This doesn't seem right, ...please advise.

[Barry_Archer]

Q: What I WAS asking, is that considering this is the case, would it then be appropriate for him to suggest a replacement attorney...?

A: Yes.

So if you had no choice but to have a court appointed attorney represent you in a case. Then, as the case went on (over the course of several years), and you began to learn more and more about the said attorney, ...it seemed odd in just the way he'd react to certain situations throughout the case. Then after 3 or 4 years goes by, you learn that he had been a paid attorney for the custodial parent in a previous case, ...and with the many little things that happened along the way, ..things that set off warning sirens, and raised red flags, all of which are things that concerned you deeply.

So when you bring your concerns up to the attorney, and he instantly gets rather angry and defensive about it, rattling off excuses as to why he hadn't removed himself at the beginning,

.........you finally see that he can no longer continue on with your case, so you ask him to file a motion to withdraw, ..he agrees, but in the motion he tells that there were irreconcilable issues and could no longer represent me, ...even though that reason is probably good all by itself, I really thought it seemed odd that he didn't mention anything about that he'd previously represented the opposing party in an earlier case.

However, when you live in a smaller community, not so small that everyone knows one another, but still small enough to where all the prosecutors, judges, and attorneys of the judicial community are all rather tight knit, and know each other very well, ......it makes it rather difficult when it comes to "being given a fair shake".

In light of the conflicting interests, as well as a number of other problems, ..I will strongly, but respectfully disagree with those of you that either can't or don't see anything wrong with a withdrawing attorney playing any such role in the deciding/referral of a replacement attorney.

If their were ANY conflicts of interests whatsoever, ...it then would make no sense for that attorney to:

A) choose to continue anyhow irregardless of the conflicts

B) due to said conflicting issues, after being asked to withdraw, ..still insists in having some connection or part in play with where the case will go from there in.

I really can't see it any other way. It's not just foul, but obviously foul!!!

Barry

 

[seniorjudge]

Then after 3 or 4 years goes by, you learn that he had been a paid attorney for the custodial parent in a previous case....

The lawyer was definitely being unethical. Why didn't you post this major fact in your first post?

If their were ANY conflicts of interests whatsoever, ...it then would make no sense for that attorney to:

A) choose to continue anyhow irregardless of the conflicts

B) due to said conflicting issues, after being asked to withdraw, ..still insists in having some connection or part in play with where the case will go from there in.

Ain't no such word as "irregardless" but let me just tell you how this works. There is no great conspiracy against you.

These PDs are absolutley swamped. The bad attorney had enough sense to try to recommend another attorney to the judge. This happens millions of times a day in this country and there is nothing wrong with it. In fact, some might say that bad attorney had a DUTY to name another possible attorney for you.

Lawyers and judges work together all day long. They can't help but know each other.

I know of a prosecutor and public defender who (you would think) absolutely hate each other they way they go at it in the courtroom. The prosecutor needed a godfather for his kid and he named the public defender since they are the closest of friends in real life.

But if you have a new attorney now and all is well, then good luck.

 

[sharpie259]

Wow...this thread has been an interesting read.

While I am not a legal professional, I am a therapist....and I do a lot of mediating...and from my perspective, if it counts at all, it seems to me, Barry, that is OK for other people to question what basis you formed your opinion that there was a "conflict of interest" with this attorney.

Remember that we only have YOUR perspective of the situation and, if people are trying to give you sound advice, they may need to know as much of the story as possible as it may present a number of different options for advice.

I think you respond very defensively to people asking what concrete behaviors or experiences led you to this decision that there was a "conflict of interest". Your defensive response may lead people to believe that there is no basis for your conclusion AND that maybe you are the problem.

I am not saying that you ARE the problem - but just suggesting that people may feel this way, given your response and given the hostility in this thread...just something to think about...from a different perspective! <wink, smile>

 

[Barry_Archer]

Wow...this thread has been an interesting read.

While I am not a legal professional, I am a therapist....and I do a lot of mediating...and from my perspective, if it counts at all, it seems to me, Barry, that is OK for other people to question what basis you formed your opinion that there was a "conflict of interest" with this attorney.

Remember that we only have YOUR perspective of the situation and, if people are trying to give you sound advice, they may need to know as much of the story as possible as it may present a number of different options for advice.

I think you respond very defensively to people asking what concrete behaviors or experiences led you to this decision that there was a "conflict of interest". Your defensive response may lead people to believe that there is no basis for your conclusion AND that maybe you are the problem.

I am not saying that you ARE the problem - but just suggesting that people may feel this way, given your response and given the hostility in this thread...just something to think about...from a different perspective! <wink, smile>

Sharpie - I understand what you're saying completely, and I also respect that. There are no problems here, ..and if I do sound, or seem to come off in a defensive mannor, I'd say that it probably has a lot to do with me simply defending my views with regards to my (now past tense) situation.

'Seniorjudge' is correct in saying that, "irregardless" isn't exactly proper.

Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.

I was brought up very well, and my mother did a fine job in raising me, morals, values, and respect were very important in our home, and this still remains today. I'd learned early on in life, that if you really believe in something, stand firmly by those beliefs. If something just doesn't seem right, then don't sit there and do nothing, stand up and express your reasoning, let it be heard, but be respectfull while doing so.

Some of the people that'd responded to this post, for whatever reasons, rather than lend their legal advise with regards to the given information that had been provided, instead they chose to pick everything apart, and even had questioned my intelligence, as if I didn't know what "conflict of interest" meant .

Not trying to stir the pot, but I do read a lot, and after reading through some of the responses that a select few people who frequent this board have given to peoples legitimate legal questions, ...it really is saddening to me. There is absolutely no sense in the way that these people carry on, ...seems that the moderation of the board, or lack thereof, is only partially to blame for the problem. People with legitimate legal problems who come here seeking legal advise, have enough to deal with, and can do without being belittled and called names such as "trailer trash" (...was a common one I found). If you have nothing helpfull to ad, then do the right thing, and leave it alone. For crying out loud, Tighten up!

Thanks all, I really do appreciate it.

Barry

 

[seniorjudge]

Thanks all, I really do appreciate it.

Barry

You are welcome.