-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Disagreement w/ Lawyer
- Thread starter ivanl3
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
Why would anyone turn down free money?
it would not be "free". It would come w/ the cost of knwoing that a lawyer who lied multiple times profited from those actions. That cost is too expensive for the small amount of money I would receive.
Yes, you will need to discuss how you were hurt. In court, to win any damages, you will need to prove by the preponderance of the evidence that you would have won in court and that you would have received more than the settlement offer. You award will be reduced by the amount of the settlement offer. Even then, that is assuming the attorney is in breach by removing himself from representation at this time. I think there is plenty of time to get an attorney with a couple of months before trial and the opportunity to continue the case while the new attorney gets up to speed, it seems to me there is no breach whatsoever even if damages could be proven.
Agreed itwould be a long shot to win the case. but it would be fun just to torment my existing lawyer.
One of your goals in the first lawsuit was to not coming up with extra money. If the contract is not contingency, doesn't that defeat the goal? Be sure o run your plan by them. All the letters and whatnot to the prior attorney may be considered intent to act in bad faith and cause you to lose by unclean hands in equity.
I would not hire a lawyer for this case unless it was on contingency. And I always have done, i will be completely tranparent w/ any lawyer I hire and provide all info up front.
You are the one making no sense. Do you have a contract or no? If yes, you can't change it without giving something up. If no, why are we talking? Oh, wait, I see. You want a contract to resend the previous contract and then create a new contract. What if he breaches the contract? He's then out of the previous one and you have zero damages in the new one.
Yep, then he still gets nothing....Fine by me.
Final edit/contribution:
Of course, the entire discussion has been held in a vacuum of the OPs statements and without review of the engagement agreement. If it is a fairly standard one which places a duty on the plaintiff to cooperate with the attorney (among other things), the OP may already be in breach and would certainly be in breach if she went to court with the intent of harming the attorney. If the agreement so states and the OP had the intent, the attorney would be entitled to compensation even if the OP didn't win. If in a suit by the attorney to collect (or by the OP in malpractice), if the attorney found out about this thread and accessed it in some way, the OP would have a big problem. Good faith is important even to ideologues.
Existing contract is entirely contingency based. I have cooperated completey other than rejecting an offer that is unacceptable to me. None of your others statements in this paragraph are of concern to me.
Last edited:
You Are Guilty
Senior Member
OK, now I'm curious. Exactly what lesson do you expect your (former) lawyer to learn from all this? Does he not have any other cases? (Unless the the answer to that is "no", I highly doubt that you firing him is going to have any impact whatsoever on how he runs his practice in the future). But keep on tilting at those windmills!
Besides, I'm sure the defendant is thrilled you are on a moral crusade.
Besides, I'm sure the defendant is thrilled you are on a moral crusade.
OK, now I'm curious. Exactly what lesson do you expect your (former) lawyer to learn from all this? .
Not to lie to clients b/c it might cost you $125K.
The saga continues.....
So I received a call, and a follow up e-mail, this morning from one of the partners at the small firm where my lawyer works. She represented herself as the "Sr. Partner at the firm". My lawyer also represetned himslef as a partner, but never said "Senior". Anyway, she profusely apolgized for the behavior of my lawyer (the lieing stuff) and offered to reduce their contingency to 20% (my guy had already reduced to 30% and then to 25%) and cover all expenses (expert witnesses, mediator, etc.) if I accept the settlement. The fees total about $25K. She also stated that my lawyers has been "coached" on his actions.
She did stick to her guns on "we are not going to try this case".
I told her I would think about it and get back to her. I may take it b/c at least I am getting some satisfaction out of knowing that he <supposedly> has been disciplined. What still bothers me is that this may be the nomal MO for this firm (good cop, bad cop). I've asked around town about their reputation and haven't heard much (good or bad). I also told her that I would be more inclined to take it if the other side removed the confidentiality clause that is standard in settlments. She was more hopeful than me that they would agree to this change. I gave it no chance in hell, she gave it a snowball's chance. If they agreed to this, I would settle....otherwise I very wll may not...
