanent arrangement.

Just another Monday

I love Mondays. (Read: I hate Mondays.)

Monday is when everyone starts their work week and decides to catch up on the things they didn't accomplish the week before.

This means that if you forgot to call your attorney during the previous week, you are going to call first thing Monday morning. This means that I am going to get a bunch of calls from clients and attorneys (who also forgot to call me the week before) with wishes/desires/demands.

If you, as an attorney, are in court ALL FRIGGING DAY on Monday, this means that your paralegal is going to have to field calls from all kinds of people, some of whom don't care that the person at whom they are yelling is new and has no familiarity with whatever case is being thrown at them via telephone. My poor new paralegal. Actually, though, she is a gem. I think I might have finally found "the one."

And court wasn't particularly fun today. I had only two appearances, both at family law court. Both cases appeared to be "easy" matters that would probably be resolved rather quickly, and I would be back in my office, tout de suite, to work on matters requiring my urgent attention.

Not to be so. I was in court from 8:30 a.m. until about 3:30 p.m. I worked through lunch, too.

Things went okay, by the way. There was no win or loss in court today. Both matters required temporary orders, with resolution to be had at a future time, but the basis of each matter was serious.

I had to be on my toes because I was up against very experienced practitioners in both cases, and one of them was particularly good at pretending to "just wanting to work things out", even though I kept finding things she was doing that would work an advantage for her client against my client's interests, and luckily I was able to thwart the improvisations on her part.

When I arrived back at my office, my paralegal wanted me to go through mail and messages that had come in before she left the office, even though this meant overtime on her part. HALLELUJAH! I finally have someone in my office who understands the importance of going through mail and calendaring and phone calls each and every day!

I had another client, by the way, who called to say he was going to sue me. Pissed me off so bad. I called him and gave him his comeuppance. He sent an apology email. I'll finish his case, but I have learned a lesson. And here it is:

When you do a case for a substantially reduced rate, or for free, the client will treat you like you are his servant, and threaten to sue you or report you to the state bar if anything appears to be amiss. YOU ARE HIS SLAVE.

From now on, no more favors for clients.

I have a good idea! Today was so much fun, let's do it again tomorrow!

Okay, so I'm an idiot!

I just spoke with the attorney handling my case. He informed me that I am wrong, that we cannot give her as many form interrogatories as we want. Therefore, when we served her with the special interrogatories and request for production of documents, we went over our 35 limitation, and she validly objected to answering any of the questions. I feel so foolish right now.

Okay, so now here's what we're going to do. We're going to send her a notice of withdrawal of previously sent discovery questions, and we're going to reserve her the new discovery, keeping it within the 35 question limit, and then we're going to ask her to let us know within 5 days whether she is going to object or not. If we don't hear from her, we'll file a motion.

Really Irritated, Part II

I didn't mean to do this in parts. When I started to post last night, I stopped because I had something to do. I have been chastised by OCD. :P

I did some research on the person's case to see if, based on his facts, I could do a motion to get rid of some of the back child support, either completely or partially. I found some good case law, and I told the client that I believed that I could help him. He owed almost $100,000 at this point.

I drafted the documents, and filed them. I think the problem arose when we were taking too long to get the documents filed. He had only retained us about 3 months prior to the filing before we finally filed them, which might be too long in a lot of family law cases, but in his case, since there was nothing drastic pending, there was no rush.

However, all of a sudden, just after we sent the documents to be filed, we received a message from the client demanding that we cease all work on his case, that he had obtained new counsel.

The new attorney telephoned me to find out what we had filed, and why. I explained it to him. He was kind of hazy.

A month or two after that, the new attorney demanded that I refund the entire amount of the fees that the client had paid to me, claiming that I should have known that there was NO WAY that I could be successful on this case. However, at the point where the client had demanded that we stop working on his case, we had expended well over the retainer he had paid to us, and all that was left was to make the appearance. We weren't going to charge any more, just to be nice. There was no way I was going to give him any money back.

I told the attorney that I have often had success on my cases, even in cases where other attorneys had said, "It can't be done!" We argued, he was condescending, I hung up on him. He seemed like one of those asshole types of attorneys who makes a problem worse rather than better.

When clients have come to see me because they are disgruntled with their original attorney, if it sounds like the problem can be worked out, I usually recommend that they stay with their attorney.

Not only did this new attorney not try to help get this worked out, if in fact my client thought I had dragged my feet too long in getting the motion filed, he made it worse.

The new attorney didn't even bother to leave the matter on calendar. He caused it to be dismissed, as in telling the court to take it off calendar.

If I was that attorney, if I really wanted to prove my point that "it couldn't be done," I would have let the motion go forward and be denied, and then I would have gone to the old attorney (me) and said, "You fool! You should have known it couldn't be done! Give my client back his money!"

When I finally spoke with the client yesterday, I told him that I still believed it could be done, based on the research that I had done. He disagreed. He told me that his attorney only needed to do 15 minutes of research to figure out that it absolutely could not be done, and he might as well keep paying on the $100K that he owed, please give him back his money, plus interest, thank you very much.

