Spartanburg Divorce Lawyer & Attorney : Stevens-MacPhail Law Firm : South Carolina Family Law Serving Columbia, Charleston, Greenville, Hilton Head Island

Choosing the right attorney to handle your family law matter can make a significant difference in the outcome of your case.  Knowing what "type" of attorney to choose (and not to choose) can make the process easier on you and can result in a faster, better outcome.  Consider the following article by Victor J. Medina on this topic:

I recently fielded a phone call from a business colleague who told me that she had referred me to a friend for matrimonial work. She mentioned that when she was getting a divorce she found that her attorney became too adversarial and impeded the progress of the divorce. She told me that, from her perspective, the divorce attorneys were making it about themselves and not about the clients.
I cringe when I hear that kind of story. One of the hallmarks of our practice is that the client and his/her needs are at the forefront of our minds when dealing with the case. I’ve often told many clients in an initial interview that I have no ego in the case. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve swallowed insult after insinuation about me and my firm because retaliation would have been counterproductive. This type of pliability in a negotiation is necessary because the goal is more important than maintaining ground in the ego game.

I also often have clients come in asking “Are you a fighter? I need a bulldog on this…” or “I really need someone who is collaborative…can you work with my ex’s attorney?” - I usually respond, kindly, that (1) yes, our firm can be all those things and (2) at this point, I’m not sure anyone knows what they’ll need in a divorce. A general way to state it is that they’ll need an attorney who can respond to the situation and can be what the circumstances warrant. I think there are a select few attorneys who can do that - at least in what I’ve encountered on the other side of the table. Most attorneys have one mode and have a reputation for being one thing. Those are the easiest attorneys to deal with (even the screamers) because you know what you’re getting from then and they’re rarely creative in their approach. That is, I almost never have to worry about not seeing the next move coming because it’s all so predictable. On the other hand, the crafty attorney is the one that never approaches the situation from the same angle. I’m on my toes with those attorneys because, having practiced that way myself, I know how crafty they can be.

The short of it is this - when you look for a divorce attorney or someone to handle your post-divorce family law matters, such as custody or support enforcement, seek out those attorneys for whom flexibility is a hallmark. In any divorce “battle”, you may need air strikes, sea power, diplomacy or a combination of four other things. If you restrict yourself to an attorney or law firm that specializes in air power with all the latest bombers, you’ll be vulnerable to the ground attack and may not avoid war altogether.

Was the war analogy too much? Just trying to get the point across.

Source:  "Choosing a Divorce Attorney - Flexibility is Key" by Victor J. Medina, published at the
New Jersey Divorce & Family Law blog.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

My two articles published last week (here and here) on the subject of using fixed fees in family law cases have created a bit of a buzz.  Some bloggers, like Grant Griffiths of the Kansas Family Law Blog, agree with me.  Mr. Griffiths writes that he has been using fixed fees in his family court practice for over three years, and he agrees with me that this method benefits both his clients and himself.

However, others, such as Daniel Clement of the New York Divorce Report disagree and still advocate the "hourly" billing model for his family law cases.  Mr. Clements questions whether fixed fees are appropriate in anything other than "simple" cases, i.e. those that are limited in scope, and he believes fixed fees to be inappropriate in more involved cases.  He focuses his concern on the possibility that parties in family law cases might take "irrational and economically untenable positions fueled by emotions."

I probably had the same type of concern before I began handling cases in this manner.  However, after using this method for a few years, I can say from experience that it is unfounded.  Among other things, I use the following two methods to help prevent this from being a problem in my practice:

1. I am very, very selective in choosing which clients I agree to represent.  I estimate that I reject approximately one-half of the potential cases that I could accept.  I only agree to represent those clients that meet the following criteria:  (a) the client's goals in the case are reasonable; (b) the client is willing to help my office work on his/her case; and (c) the client is someone that I truly want to help.  There are other more subtle criteria that I subconsciously apply, and I will admit that a lot of it is done by "gut feeling".  However, after doing this for so long and handling so many cases, my gut feeling is right the vast majority of the time.
   
2. In most family law matters, I usually break the case down into different phases, at which portions of the fixed fee will be due and payable.  This can be done in different manners, such as by time or by status of the case, but the point is that if a case gets resolved during any particular phase, there are no additional attorney's fees due.  This scenario gives the client incentive to help resolve the case sooner rather than later if a reasonable resolution is possible, but at the same time, the client is protected and knows his total cost if it is not.  Having all of this information available to the client up front helps him/her better assess any settlement offers and the case in general as it progresses.

Mr. Clement's post made me wonder about his thoughts on these questions:

1. How does he handle "unreasonable" clients that he is representing on an "hourly" basis?  I believe that the problem he references is more with the clients themselves than with the manner of charging for the attorney's time.  Back when I did charge by the hour for my time, I would typically withdraw from the representation if my client was acting unreasonably.  I still have that same option available to me now while using a fixed fee, but it is very rare that I have to exercise that option because of my stringent client selection criteria as discussed above.  Either way, I do not want to represent unreasonable clients, period.
   