So I received a call, and a follow up e-mail, this morning from one of the partners at the small firm where my lawyer works. She represented herself as the "Sr. Partner at the firm". My lawyer also represetned himslef as a partner, but never said "Senior". Anyway, she profusely apolgized for the behavior of my lawyer (the lieing stuff) and offered to reduce their contingency to 20% (my guy had already reduced to 30% and then to 25%) and cover all expenses (expert witnesses, mediator, etc.) if I accept the settlement. The fees total about $25K. She also stated that my lawyers has been "coached" on his actions.
She did stick to her guns on "we are not going to try this case".
I told her I would think about it and get back to her. I may take it b/c at least I am getting some satisfaction out of knowing that he <supposedly> has been disciplined. What still bothers me is that this may be the nomal MO for this firm (good cop, bad cop). I've asked around town about their reputation and haven't heard much (good or bad). I also told her that I would be more inclined to take it if the other side removed the confidentiality clause that is standard in settlments. She was more hopeful than me that they would agree to this change. I gave it no chance in hell, she gave it a snowball's chance. If they agreed to this, I would settle....otherwise I very wll may not...
Last edited:
I also told her that I would be more inclined to take it if the other side removed the confidentiality clause that is standard in settlments. She was more hopeful than me that they would agree to this change. I gave it no chance in hell, she gave it a snowball's chance. If they agreed to this, I would settle....otherwise I very well may not...
As expected, I was right. The other side is not willing to eliminate the confidentiality clause. They did, however, sweeten the pot financially. They upped their offer by $50K. They claim this offer is only good through CoB Thursday (I highly doubt that is true). My old layer did not call me w/ this offer, the "Sr. Partner" did. I told her to draw up the documentents for me to accept the offer w/ their contingeny being reduced to 15% of the previous offer, 0% of the additioanl $50K and her firm paying the costs ($25K). I told her that once I have the p-work in hand, I may sign it. She said I would have it today.
Based on these latest developments, I am satisfied that my lawyer and his firm learned a lesson. After they deduct the $25K in costs and factor in the hours they put into nthe case, they are lucky to be making minimum wage on this case. I hope they starve.
I also learned something new about civil cases that I never knew....If you play your cards right, there is PLEANTY of room to negotiate contingency %'s w/ lawyers even AFTER a contract is in place.
The only thing I am still bothered by is that the facts of this case will not be made public if I accept this offer. That bothers me a lot. I am now waying the benefits of making those facts public via the local press against the benefit of donating my share of the proceeds from this case to charity. This is a tough call.
You Are Guilty
Senior Member
Somehow, I suspect the only lesson your lawyer learned was never to deal with you again, but good luck in your endeavors anyway.
Somehow, I suspect the only lesson your lawyer learned was never to deal with you again, but good luck in your endeavors anyway.
Unfortunately, you are probably right. They (or at least he) will likely continue to behave unethically in the future. You are also right that I am very confindent he would never try this again w/ me (as if I would ever hire him again...). He will problaby get away w/ it w/ others b/c most clients won't have the nerve, intelligince and/or financial capabilities to stand up to him.
It's a real shame. There are tons of hard working honest lwayers out there. Its guys like this that give that profession such a bad reputation. Shame on me for not doing better due dilignece before hiring him.
You Are Guilty
Senior Member
I have no doubt that most of his clients do not have your nerve or intelligince. But had you done your due dilignece, you wouldn't even be posting in the first place, so ultimately, who really is to blame?... You are also right that I am very confindent he would never try this again w/ me (as if I would ever hire him again...). He will problaby get away w/ it w/ others b/c most clients won't have the nerve, intelligince and/or financial capabilities to stand up to him.
It's a real shame. There are tons of hard working honest lwayers out there. Its guys like this that give that profession such a bad reputation. Shame on me for not doing better due dilignece before hiring him.
I have no doubt that most of his clients do not have your nerve or intelligince. But had you done your due dilignece, you wouldn't even be posting in the first place, so ultimately, who really is to blame?
