Why not to lie to your attorney.

[enkeivette]

I spent 6 hours writing an opposition to a motion another attorney filed against my client. When I found evidence that the client lied, I could not file the opposition. It wouldnt have made sense. Deadline passed before I could draft a new one.

I argued my position orally at the hearing, did better than anyone thought I would, but the judge did not like that we did not file an opposition. We may have won had I done so, now we will have to wait to see what the ruling is.

Now I have to bill the client for 6 hours, at $250 an hour, for an opposition I never filed (yes, $1,500) otherwise it will look to my boss like I did nothing that day.

[Vettezuki]

Why would someone do that? It makes no sense at all.

[enkeivette]

Speculating, he may have thought that by lying to me it would have yielded him more money in a judgment. Or more sympathy.

[Vettezuki]

I'll never understand people who hire professionals, then ignore them (doctors) or in this case lie to them.

[fiveohwblow]

I'll never understand people who hire professionals, then ignore them (doctors) or in this case lie to them.

You mean like telling a lawyer you're happy they exist?

:D

[Vettezuki]

You mean like telling a lawyer you're happy they exist?

:D

I sure have been a couple times!

[fiveohwblow]

I sure have been a couple times!

Haha! I'm sure it always depends which side of the bench you're on.

[Vettezuki]

Haha! I'm sure it always depends which side of the bench you're on.

The winning side. That's the side I'm on. Booom. Like a boss. :drink:

[fiveohwblow]

The winning side. That's the side I'm on. Booom. Like a boss. :drink:

:sm_laughing:

[big2bird]

I sure have been a couple times!

Yep. I did not require a lawyer for 58 years, then I needed one twice in 2 months.:sm_laughing:

[enkeivette]

You mean like telling a lawyer you're happy they exist?

:D

Da da tsh.

People joke, but when your little girl gets raped and murdered its not the cop who prosecutes the rapist and puts him behind bars. Its an attorney who is staying up till 2 am in the office on a Saturday working his or her ass off for you.

[enkeivette]

The winning side. That's the side I'm on. Booom. Like a boss. :drink:

Yep. I did not require a lawyer for 58 years, then I needed one twice in 2 months.:sm_laughing:

:beer: :beer: :beer:

[BADDASSC6]

Bill the client and make it clear to him that he wasted your time and his money.

[fiveohwblow]

Bill the client and make it clear to him that he wasted your time and his money.

Not quite a winning strategy for longevity.

[BADDASSC6]

You entitled to your opinion. In my 17 years of work history I have found that being upfront with dishonest people is the most effective way to stop that behavior. If I had issue on a project that I was managing for a client (engineer not a lawyer) I would make it very clear that his / her behavior resulted in added risk. Bottom line if he looses the case the client will blame Clint and not take responsibility. My $.02.

[fiveohwblow]

You entitled to your opinion. In my 17 years of work history I have found that being upfront with dishonest people is the most effective way to stop that behavior. If I had issue on a project that I was managing for a client (engineer not a lawyer) I would make it very clear that his / her behavior resulted in added risk. Bottom line if he looses the case the client will blame Clint and not take responsibility. My $.02.



Why is it always a dick measuring contest with you? I don't need your credentials to validate what you are saying Carlos. I don't seek to devalue anyone and everyone so don't worry about proving yourself to me. I respect your opinion for what it is, and experience where applicable.


That said, I don't disagree being honest is the best policy. I just don't presume to know how beneficial this client is to his firm and always proceed with caution. Sometimes, actually most of the time, telling the client they were essentially "wrong" in any facet doesn't play out well for longevity. Maybe, just maybe it doesn't matter much to his firm and that's the best approach, I don't know.

Just be cautious is all Clunt

















:D

[enkeivette]

My name is Clint.

You both make good points, I prefer a hybrid approach. Let someone know they messed up without accusing and still being friendly. Best of both.

[fiveohwblow]

My name is Clint.

You both make good points, I prefer a hybrid approach. Let someone know they messed up without accusing and still being friendly. Best of both.

My bad, no clue how that autocorrected.

[Vettezuki]

My name is Clint.

You both make good points, I prefer a hybrid approach. Let someone know they messed up without accusing and still being friendly. Best of both.

:iagree:

Totally different field. But we've actually "fired" customers who were perpetually problematic. We're now implementing a CRM (Customer Relationship Management software) to better journal and track discussions, etc. I prefer documented conversations. They help shutdown problems with inventive memories. :sm_laughing:

I might post about it elsewhere, but there is this form of communication that's pretty interesting, sort of getting into it. It's called NVC (Non-violent communication). It basically focuses on de-escalating conflict and focusing on trying to gain a mutual understanding of needs, rather than the usual ratcheting up of accusations. It's not easy, and may not always work with someone who is pathological, or just plain hell bent on being an asshole, but I think there's a lot to recommend it.