I told him that I was so confident that I would win the motion that, if he let me refile it and it lost, I would give him back his money.

Think about what a "win/win" situation this would be for him! He had already paid. All the documents had already been drafted. If I lost, I would give him his retainer back. If I won, he would see a substantial reduction of his child support by about $50,000.00.

First, though, he told me that the new attorney didn't have anything to win by requesting my client's money back, that they were "friends" before my client even realized that the new attorney was an attorney! That sounded very odd to me.

Then, he told me that no, he would just rather have his money back because he didn't believe it could be done. I told him to go ahead and file a complaint with the state bar because I believed I hadn't done anything wrong.

Here's what's interesting to me:

Why not let the motion be heard??? It was already drafted and filed. The major bulk of the work had been done. What if the motion was granted? What does he have to lose except the court denies the motion and I give him back the money he initially paid me??? I wasn't going to charge him any more money, and I was even going to give back to him the entire amount of the retainer if the judge denied the motion!

Even more interesting is that the new attorney and the client turned out to be friends! It struck me that they were trying to scam me. Think about it: They dismiss the action before it can be heard and threaten to report me to the state bar if I don't refund the money. Then, they can later refile all the documents that I had already drafted, but file the documents under the new attorney's name, and all the work I had done would be free for him to use.

Another interesting fact: The alleged "malpractice" that should require that I give my client back his money occurred about 7 or 8 months ago. Why haven't they reported this to the state bar by now, regardless of whether I gave the client back his money or not?

If I had retained an attorney who had taken money to do something that couldn't be done, I wouldn't wait this long to try to get my money back. I would have immediately reported the attorney to the state bar. This is not about a "fee dispute" over which the state bar has no jurisdiction. This would absolutely be malpractice because I took money with the promise that I would do something that couldn't be done!

So, I'm really irritated. This is the 3rd bullshit accusation I've had to defend myself against this past 9 months. I won the first 2 accusations, one being a charge-back, and one a complaint with the state bar.

I still have a pending civil action that was filed against me by the nut who claims that, but for me, she wouldn't have had to plead guilty to felony child abuse, lol. Jeez. I found out from my attorney, btw, that she didn't appear at the case management conference that was scheduled yesterday. So my attorney set a trial date.

Something else that came up with regard to that case that's funny: (Okay, you probably have to be an attorney to find this funny. If you need somthing to read to put you to sleep, keep reading.)

In October of last year, my attorney served form interrogatories on her, but he forgot to attach a proof of service. This is no big deal. I'm not worried. Law is rife with opportunity to make a mistake, but the good thing is that mistakes can be fixed. Sometimes, though, mistakes can cause something good to happen, as in this case, hehe.

The Plaintiff (who is suing me) responded to the form interrogatories with objections to every single form interrogatory. She refused to answer any of the form interrogatories on the grounds that a proof of service hadn't been attached to the form interrogatories. Okay, fine.

My attorney said that we could send other discovery to her, and ask the questions listed on the form interrogatories at a deposition, rather than re-serve them.

My attorney mailed to the Plaintiff two types of discovery: Special Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents.

In a limited civil case, as opposed to an unlimited civil case, you can only served a total of 35 requests for documents, special interrogatories, and requests for admissions. In an unlimited case, you can send 35 of each. However, in either type of case, the number of form interrogatories don't count.

The other day, the Plaintiff sent responses to the Special Interrogatories and the Request for Production of Documents. In those responses, she didn't answer a single question! Instead, she objected on the grounds that I had already propounded 48 FORM INTERROGATORIES (to which she had objected!) and therefore didn't have to answer the Special Interrogatories and the Request for Production of Documents because the total was more than 35! LOL!!!!

Um, you probably don't understand why "LOL". My attorney only served a total of 34 Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents. The number of Form Interrogatories doesn't matter.

Now, because she didn't timely answer any of the questions, she can't object to any of them. She might have been able to object on the grounds of privacy, or privilege, or a number of things. My attorney had even asked for the name and address of her doctor who has been treating her for her "mental distress", to which she probably could have objected (even though we would have overcome the objection, but she could have made more work for us if she really wanted to screw with us), but now she can't object because she erred in objecting to the recent requests because she doesn't understand the law. Woohoo!

Um, okay. You probably aren't laughing because you're not an attorney, not because this is really boring and you don't know why I'm so amused.

What a dumb youknowwhat. Um, not you, her. The plaintiff.

p.s. I had to come back and edit because I went and read the first post on why I'm irritated, and I realized that I said therein, "It might be the physical." I need to explain that. Stay tuned for part III. (Sorry OCD!)

I'm really irritated now!!

I think I posted somewhere that I have been an attorney for 9 years. For the first 8 years, I never had a complaint. For some reason, these past 9 months (and looking to last for the next several months) I have received several complaints. I'm getting so tired of it! I wish I could see the physical or the karmic explanation!

I have worked hard on all my cases. I usually charge less money than I should have. I have often worked on cases where I have been ripped off, as it became obvious that the client never intended to pay, and yet I didn't sue anybody. I don't get where karma might be playing here.

It might be the physical.

I had a client come to me last year because he owed a lot of back child support. It was up to about $100,000 with penalties and interest. He is never going to be able to pay it off unless he hits a gold mine because, at this point, he's only paying interest and penalties.

When he came to see me, he said he had been to a few attorneys who had told him that there was no way that he would win this case to get the arrearages dismissed. Initially, I agreed with him. But after listening to a few more facts about his case, I started to wonder. It seemed so unfair!

Going to finish posting about this later...

Sue the bastard!!!

I have been an attorney for almost 9 years. For the first 8 years, I never heard a single complaint.

I recently read/heard from various sources that, recently, people are more likely to sue attorneys than they were in the past. To wit:

In the last 6 to 8 months, I have had altercations with 5 different clients. So far, I have fought against 2 and won. There are 3 left, and I have a feeling that one more is coming. So irritating. I have so much proof that I did what I was supposed to do! And I'm so busy with legitimate work!

In one case, the woman actually filed a lawsuit rather than file a complaint with the state bar. I met with her in the summer of 2005 to draft documents so that she could get visitation with the daughter that she "allegedly" beat the crap out of.

After we drafted the initial documents, and before she signed anything, she was supposed to bring back to my office documents relating to the criminal action where she was defending herself against felony child abuse. I asked her to bring those documents so that I could review the documents from the criminal action.

She never came back. I didn't hear from her for almost 2 years. Because she didn't come back, I tried contacting her several times in order to give back MOST of the money she had given me to pursue the action. Never heard a word from her.

So now I am suddenly defending myself against her, and I don't know why. I didn't get a chance to screw anything up. I think of all the cases where I actually DID screw something up and everything worked out okay, and nobody sued me. Why the heck is she suing me??? As part of her cause of action against me, she is stating that if I hadn't screwed up, she wouldn't have had to plead guilty to felony child abuse. Sigh.

There are two other cases where I have been reported. In one of them, the woman I represented stated, in her complaint, that in response to her statement that she had cancer, I rubbed 2 fingers together and said, "Hear that? That's the smallest violin in the world, and that's how much I could give a **** that you have cancer!"

I can be a mean person, but I would never say that in response to someone telling me that he/she has cancer, even if it is an opposing party.

I will probably post about the other two cases later. I'm so annoyed and irritated and stressed. I have so much LEGITIMATE work to do. And yet if I don't respond to these complaints, they will go down against me.

The Dom Attorney

No, not "damn" attorney. Dom Attorney.

I like the attorney who is opposing counsel on this case I had this morning in family law court. I wish every case I was on had him as opposing counsel.

I have been on a couple of cases with him. He is like a father image, except that he's not old enough to be my father. He's probably 5 or 10 years older than me, but he's been practicing for a long time in family law and has a lot of experience.

And he's not exactly a "Good Guy" in the sense of being a lay down. He's one of those kinds of attorneys who acts like a good guy, but he's tough. He knows how to be nice while at the same time laughing at your "demands." He's smug, condescending, and sort of dom-like.

How could I like being on a case against him? He knows what he's doing, and it's fun playing his game. Or maybe I should say trying to play his game. He's been doing it for so long, and he's so sure of what he's doing, that he doesn't have to pay heavy attention to all the details. He's like a Master playing with his student. And you're never quite sure he's not messing with you.

So from now on his name is Dom Attorney.

I almost cried in front of him today. Sigh. I can't believe I'm 49-years old.

We were arguing about the case, but in the fun way he has of making fun of my positions while I am all seriousness and earnestness, explaining why I am thinking the way I am.

And then I accidentally said something like, "Your client is a whiny asshole." I didn't just bop out with it. I was making a point and at the end of my point, which might have been a better point and better taken if I hadn't added that comment at the end, I said something like, "I can't help it if your client is a whiny asshole."

Dom Attorney froze and said, in a most serious tone, "That was uncalled for. I haven't maligned your client. You want me to give you something for your client, right? Why would I want to give your client anything after you say something like that?"

He was right of course. I was mainly teasing but, even still, it was inappropriate. I apologized profusely, told him yes, it was inappropriate, apologized again, and shut up.

We discussed things a little further and then I said, "I'll go ahead and finalize our discussion in a letter and fax it to your office."

He stopped and said, "Why? You have somewhere to go right now?" He had an amused look on his face.

I said I couldn't tell if I had pissed him off or not, and I figured that we weren't going to get anywhere today and I might as well leave. He said to hang out and he would talk to his client about my client's demands.

And that is where I almost broke down and cried, because he was so nice to me after he had seemed so angry when I said his client was a whiny asshole.

I was in court from 8:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m.. The good part is everything worked out, and Dom Attorney even had status taken so that our clients could be divorced. Case is almost over except for a few details.