I would say it is 75% him, 20% me and 5% his superiors (Sr. partner
I agreed to the deal...
My wife convinced me that the good that would come out of donating our funds to the Cancer Society and American Heart Assoication is more important than denying my scumbag lawyer his money. So hear is what the final tally came in at:
Settlement amount =$500K.
Lawyer Share = .15* 500 - $25K = $50K (before taxes). It is hard for me to estimate how much of this will be taken by Uncle Sam. It may be nothing if the firm operates at a loss this year, but I assume it can be 30%+ if they make a profit . This would be the business tax rate. Then once he receives a salary or straight dividends, I assume some sort of income or capital gains or dividend type tax will take another chunk from him too......I may be talking out my a$$ here as I am not sure exactly how private law firms get taxed. I guess it really doesn't matter.
Our Share= $450K.
So we intend to donate $200K to the cancer society and $250K to the American Heart Association. Hopfully some good will come of that. We will also of course get the tax benefit of this donation. We are going to wait until 2009 to make the donation as we are expecintg Federal Income taxes to skyrocket w/ the D's in office next year.
Here is the other good news on this.....Although the confidentiality clause in the settlement case prevents me from sharing details of the case and settlement w/ anyone, I do have a friend who writes for the local newspaper who has received an anonymous tip that the case settled (as did a similar case in recent months against the same doctor). He will verify with the courts that these cases settled which will be a matter of public record. A little birdie tells me that this will trigger a story about the deaths involved, the cases that were filed, the fact that they settled, and the fact that we refused comment on the story due to the confidentiality clause involved. He will also report about the public thank yous we received from the Cancer Society and American Heart Assoication for the six figure donations/pledges we made to each of them respectively. This will allow him to speculate that we used our share of the settlement to make these donations. He will likely assume the normal 1/3 contingency (not the actual .15) agreement and back into a settlement amount even greater than what it actually was. Hopefully this will fuel future cases against the doctor who was sued. A little birdie also tells me that this story will not mention my lawyer's name, but will mention the lawyer who handled the other case that settled. So any future business is much more likely to get routed to that guy, not my guy.
Oh, here is the other tidbit of info I did not share, the State Attorney General is also pursuing criminal charges against the doctor involved. Not for my case specifically but for systematic abuse of the states medical laws. Unfortunatley as of right now, he still has a license to practice. Hopefully that changes too....
Thanks for all your help on this......And to any clients out there reading this thread, always remember that you have the power to re-negotiate contingency %'s w/ your lawyer once a settlement offer is received assuming you have the guts to walk away from the offer altogehter. Personally, I would never do this to a lawyer who treated me ethically throughout the case, but if they screw w/ you along the way (as is what happened to me), IMO, ethically you are "in the right" to play dirty (but legal) too.
Be safe this weekend and hug your kids before you go to bed. Trust me when I tell you losing a child, especially due to a doctors negligence/incompetece, will change your life forever.
My wife convinced me that the good that would come out of donating our funds to the Cancer Society and American Heart Assoication is more important than denying my scumbag lawyer his money. So hear is what the final tally came in at:
Settlement amount =$500K.
Lawyer Share = .15* 500 - $25K = $50K (before taxes). It is hard for me to estimate how much of this will be taken by Uncle Sam. It may be nothing if the firm operates at a loss this year, but I assume it can be 30%+ if they make a profit . This would be the business tax rate. Then once he receives a salary or straight dividends, I assume some sort of income or capital gains or dividend type tax will take another chunk from him too......I may be talking out my a$$ here as I am not sure exactly how private law firms get taxed. I guess it really doesn't matter.
Our Share= $450K.
So we intend to donate $200K to the cancer society and $250K to the American Heart Association. Hopfully some good will come of that. We will also of course get the tax benefit of this donation. We are going to wait until 2009 to make the donation as we are expecintg Federal Income taxes to skyrocket w/ the D's in office next year.