[Shaolin Crane]

:iagree:

Totally different field. But we've actually "fired" customers who were perpetually problematic. We're now implementing a CRM (Customer Relationship Management software) to better journal and track discussions, etc. I prefer documented conversations. They help shutdown problems with inventive memories. :sm_laughing:

I might post about it elsewhere, but there is this form of communication that's pretty interesting, sort of getting into it. It's called NVC (Non-violent communication). It basically focuses on de-escalating conflict and focusing on trying to gain a mutual understanding of needs, rather than the usual ratcheting up of accusations. It's not easy, and may not always work with someone who is pathological, or just plain hell bent on being an asshole, but I think there's a lot to recommend it.
We had to do a ton of that type of training for the studio, It works, well. However, i'd rather be an asshole.

[94cobra69ss396]

It's not easy, and may not always work with someone who is pathological, or just plain hell bent on being an asshole, but I think there's a lot to recommend it.

I was going to say that you described Guy perfectly without using his name. :sm_laughing:

[Shaolin Crane]

I was going to say that you described Guy perfectly without using his name. :sm_laughing:

I was the test subject during role play on more than a few occasions :sm_laughing:

[BADDASSC6]

I am curious to see what the clients response will be to the bill. Please let us know when it's done.

[enkeivette]

My bad, no clue how that autocorrected.

Its magic. Leave it that way please.

[enkeivette]

I am curious to see what the clients response will be to the bill. Please let us know when it's done.

Im not in charge of billing, but Ill let you know if I hear anything.

[enkeivette]

Why is it always a dick measuring contest with you? I don't need your credentials to validate what you are saying Carlos. I don't seek to devalue anyone and everyone so don't worry about proving yourself to me. I respect your opinion for what it is, and experience where applicable.


That said, I don't disagree being honest is the best policy. I just don't presume to know how beneficial this client is to his firm and always proceed with caution. Sometimes, actually most of the time, telling the client they were essentially "wrong" in any facet doesn't play out well for longevity. Maybe, just maybe it doesn't matter much to his firm and that's the best approach, I don't know.

Just be cautious is all Clunt

















:D

:lol:

[enkeivette]

I spent 6 hours writing an opposition to a motion another attorney filed against my client. When I found evidence that the client lied, I could not file the opposition. It wouldnt have made sense. Deadline passed before I could draft a new one.

I argued my position orally at the hearing, did better than anyone thought I would, but the judge did not like that we did not file an opposition. We may have won had I done so, now we will have to wait to see what the ruling is.

Now I have to bill the client for 6 hours, at $250 an hour, for an opposition I never filed (yes, $1,500) otherwise it will look to my boss like I did nothing that day.

Found out later (because the judge took it under submission), that we won. Boom. Contract law is my bitch.

[Vettezuki]

Found out later (because the judge took it under submission), that we won. Boom. Contract law is my bitch.

:farley2:

[injdinjn]

Found out later (because the judge took it under submission), that we won. Boom. Contract law is my bitch.

Good for you.

[injdinjn]

Just curious, with all the new laws are their items that fall outside the atty - client confidentiality area?

[enkeivette]

Just curious, with all the new laws are their items that fall outside the atty - client confidentiality area?

What new laws?

Attorney confidentiality just like doctor patient confidentiality is limited only when someone else stands to suffer "substantial bodily harm or death."

Also, lawyers cannot hide instrumentalities of a crime, but they don't have to give facts relating to those instrumentalities.

[Vettezuki]

What new laws?

Attorney confidentiality just like doctor patient confidentiality is limited only when someone else stands to suffer "substantial bodily harm or death."

Also, lawyers cannot hide instrumentalities of a crime, but they don't have to give facts relating to those instrumentalities.

Going the opposite direction I do think the Patriot Act (or related) does bizaarely prevent the accused from fully knowing what evidence the state is brining against them, making defense, uh, challenging. AIR, This is happening in the case of the lavabit founder, it's weird.

[injdinjn]

What new laws?

Attorney confidentiality just like doctor patient confidentiality is limited only when someone else stands to suffer "substantial bodily harm or death."

Also, lawyers cannot hide instrumentalities of a crime, but they don't have to give facts relating to those instrumentalities.

I'll bite, define instrumentalities as defined in the legal sense.

[injdinjn]

Going the opposite direction I do think the Patriot Act (or related) does bizaarely prevent the accused from fully knowing what evidence the state is brining against them, making defense, uh, challenging. AIR, This is happening in the case of the lavabit founder, it's weird.

The patriot act is the worst thing we ever allowed to happen, but it expired and this dictator revived it. We gave up all our constitutional rights.

[enkeivette]

I'll bite, define instrumentalities as defined in the legal sense.

OJs knife

[injdinjn]

Thanks
Oh, as to "new laws" CA passes ~1800 new laws every year, the feds about the same who knows what all they all could apply to.