Have to ask again

[almostsm]

What is the name of your state? Missouri

I've already asked something similar, but time as since passed. For those of you who don't know, Dad lives in WI and the case is in Missouri, therefore Dad has a MO atty.

Dad is going to file a contempt motion (child custody.) Dad paid the lawyer up front in August, then lost his job. Dad became behind in child support, so he assumed that's why the lawyer didn't do anything about the contempt motion- he figured he'd look stupid motioning for mom to be in contempt for denial of visitation if he too would be in contempt for nonpayment of child support.

Dad kept in contact with the lawyer via email, simply asking if anything had been done with the contempt motion and informing him of his progress with finding another job- he did this on average every other week. The lawyer did not respond to any of these communication attempts.

When Dad got another job in October, he contacted the lawyer a little more aggressively, and at first sent emails 2-3x a week. When that didn't work, he started calling the lawyer's office 2-3x a week in addition to the emails.

The lawyer finally contacted Dad at the end of October, told him he did not have to pay for anything prior to that date including that telephone conference because it was his (the lawyer's) fault that things have gone so slow. The lawyer took down some info at that time and told Dad he'd email him a rough draft of the motion when he had it done.

Dad figured he'd give the lawyer approximately 60 days to do this (he gave him so long because of the holidays.) The lawyer has not sent Dad any rough drafts of the motion or even communicated with him. Dad has since emailed the lawyer again, directly informing him that he's already been paid, so what is the hold up? And the lawyer still has not responded.

Does anyone have any advice about this?

 

[jdmba]

Your father should email his lawyer this (from the Rules of Professional Conduct Governing the Missouri Bar):

4-1.3. Diligence

A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.

(Adopted August 19, 1994, eff. July 1, 1995)

COMMENT

A lawyer should pursue a matter on behalf of a client despite opposition, obstruction or personal inconvenience to the lawyer, and may take whatever lawful and ethical measures are required to vindicate a client's cause or endeavor. A lawyer should act with commitment and dedication to the interests of the client and with zeal in advocacy upon the client's behalf. However, a lawyer is not bound to press for every advantage that might be realized for a client. A lawyer has professional discretion in determining the means by which a matter should be pursued. See Rule 1.2. A lawyer's workload should be controlled so that each matter can be handled adequately.

Perhaps no professional shortcoming is more widely resented than procrastination. A client's interests often can be adversely affected by the passage of time or the change of conditions; in extreme instances, as when a lawyer overlooks a statute of limitations, the client's legal position may be destroyed. Even when the client's interests are not affected in substance, however, unreasonable delay can cause a client needless anxiety and undermine confidence in the lawyer's trustworthiness.
Unless the relationship is terminated as provided in Rule 1.16, a lawyer should carry through to conclusion all matters undertaken for a client. If a lawyer's employment is limited to a specific matter, the relationship terminates when the matter has been resolved. If a lawyer has served a client over a substantial period in a variety of matters, the client sometimes may assume that the lawyer will continue to serve on a continuing basis unless the lawyer gives notice of withdrawal. Doubt about whether a client-lawyer relationship still exists should be clarified by the lawyer, preferably in writing, so that the client will not mistakenly suppose the lawyer is looking after the client's affairs when the lawyer has ceased to do so. For example, if a lawyer has handled a judicial or administrative proceeding that produced a result adverse to the client but has not been specifically instructed concerning pursuit of an appeal, the lawyer should advise the client of the possibility of appeal before relinquishing responsibility for the matter.

4-1.4. Communication

(a) A lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information.

(b) A lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation.

(Adopted August 19, 1994, eff. July 1, 1995)

COMMENT

The client should have sufficient information to participate intelligently in decisions concerning the objectives of the representation and the means by which they are to be pursued, to the extent the client is willing and able to do so. For example, a lawyer negotiating on behalf of a client should provide the client with facts relevant to the matter, inform the client of communications from another party and take other reasonable steps that permit the client to make a decision regarding a serious offer from another party. A lawyer who receives from opposing counsel an offer of settlement in a civil controversy or a proffered plea bargain in a criminal case should promptly inform the client of its substance unless prior discussions with the client have left it clear that the proposal will be unacceptable. See Rule 1.2(a). Even when a client delegates authority to the lawyer, the client should be kept advised of the status of the matter.

Adequacy of communication depends in part on the kind of advice or assistance involved. For example, in negotiations where there is time to explain a proposal, the lawyer should review all important provisions with the client before proceeding to an agreement. In litigation a lawyer should explain the general strategy and prospects of success and ordinarily should consult the client on tactics that might injure or coerce others. On the other hand, a lawyer ordinarily cannot be expected to describe trial or negotiation strategy in detail. The guiding principle is that the lawyer should fulfill reasonable client expectations for information consistent with the duty to act in the client's best interests, and the client's overall requirement as to the character of representation.

Ordinarily, the information to be provided is that appropriate for a client who is a comprehending and responsible adult. However, fully informing the client according to this standard may be impracticable, for example, where the client is a child or suffers from mental disability. See Rule 1.14. When the client is an organization or group, it is often impossible or inappropriate to inform every one of its members about its legal affairs; ordinarily, the lawyer should address communications to the appropriate officials of the organization. See Rule 1.13. Where many routine matters are involved, a system of limited or occasional reporting may be arranged with the client. Practical exigency may also require a lawyer to act for a client without prior consultation.

Withholding Information. In some circumstances, a lawyer may be justified in delaying transmission of information when the client would be likely to react imprudently to an immediate communication. Thus, a lawyer might withhold a psychiatric diagnosis of a client when the examining psychiatrist indicates that disclosure would harm the client. A lawyer may not withhold information to serve the lawyer's own interest or convenience. Rules or court orders governing litigation may provide that information supplied to a lawyer may not be disclosed to the client. Rule 3.4(c) directs compliance with such rules or orders.

Maybe a refresher of the Rules will get the lawyer to do something. If not, your next step is to file a complaint with these people: http://www.mochiefcounsel.org/