Here is the other good news on this.....Although the confidentiality clause in the settlement case prevents me from sharing details of the case and settlement w/ anyone, I do have a friend who writes for the local newspaper who has received an anonymous tip that the case settled (as did a similar case in recent months against the same doctor). He will verify with the courts that these cases settled which will be a matter of public record. A little birdie tells me that this will trigger a story about the deaths involved, the cases that were filed, the fact that they settled, and the fact that we refused comment on the story due to the confidentiality clause involved. He will also report about the public thank yous we received from the Cancer Society and American Heart Assoication for the six figure donations/pledges we made to each of them respectively. This will allow him to speculate that we used our share of the settlement to make these donations. He will likely assume the normal 1/3 contingency (not the actual .15) agreement and back into a settlement amount even greater than what it actually was. Hopefully this will fuel future cases against the doctor who was sued. A little birdie also tells me that this story will not mention my lawyer's name, but will mention the lawyer who handled the other case that settled. So any future business is much more likely to get routed to that guy, not my guy.
Oh, here is the other tidbit of info I did not share, the State Attorney General is also pursuing criminal charges against the doctor involved. Not for my case specifically but for systematic abuse of the states medical laws. Unfortunatley as of right now, he still has a license to practice. Hopefully that changes too....
Thanks for all your help on this......And to any clients out there reading this thread, always remember that you have the power to re-negotiate contingency %'s w/ your lawyer once a settlement offer is received assuming you have the guts to walk away from the offer altogehter. Personally, I would never do this to a lawyer who treated me ethically throughout the case, but if they screw w/ you along the way (as is what happened to me), IMO, ethically you are "in the right" to play dirty (but legal) too.
Be safe this weekend and hug your kids before you go to bed. Trust me when I tell you losing a child, especially due to a doctors negligence/incompetece, will change your life forever.
Last edited:
First_Time_P
Junior Member
Remarkable, yet very sad, thread. Inspiring though too. Learned a lot. I will keep all this in mind as I deal with my lawyer. I do not anticipate any problems, but it is nice to know I have options in case I do. Thanks to all who contributed, especially Ivanl3.
Seeing your lawyer as the enemy is not conducive to a good result from legal proceedings. I am sorry for ivanl3's loss, but the lawyer did not harm his child, the lawyer obtained a successful result from his lawsuit against the doctor who allegedly did. The law firm did what it had to do to salvage a recovery for the client and prevent a potentially devastating loss to itself.
This is not a good model for others to follow.
This is not a good model for others to follow.
Seeing your lawyer as the enemy is not conducive to a good result from legal proceedings. I am sorry for ivanl3's loss, but the lawyer did not harm his child, the lawyer obtained a successful result from his lawsuit against the doctor who allegedly did. The law firm did what it had to do to salvage a recovery for the client and prevent a potentially devastating loss to itself.
This is not a good model for others to follow.
Agreed. The lawyer did ABSOLUTELY nothing to our child. He never even met him. I also agree that law firm did what it had to do to prevent a devastating loss to itself. I also agree 110% that this situation is NOT NOT NOT the model plantiff's should seek to establish. It is the exact opposite. I hope no-one ever finds them in the situation I did, but if they do, this model is one for them to consider. I have had countless dealings w/ lawyers through my 55+ years on this planet (business, personal, defendat in a lawsuit, etc.). I was never involved in a criminal case (either side) and was only ever the plantiff one other time (and that case was trivial comapred to this one). In every one of those caes, my relationship with my lawyer was positive from the on-set right through final resolution. This is the only case when I ran into a dishonest lawyer. By all means "viewing your lawyer as the enemey" is NOT where you want to be. I hope none of you ever have to experience it.
The only point in your quote aove that I disagree with is the phrase "successful result". This is a subjective statement and you are entitled to your opnion. In in my view, however, the result of this case was not "SUCCESFUL". I salvaged the best I could given the horrible circumstances, but by no means was it sucessful for me. I suspect my lawyer, his firm, the doctor, and his insurance company would all also not characterize this case as "succesful".
Last edited: