What we don't do well.

A client who is quite familiar with these ever growing pages recently expressed her sense of the accuracy of my posts and generally complimented the firm.  She said, "you understand what I'm going through better than anyone else I talked to.  You understand this area of law inside and out and, as I've seen, you can litigate anybody into the ground.  Is there anything you don't do well?"

"I'm sure there must be," I told her.  Though I couldn't think of anything at the time.

But her question stayed with me.  Is there anything we don't do well?  I finally came up with an answer.

We don't lie well.  We don't make stuff up.  Frankly, we don't do balderdash well at all.

If you've read my posts for any length of time you're aware that there are two types of family law attorneys.  Short of saying the good guys and the not so good guys, I'll recast it this way: the majority of us are honest and straightforward.  We look for common ground to achieve a fair settlement.  Most of us practice in this same vein.

Some, however, feel that an honest, straightforward, affirmative practice is not what lawyering is all about.  They argue that lawyers are not doing their job unless they are zealous advocates.  (The Bar regulations actually use that term, zealous advocates.)  But these folks mean something very specific by their interpretation of the Bar's rules.  They mean that you win at all costs, including integrity, honesty, ethics, decency and morality.  In short, to win, you make stuff up. 

We have several cases moving forward right now where I can see a fair, just and equitable settlement.  But the other side is represented by "winner take all" attorneys, doing the bidding of an unscrupulous spouse.  In each case, they have no case, no facts, no law.  So they conjure the facts and they bastardize the law in the hope of creating a case in which they will eventually vanquish us.

And we don't do that well. 

I love my profession.  I think it a noble business.  I value the law too much to cheapen it by falsifying documents, purchasing witnesses and torturing time honored legal positions.  I value my clients too much to allow them to perjure themselves or posit a position which is outside the bounds of decency. 

I always say, "It is what it is."  I don't make the facts.  History has cemented the facts.  Those are the facts we work with.  Reality dictates the just result.  A result not based upon reality is, by definition, unjust.  And unjust results yield a destruction of the legal process, undermining the dignity of law and a whole host of unexpected and unwanted consequences.

Karma anyone?

So we don't lie, cheat or steal well.  And we never will.

You want somebody to make up stuff?  Check out those other guys.  You want honesty and integrity in your family law case so that you can look your children in the face, or better still, look yourself in the face in the morning and hold your head up high always?  Give us a call.

Michael Manely
http://www.allfamilylaw.com/CM/Custom/Firm-Overview.asp

I'll fight you 'till the day you die.

In an exclusively family law practice, it is easy to focus on the divorce cases.  They are parties' first bite at the apple.  All the issues are in play.  All the drama and all the strategies are brought to bear on resolution of these sometimes legally and always emotionally complex matters.

The other kinds of cases, usually modifications and contempts, cause less concern because they are usually more logic based.  Something needs to change in the agreement because life has substantially changed: Modification; or the other party is not doing something important that they were supposed to do based upon the Court's Order: Contempt.  Both are straightforward and, since they arise after the divorce, usually are far less vitriolic and emotional. 

However, there is a kind of post divorce case that can take the cake.  These contempt and modifications do not stem from logic but from need, some deep seated need to stay engaged, to stay embroiled.  They come from the party who never lets go.  In a sick sense, they come from the party who won't say goodbye.   It's as if they carry "till death do us part," to a whole new level.

We can identify these cases because the Complaint provides nothing substantive to sink your teeth into.  There is nothing hard and fast and objective, it is all innuendo, "hints and allegations."  We find a lot of pettiness in these Complaints.  It's a "she touched me first," kind of pleading.

And they usually come from just a few attorneys who are more than happy to stoke the eternal flame of post marital animus because they know that angry clients pay more.

There's a Don Henley song about this.  (Isn't there about everything?)  It's called, "Get over it."  Lord knows the judges wish the parties would. 

I was recently asked by a party defending yet another suit from an all too well funded ex-spouse, "Will it ever end?"  I had to answer that I didn't think it would.  So long as the Judge doesn't pop the Opposing Party, doesn't force them to some financial pain for continuing to inflict their anger on their ex-spouse, there is little hope that the offending party will ever stop. What would make them?  Boredom?  These people live to litigate.  This is what life is all about for them, staying in controversy.

So, judges, if you see a party bringing an action against an ex-spouse, and there's no real teeth to it, stop the madness, stop the destructive behavior.  Please charge the plaintiff with some fees for harassing their ex.  Make them think at least twice before they venture down this road again.

And parties, if you are in this never ending relationship with an ex-spouse who could never love but can always litigate, I'm terribly sorry.

Michael Manely