2. Does he agree with the harsh opinion expressed by Robert Hirshon, former president of the American Bar Association, that “[t]he billable hour is fundamentally about quantity over quality, repetition over creativity”?  I believe that clients don’t care how long it takes you to produce those results – they only care about the results themselves.  I believe that the hourly rate can encourage (or at least reward) inefficiency on the attorney's part, because the longer it takes to do something, the greater the fee charged to the client.  Also, if I were the client, I know that I would feel uncomfortable in effect writing the "hourly basis" lawyer a blank check and hoping that he/she keeps the fees as low as possible.
   

I challenge Mr. Clement to handle just one case on a fixed fee basis and to then post his thoughts about doing so.  I am confident that should he do so, he will quickly see why I am such an advocate of this method.  I handled cases on an hourly basis for over a decade, and I can say without hesitation that the fixed fee basis is vastly superior for both attorneys and their clients.  I invite others to let me know their opinions on this topic by posting their comments.

• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks (2)

The American Bar Association released a report just over five years ago that was very critical of the “standard” way that many (if not most) attorneys charge their clients for their services.  Its conclusion was that “[t]he billable hour is fundamentally about quantity over quality, repetition over creativity.”  To me, that doesn't sound like it contributes at all to what should be the attorney's ultimate goal -- providing clients with the best possible service.

Approximately two years ago, I began handling all family law cases on a fixed fee basis instead of charging by the hour as I had done for many years.  When a client hires an attorney on an hourly basis, that client is basically writing the attorney a blank check and crossing his/her fingers hoping that the total fees are what he/she anticipated.  I know that if I was the client, I would definitely prefer the certainty of knowing the total cost instead of hoping for the best.

Specifically, I believe that clients receive the following benefits from hiring attorneys for a fixed fee:

• Clients know the total cost up front, which enables them to determine prior to retaining the attorney whether or not they can afford his/her services and to budget for the attorney's fees and costs. 
  
• Clients have another basis upon which to compare attorneys, both in the manner they charge for their services (fixed fee vs. hourly) as well as the amount charged ($X vs. $Y).
  
• Clients never end up in fee disputes with their attorneys, because all fees were negotiated and agreed upon before the representation began.
• This method encourages open communication from the client to the attorney.  In hourly billing situations, clients sometimes hesitate to provide information to the attorney because they know that they will incur fees and costs for doing so.
• Clients have a higher level of trust with their lawyers, which results in a better working relationship, which frequently yields better outcomes in the clients' cases.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (3)

I have written several posts on this blog about Parental Alienation Syndrome, such as here, here, and here.  To get another lawyer's take on this subject, I present the following article published by Dan Nunley at the Oklahoma Family Law Blog a few months ago:

Statistics show that approximately one in two marriages end in divorce and about ten percent of those divorces involve child custody battles.  During these emotionally charged proceedings, some children exhibit emotional detachment from one or both parents.  The cause of this emotional detachment is unknown and the issues involved are complex.

One suggested theory, developed by the late Richard A. Gardner, M.D., has come to be known as "Parental Alienation Syndrome" (PAS).  PAS typically portrays one parent as an evil alienator who through consistent brainwashing is responsible for turning an impressionable and vulnerable child against the innocent, enstranged parent.   As a result of this brainwashing, the child reflexively supports the alienating parent and experiences no guilt over their own cruelty towards the enstranged parent.

PAS is becoming an issue in more and more custody cases.  However, the mental health profession is far from agreement about the existence of the syndrome. Noting the lack of supporting data, the American Psychological Association has "no official position on the purported syndrome," according to its statement on PAS.

The legal community is divided as well. While many family lawyers believe the syndrome is a legitimate psychological diagnosis, others view it as nonsense. They say it's used primarily by parents who want someone to blame for their poor relationship with their children.

Read more about PAS in this recent article from Lawyers Weekly USA.

Source:  "Parental Alienation Syndrome" by Dan Nunley, published at the Oklahoma Family Law Blog.

• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks

Too many people don't know what to look for when they are considering which divorce lawyer to hire.  Most people who are interviewing family law attorneys are in a very stressful situation, typically one that they have not been in before.  Making an important decision during a particularly stressful time can be a recipe for disaster.

DivorceZone published an article that can be helpful to people facing this situation.  This article points out that not all lawyers are created equal, and I would add that not every lawyer is "right" for every case.  It is more important in family law cases than other cases that the attorney and the client have a good, working relationship and understand each other.  This article lists the following important points to consider when hiring a divorce lawyer:

• Specialization. The reality is that the law is extremely complicated and no lawyer, not even a so-called “general practitioner” can really master more than one or two main areas of law. Divorce law itself grows more and more complicated each year. You should choose a lawyer who practices primarily or exclusively in the area of divorce and family law.
• Knowledge. Given the high hourly rate you’ll be paying your divorce lawyer, you don’t want to have to pay to give your lawyer a legal education. You want a lawyer with substantial knowledge in divorce and family law issues, who already knows the law and how it applies to your situation.
• Experience. There are a lot of complexities to divorce law that you can’t simply learn from a book. For instance, often being able to determine the correct range of alimony that’s appropriate in your case is simply the result of seeing many cases with similar facts. While every divorce case has its unique twists, you will come out ahead if your lawyer has substantial experience.
• Good Communication. The biggest beef clients have with divorce lawyers is that their lawyer does not return their telephone calls, emails or other communications promptly. You should find out what a prospective divorce lawyer’s office policy on this. Also, see how long it takes for your prospective lawyer to return your initial call – this will give you a good idea as to the level of service you can expect.
• Local Knowledge. Part of the job of a divorce lawyer is to know the attitudes of the local judges and how best to tailor your case for them. As well, even if you never set foot inside a courtroom, it is helpful if the lawyer has experience dealing with your spouse’s divorce lawyer.
• Time. Does the divorce lawyer limit his practice to just a few select cases so that he can concentrate on his clients and give them good service, or do they take all clients who walk through their doors? The reality is that the amount of work to resolve successfully the issues arising from a divorce can be quite substantial, and your lawyer will need the time to deal with this.
• Fit. It’s important that you and your divorce lawyer get along well. This doesn’t mean that you have to be good buddies with your divorce lawyer and want to invite them to dinner. However, you’ll be going through some of the most difficult experiences in your life with this person. You’ll be revealing some of the most intimate details of your personal and financial situation to this person. Your relationship with this person will last quite a long time. So, it’s important that you’re comfortable with your divorce lawyer.
• Compassion. It’s important that your divorce lawyer be understanding of what you’re going through. Are you just a file number, or does your lawyer really care who you are and what you want?
• Independent. Ultimately, your divorce lawyer’s job is to fight for you and your rights. However, many lawyers have political ambitions or care more about getting along with other lawyers than giving zealous representation. You want an independent lawyer so that your needs are not sacrificed so that your lawyer can avoid irritating a colleague.
• Plan of Action. Is your divorce lawyer able to articulate a plan of action that they are going to take to resolve your case? If not, you will find that your case just seems to amble in no particular direction, raising your legal fees without accomplishing much.

Source:  "How to Hire the Right Divorce Lawyer" published at the DivorceZone Divorce and Family Law Blog.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

This is the final installment in the excellent series of posts by Michael Sherman of the Alabama Family Law Blog on the steps to take when it becomes apparent that a divorce may be imminent.  His series takes an honest, practical approach in showing people how to protect their interests and make prudent preparations in such a situation.  Here is Divorce Preparation: Step 13 - Be Good:

Well, we have finally reached the last step in this series of posts on practical steps to consider when you may be facing divorce.  I will wrap up the series with two more posts to conclude and summarize the series.  But, first, the final step which may seem a bit silly.

It is simply this: Be Good.

Here is the principle: you are about to be under a microscope.  You are reading this blog, so I assume that you may be facing a divorce and you'd like to that unpleasant process to be as amicable as possible.  Unfortunately, that is not always possible.  Your spouse may not share that objective for some reason.  They may be influenced by others (lawyers, friends, etc.) that convince them that what you are offering is not fair.

So, there is a chance that your case will end up going to trial no matter how diligent you and your lawyer are about trying to work the case out fairly and quickly.  That being said, you should not put ammunition in the gun for your spouse to use against you.

That means no dating, no carousing, and no partying. If custody may be an issue it means making the children your number one priority (they should be that anyway, right?).  Even things that are perfectly legal and harmless any other time can be twisted to look suspicious or worse in the hands of your spouse’s lawyer.

Suppose for example that you go out for dinner and drinks with members of the office to celebrate a fellow employee’s birthday.  This sounds harmless enough.  But, in a custody case these questions may be asked: While you chose to go out drinking with your friends, your spouse was at home taking care of the children, correct?  Are you having a romantic relationship with Joe/Jane who was also at the party?  How many drinks did you have that night?  This is something you routinely did during the marriage, isn’t it (i.e. choosing social events over your family)? You drove home that night under the influence of alcohol didn’t you? Etc.

You get the point.  This is a silly example, but why even open yourself up to this line of questioning.  Don’t put the judge in the position having to decide whether you are telling the truth that this was a harmless and isolated event.

Spend time with your kids, work, stay around the house, exercise, and attend to your spiritual life. Be above reproach.  Be Good.  Come to think of it, Its not bad advice whether you are facing divorce or not.

Source:  "Divorce Preparation: Step 13 - Be Good" by Michael Sherman, published at his Alabama Family Law Blog.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks