Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 09:41 AM
Posted by Administrator
This is a question that doesn't get asked as often as it should.

And I have avoided talking about it for 33 years (more or less) because of evil insurance companies.

But, now, it is time.

It was a hot Easter week in Hempstead, New York in 1975. Temperatures were in the 90's...and this was before "Global Warming" and, back when the earth was cold. Kids were off from school, they wanted ice cream to help beat the heat and I was driving my Eskimo Pie truck. It was in the middle of Easter week that a teenage kid named Dante decided it would be a good idea to throw a firecracker at me after he stopped my truck. I had thought that he just wanted to buy ice cream.

When the firecracker exploded it was not near as loud as the cherry bomb that had exploded in the toilet when I was using the bathroom at Valley Stream North High many years before. The cherry bomb had my ears ringing for the next two weeks.

Still, the firecracker was loud and the explosion was surprising since I thought I would just be handing over a cone or a pop and making a cool 70 cents. And, when the firecracker went off, I tensed up and then.....

Then, I jumped out of the big window of the Eskimo Pie truck (the window usually used to exchange the ice cream and the money) and started chasing Dante down the street. I caught him after a block or two and then, the question was..........what to do?

I was an adult (albiet a 21 year old adult) and he was a kid and it was bad form for adults to beat up kids. It was also bad form for ice cream men to beat up kids. Luckily, as soon as I had my hands on him, Dante started apologizing and telling me that he had no idea that the firecracker was going to be that loud (and, certainly, no idea that I would jump out of the truck and chase him down).

The aftermath of this was that the jump out of the truck made my neck spasm and I spent the rest of the hot Easter week taking a cut of what my friend Mitch Blank made driving the truck....I was stuck in bed.

If I ever get into a car accident and mess up my neck, my recovery will be reduced by the fact that I had or have a pre-existing neck condition...never mind that it was 33 years ago...my neck is just worth less than your neck. Medical insurance companies will rate me and charge me a higher premium...though I haven't had a symptom in many decades (never needed to see a doctor...participate in sports...can stand on my head). If you are injured there is a great motivation to just keep it quiet (but, of course, not to lie). The people who would want to know just aren't your friends....they just want to know so that they can use it against you later.
add comment ( 3 views )   |  0 trackbacks   |   ( 3 / 1710 )

Sunday, June 21, 2009, 06:01 PM
Posted by Administrator
I believe I have previously written about the third party compliment...but...it bears repeating. The concept of the third party compliment is courtesy of Ralph...my instructor for my first trip to Burroughs sales school...Southfield, Michigan...maybe...1976...maybe 1977.

Here is the idea:

"Sally told me that she thinks you smart."

If I told you that I thought you were smart...you would likely think that I was just saying that to get something from you or to ingratiate myself to you. But, I'm just telling you what Sally told me. And, since you weren't around, Sally wasn't telling me because she wanted to get on your good side..Sally never thought for one second that I was going to tell you what she said...so, Sally could only have been telling me that you were smart for one reason: because she thought you were smart. ...

And not only did Sally think you were smart but she thinks so much of you that she wanted to tell me that she thought you were smart. You weren't even there at the time so...even when you weren't around it was on Sally's mind that you were smart.

And I think so much of you that I talked about it with Sally and remembered what she told me and took the trouble to tell you.

So, not only are you smart...and you can be sure that nobody is just making that up...but you are such a great person that me and Sally say good things about you when you aren't around and I make it a point to remember the discussion about you and to tell you what Sally said when you and I run into each other. You just are great!

You are going to like Sally even more than you did before....
You are going to even sort of start to like me.

"I like your tie." is a crap compliment.... But, hearing me tell you "John told me he likes your ties." is like having Christmas in July.

Having written this I must issue this disclaimer:
I have never (to the best of my recollection) ever made up a third party compliment and I never will in the future make up a third party compliment. If I say someone said something about you..they did...go ask them.

On the other hand, if someone does start talking about you...and says something nice...I am going to tell you the next time we run into each other.

Oh, and in the unlikely event the shoe is on the other foot...please do the same for me.
add comment ( 3 views )   |  0 trackbacks   |   ( 3 / 1776 )

Thursday, June 18, 2009, 03:27 PM
Posted by Administrator
A client told me today that the other party in the case had told her "Your lawyer is just an old car salesman." On behalf of car salesmen everywhere, I have to take exception to this. I only sold cars for about a year and a half. I really got my start in sales as an Ice Cream Man.

So, from here on out, I would like to be known as: JUST AN OLD ICE CREAM MAN.

And, while I learned a lot selling cars (especially things about dealing with people and sizing them up quickly...you never knew who the next customer would be at Volkswagen of Bayside), I got one of my first lessons in law at the wheel of the ice cream truck.

Before signing on as an Eskimo Pie man back in or around 1974...and paying for the inventory of ice cream and the rental on the truck...and choosing my ice cream route (Hempstead, New York on an island called "Long" which is slightly off the coast of New York near Manhattan Island)...I first had to spend an afternoon with an established Eskimo Pie man.

As an established Eskimo Pie man, the fellow I went out with sold hot dogs and soda as well as Eskimo Pie ice cream. I would be limited to ice cream and soda. This is what he told me: "Don't ever give the customer the ice cream until they have given you the money."

I thought this was kind of rude.

On my first day on the job, I was parked near Hempstead High School. My first sale was about to happen. A teenage girl walked up and asked for a Dr. Pepper. I handed her a can. She walked away without paying. I yelled at her and told her to pay. She didn't.

So, I drove after her in the ice cream turck, across a road construction site, down an alley. I cornered her and told her to pay me. She said she didn't have any money. I said "Then, give me back the soda." She said "I already opened it." I told her I didn't care. She gave the soda back.

Not being someone who learns lessons quickly, I continued to hand people the soda or ice cream...expecting that they would pay me once they had the item in their hand. And, for the four or five months I worked at ice cream sales, everybody did. Except for the first customer and the Dr. Pepper, everybody paid.

A large part of what lawyers do....especially lawyers who do transactions (buying and selling, for example, real estate and businesses)...is to make sure that the girl doesn't get the Dr. Pepper until the ice cream man gets his 75 cents. Litigation lawyers do it too.

For example, I sent the other lawyer a check for the remainder of his client's security deposit (after a deduction for damages and my fees) and I sent him my clients' written Release of his clients...and he had to hold the check and in his Trust Account and keep the Release in his file.

He sent me the garage door openers and his clients' written Release of my clients. When I get them, I let him know that he can go ahead and give his client the Release and the money.

He is the escrow agent. ...the middle man...the facilitator...the reminder that for as much people claim they don't trust lawyers, really, they do trust lawyers... because lawyers, generally, are trustworthy and because we make a lot of deals happen that wouldn't happen without us. So, go beat up your veteranarian or your dentist and leave us alone.

And, escrow agents are necessary when two sides to a transaction don't completely trust each other. People on opposite sides of law suits frequently don't trust each other.

In an injury case, I have to hold onto my client's settlement money until I send the other side my client's Release of their client (or, if I am dealing with an insurance company, their insured).

For a real estate transaction attorney, this means he or she holds the purchase money and the deeds and, when he or she has both, the deeds go to the buyer and the money goes to the seller. This way, the seller doesn't have to worry about giving the deeds to the buyer and not getting paid and the buyer doesn't have to worry about paying and not getting a deed.

If I give my client the settlement money without send out the Release...if the real estate lawyer gives out the purchase money without recording a deed to the buyer........and putting aside the fact that to do these things could, in some circumstances, be a crime..........at least the lawyer will get reported to the Florida Bar and (should) have his or her ticket pulled.

add comment ( 2 views )   |  0 trackbacks   |   ( 3.2 / 349 )

Sunday, May 17, 2009, 06:55 PM
Posted by Administrator
Let me get the easy part out of the way first: YOU CAN'T GO TO JAIL JUST FOR NOT PAYING A CREDIT CARD OR YOUR MORTGAGE OR A HOSPITAL BILL OR YOUR ELECTRIC BILL. You can't even go to jail for not paying your lawyer (but, I believe we are working on this).

Still, if you try hard enough, you can go to jail as a result of owing money. There are several ways to do this:
1) Not paying alimony or child support is contempt of court. The Judgment says you "shall" pay it and, if you don't do what the court says you shall do, it is possible to get taken off to jail for contempt. The courts here in Palm Beach County try hard to just accept non-payment and not send anyone to jail. I understand in Broward they are less sympathetic.

Once you get arrested, you will be brought to court the next morning and the judge will (re-) set your "purge amount"...pay the purge amount and you are out. The purge amount should be set at no more than you can afford and does not usually bear much relation to what you owe. So, if you convince the judge you can only come up with $50.00, for $50.00 you're out even though you owe $10,000.

The federal government/FBI/justice department will send you to jail for not paying your child support if you owe staggering amount, grab their attention and still don't pay. For big money, not paying child support is a federal crime. I have not heard any local stories but, sometimes, there is something about this in the newspaper, and...

2) If you don't pay fines in criminal cases, you can land up in jail.

3) HERE IS THE BIG ONE FOR PEOPLE IN DEBT: A creditor gets a judgment against you and then wants to take your deposition or have you answer questions "in aid of execution". "Execution" is when the Sheriff is sent off to take your property ("execution" ijn this context has nothing to do with executing people) and "in aid of" means the creditor (now judgment holder) wants you to tell them what you've got.

A subpoena, properly served, is a court order for you to come to a deposition or a hearing. If you don't show up----that's contempt. If you don't answer interrogatories (written questions) or if you don't show up in response to a subpoena (or you don't answer questions after showing up), the judgment holder will file a motion (request) for the court to make you show why you should not be held in contempt and the court will have a hearing on the motion. You will get notice (notice and the right to be heard are part of the right to "due process" that is in the Constitution).

If you come for the motion hearing, the judge will tell you to sit for the deposition and give the answers to the interrogatories and all will be forgotten and that you will go to jail if you don't. But, if you don't show for the hearing, the judge will likely find you in contempt of court and issue an order for you to be held in jail until your purge yourself of the contempt. The purge is usually set in the alternative: a) pay the amount you owe the judgment holder, or, b) sit for the deposition. If you don't pay, you will be brought to court the next day and, hopefully, the judge will make the judgment holder take your depostion right then. Otherwise, you'll sit in jail until..............

I have run into only a couple of people in my 25 years who have managed to be ordered off to jail for not sitting for depostions or answering interrogatories as a result of a lawsuit by a creditor. The low number demonstrates that while it is tough to get sent to jail as a result of owing money...........if you try hard enough, it can be done.

add comment   |  0 trackbacks   |   ( 3 / 303 )

Saturday, March 28, 2009, 11:12 PM
Posted by Administrator
My daughter, Aryanna Duhl, who is in the 8th grade, was complaining, this evening, that the kids who spit back what the teacher told them got an "A" but that the kids who questioned what the teacher said and who expressed their own opinion got a "B". I told her that I thought she was right but that I had not figured this out until the second year of law school. She beat me by about a dozen years.

So, here is how to get an "A". There are two parts....I) Spitting back what the teacher says and, II) Studying (this is unrelated to spitting back what the teacher said but I might as well get it off my chest here). Note that neither I nor II relates in any way to math. I never figured out how to do better than a "C" in math.

I) This worked in law school at the University of Florida and I assume it would work in any class dealing primarily with words as opposed to numbers:
A. Do not read the assigned book unless the teacher wrote it. It will only confuse things. The teacher is most interested in their own opinion and not the opinion of the book's author. So, don't read the book...it will only fill your brain with extraneous ("B") thoughts.
B. Take notes. Write down everything the teacher says.
C. Review the notes. I read all of my notes once three weeks before an exam; twice two weeks before; three times one week before; and one more time the day of the exam.

Here is what will happen if I am right: You will see in the exam questions relating exactly what the teacher said in class. For example, if the Contracts teacher discussed as an example in class, something like...a man is interested in buying a horse; he stands with the farmer in the field on the border of the US and Canada and points to a white horse but the farmer thinks he is pointing to the black horse; he pays $1,000 Canadian to the farmer in cash but the farmer puts the money in his drawer without looking thinking all the time that he was paid $1,000 US; the farmer delivers the black horse; the man keeps the black horse for two weeks before calling the farmer to complain...you will find almost exactly the same example on the test. Discuss the issues in the same words the teacher used (they will be in your notes) and you'll get your "A".

II) Unrelated to Aryanna's observation but I might as well get it off my chest.............HOW TO STUDY FOR MULTIPLE CHOICE OR FILL IN THE BLANKS. Again, I did not figure this out until half way through law school (some law school tests were partly multiple choice and the Bar Exam is multiple choice). Here goes:
A. Do not use test questions or examples of tests to test yourself on your knowledge of the subject. Do not have someone ask you questions so that you can see if you know the answer. Instead, read the question and the correct answer together.

Why? Because if you test yourself you will find yourself sitting there, in the middle of the exam, wondering whether the answer you remember as being the correct answer is correct or whether it was one of the wrong guesses you made while studying. My idea is that you only associate the correct answer with the question.

B. Test yourself. A few questions here and there to make sure this idea is working. But, only a few....and then back to question followed by correct answer.

Law school became much easier once I figured this out.
3 comments ( 9 views )   |  0 trackbacks   |   ( 3 / 1496 )

Sunday, February 8, 2009, 10:26 PM
Posted by Administrator
One of my favorite expressions is "That's a red herring." Unfortunately, I have found that nobody knows what I am talking about. So...

This is my understanding of the red herring.

You are in England and you are going fox hunting. You are nobility or, at least, moneyed. To fox hunt, you need to be on a horse and you need dogs. The dogs will smell the scent of the fox and go off chasing. You will follow on your horse with your fellow fox hunters. The dogs will chase the fox and, eventually, corner it and you will ride up and shoot the fox dead.

Anyway, back to the red herring.

A fox lover will take a herring (which is a fish) and let it get rotten and smelly. Then, before the dogs take off chasing the fox, he/she will get out the herring and walk across the trail he/she supposes the fox will take and then keep walking off into the countryside dragging the rotten fish.

When the dogs take off after the fox, they will be confused by the herring's scent and will make a right turn and head off to follow the fish. You will follow on your horse. The fox will escape.

Now, when someone changes the subject in the middle of an argument to another subject that they are better able to argue or when the other lawyer starts trying to confuse the judge with things that have nothing to do with anything to try to get the heat off of his/her client or when your kid lies and when you catch on says "My throat really, really hurts Mommy"..you can say "That's just a red herring."

Then you can start hoping that someone else in the room knows what you are talking about because, once you say it, it's stick, stack, no take back.

1 comment ( 13 views )   |  0 trackbacks   |   ( 3 / 286 )

Wednesday, January 28, 2009, 10:16 AM
Posted by Administrator
Clients are always looking for the good choice: The million dollar offer (on a case worth 20% of that); Don't pay bills but keep your credit rating; Write a threatening letter and she will send back the engagement ring along with a check for the $10,000 that you lent her to send to her brother in Brazil; He/She will agree to pay the $5,000 a month in alimony...no trial, no risk, just ask and you get it. But, usually...almost always....in this business there are no good choices and you've just got to pick the choice that is least bad: Run the risk of going to trial and getting nothing for the chance for the big money...or, take the offer; Sue your ex-fiance and go through the emotion of seeing and dealing with him/her again...or write off the ring and the loan; Forget about the alimony and move on with your life or go to trial and accept that the judge is going to hear that you were a coke addict for half of your marriage.

But, typically, clients can't decide because they are looking and looking and looking for the good choice. There must be a good choice. Right? You tell them the three choices, A,B & C and they keep looking for D. I truly and deeply wish there was a D. I would sleep better at night. I would not be laying awake...as I often do...looking for D. (I do note that sometimes there is a D and the client or I come up with it but, back to reality...) Usually there is not D.)

So, here is the story I tell to try and get clients to understand that there is no D and to pick A,B or C so that we can move on and make progress and resolve things:

About 8 years ago, I had to get a surgery on my nose for skin cancer (not melanoma and not basal cell, the other kind) and, after the surgery there was a deep ditch on the right side. Anticipating the deep ditch, the skin cancer surgeon was scheduled for the morning and, in the afternoon, it was off to the plastic surgeon.

Around 1:30PM, I sat in a barber type chair in the plastic surgeon's office and he said:
"You have three choices: I could take some skin from in back of your ear and graft it onto your nose; We could just leave the whole thing alone and it will heal...but there would be a deep depression where the cancer was; Or I could cut a piece of skin from above the surgery site leaving the bottom part of the skin attached and rotate it down to cover the hole."

The good thing about the last option, he said, was that it would leave some capillaries attached to the flapped skin and might heal faster and better on account of the uninterrupted blood flow.

I said "I know this one, I have three bad choices and I have to pick the one that is least bad." I picked the flap.

By the way, it didn't work as well as I'd hoped.

4 comments ( 28 views )   |  0 trackbacks   |   ( 3 / 371 )

Wednesday, January 21, 2009, 12:08 PM
Posted by Administrator
Letters from lawyers solve problems and get results.........r a r e l y. But, sometimes. For the most part, letters from lawyers are thrown in the trash.

If you don't pay the money, move out of the apartment, stop competing with your former employer, stop calling your former employee bad names when new, prospective employers call you will get sued...the lawyer's letter says. But, will you?

I don't like writing letters because my name is on the line. I write that my client will sue you if you don't do/stop doing what I decree. There are bad things about this from my perspective:

1) It isn't nice to threaten. Lawyers sometimes can't be nice but we want to be nice and we want to be paid well when we have to be rude, abrasive or obnoxious. There isn't much money in writing the lawyer letter.

2) I have threatened that my client will sue you if you ignore the letter. But, what if the client changes his/her mind? What if they don't want to spend the money to sue? My threat will be an empty threat and you will tell all of your friends to ignore letters from lawyers and, especially, that guy Duhl. He is just full of hot air.

Sometimes, it is helpful to write a letter just to see if the other side wants to give you their version of the facts:

"I am writing for the purpose of investigating the facts surrounding an incident where you, from what I have heard, told my client's prospective employer that she stole from you. This statement may be slanderous but, before proceeding, I want to make sure that the facts I have are accurate. Please provide me with your knowledge of what happened during the conversation in question within ten days or I will be forced to conclude that what I have been told is accurate and we will proceed accordingly."

This may put a scare into the other side without the letter writing lawyer having to threaten the lawsuit that may not come to pass.

Sometimes, you can mention bigger trouble if the other side doesn't do what you want:

"As you are aware, the engagement ring that you received from my client was a gift with a condition subsequent. The condition subsequent was marriage. Since you broke off the engagement, the condition subsequent was not fulfilled, the ring is not your ring and it must be returned.

Florida law provides that retaining property that is not yours may be civil theft and that damages for civil theft are three times actual damages plus attorney's fees and costs.

Please contact this office immediately regarding return of the ring. If we do not hear from you in ten days, we will conclude that it is your intention to keep the ring and we will proceed accordingly."

Now, if you don't return the $5,000 ring, you may owe $15,000 plus your ex-fiance's attorney's fees. It is easy to say "no" if your choice is returning a $5,000 ring or being sued for $5,000. Wait until you are sued...maybe you won't be. It is a little harder to look at maybe having to pay $15,000+ and all you get is a piece of ancient rock from Zales.

Lawyers letters are maybe worth something if they can legitimately contain a big downside if you don't comply or if they solicit information....where providing the information may make you uncomfortable or have you thinking that you did something wrong and trouble is about to follow.

Otherwise, why not throw the letter in the garbage?

3 comments ( 38 views )   |  0 trackbacks   |   ( 3 / 1771 )

Tuesday, December 9, 2008, 08:58 AM
Posted by Administrator
Lawyers are a pretty honest bunch, I think, and nobody wants to lose their ticket (their license to practice law). So, it is awkward when potential clients come in and ask (in a divorce case or a bankruptcy or after a money judgment gets entered---where the client's assets are an issue) "Can I just give my jewelry to my mother?" No, you can't. The jewelry will still be your jewelry because you don't really intend for your mother to own it (and there is another, similar, answer if you say you really do want your mother to own it). And, if you give the jewelry to your mother because you want to hide it from creditors, or your soon-to-be-ex spouse, or the other side of a case, you probably are not about to help your case much. Will the transfer to your mother lead you to lie under oath? Is the end result of "giving" the jewelry to your mother going to end up up being a crime? (Maybe the jewelry isn't worth as much as you think and the whole issue isn't worth agonizing about. Certainly, there is a different solution to the problem.)

I have written before about the difference between old crimes......committed before the client sees the lawyer (totally confidential) and new crimes......crimes the lawyer knows you are about to commit (most commonly, perjury...and totally not confidential).

New crimes....for example, when you tell the lawyer you have $100,000 in the bank but are about to swear that you have only $1...aren't covered by the priviledge. And it makes sense, the lawyer shouldn't be involved in the client's plan to defraud the court or the party on the other side. We aren't going to tell you how to hide your jewelry from creditors and we aren't going to help you put in place your plan to be a cheat...at least not knowingly. The problem is usually easily solved, the client gets reminded that the lawyer can't participate, that he/she will get caught and sent to jail, and the client gives up the idea.

The bigger problem is that some clients tell lies or forget things and the lawyer finds out later. A few months ago, I went to a "341 Meeting in a Bankruptcy". One of the questions in the bankruptcy petition, under oath, is whether any property was transferred (bought, sold, traded) in the past year. My client's answer to the question was "no". At the Meeting, the Trustee asked whether my client had owned property in the past year. His answer was "yes", he had a hourse and he sold it. The Trustee looked at me.......I sank down in my chair. I should have caught this when we did the Petition...I should have sensed there was a house...I should have smelled the house. I have been doing this for 25 years and there is no excuse. I am supposed to catch this stuff.

Thanks to this crappy market, the client's house had been sold without realizing one penny for him, so, no problem...it was obvious he had just forgotten and that he hadn't intended to lie or defraud anyone....except that I felt stupid. But, how about a client who said he had $1 in the bank but really had $100,000 and the lawyer finds out after the $1 had been sworn to? Here is what we have to do:

1) Tell the client that they have to advise the court of the mis-statement and
2) Advise the client that if he/she does not disclose the mis-statement that (as the lawyer from the Bar Ethics Hotline told me not too long ago) the lawyers obligation of honesty to the court "tumps" the client's priviledge.

In a civil case, the lawyer is obligated to rat out the client. And, if the lawyer doesn't rat out the client he/she is in violation of the ethical rules and, in addition, will probably be deemed to have joined up with the client's conspiracy to defraud the court and/or the other party. This would be criminal and the client and the lawyer can go off to jail together.

I wrote previously about how this applies to criminal cases. It is a little different. It is rare for a criminal defendant...especially in a serious case...to admit to the lawyer that they did it. Criminals tend to be smarter than we think and they know that as long as they claim innocence, their lawyer will work day and night to make their charges go away. No innocent man or woman should have to spend one day in jail. For defense laywer, it is a moral issue.

On the other hand, once they admit they are guilty, human nature takes over and it is not the moral issue for their lawyer that is once was. The lawyer will still try real hard, but now there is something missing: innocence. I remember years ago (not my case)...a young man of about 18 was charged with stabbing his girlfriend to death and leaving her in her upstairs apartment lying in a pool of blood. He swore to his lawyers he was not guilty and they worked day and night to save him.

One day, he changed his story and admitted he stabbed her. They pled the case out within the week. Did it plead out so quickly because the lawyers lost their spark, because they no longer feared long, sleepless nights regretting that they didn't do all they could to get this guy out of jail? Who knows? Still, I understand why criminal defendants (almost) never admit their guilty (and, always keep in mind: MANY REALLY AGREN'T GUILTY).

Note: My only link to the murder case came one Saturday morning when I was at the Gun Club Road jail seeing clients. I wandered throug the court room at the jail to see what was a going on (Saturday morning first appearances...whoever was arrested the night before) and there was the murderer's other girlfriend. She had been arrested for slipping him marijuana during a visit at the jail. I told the judge that I knew her (which I did) and that she was a nice, local girl....and she got released from jail to await her trial...probably nothing to do with what I said.
add comment ( 3 views )   |  0 trackbacks   |   ( 3 / 1942 )

Friday, December 5, 2008, 10:08 PM
Posted by Administrator
There are generally three ways for lawyers to calculate fees:

1) Hourly. This recognizes that for many kinds of cases, litigation particularly, it is impossible to figure out in advance how much work will go into resolving the case. Will it go to trial? Will it settle at court ordered mediation? Or before? Is the other party and/or the lawyer reasonable and eager to resolve things or crazy-nut-interested mainly in making the other side's life a living hell. How much does the other side have to spend on fees? How interested in the other lawyer in resolving things vs. running up a big fee to make his or her next yacht payment?

2) Contingency. The lawyer gets a piece of the action if there is a recovery. If there isn't a recovery, the lawyer doesn't get any fee at all and probably doesn't get paid back for his or her out of pocket costs. Lawyers like contingency fee cases if:
a) The other side is clearly liable for damages to his/her client.
b) There is money to pay for the damages...insurance or a deep pocket on the other side.
Clients like contingency cases if:
a) The client doesn't have money to pay an hourly fee, or,
b) The client wants the lawyer to take the risk of losing the case.

Very few cases except for injury cases and big money collection cases are handled on a contingency basis. Almost all injury cases are handed on a contingency basis ("no recovery, no fee").

In Florida, there is a standard contract the Florida Bar requires that clients sign and a Statement Of Client's Rights that the Bar also requires. This says, among other things, that you have a few days to fire your lawyer without having to pay the lawyer anything (you have a right to fire your lawyer any time you want but they will probably be entitled to a fee for work they've done) and that you have right to negotiate the percentage of the recovery the lawyer will get as a fee (yes, you can try to negotiate the percentage of the lawyer's fee).

For lawyers, the perfect case is, for example, an auto accident cases with damages worth, say, $150,000 and policy limits (the most an insurance company is obligated to pay) of, say, $100,000. The insurance company will pay the $100,000 quickly and without trouble in exchange for a Release from the injured client to the insured. The lawyer will explain to the client that the smart thing to do is take the $100,000. The lawyer will get a fee of between $33,000 and $40,000 (depending primarily on whether a lawsuit was filed) for minimal work. On the other hand, if the lawyer isn't advertising on TV, the lawyer isn't getting these csaes.

Note that contingency fees are illegal in criminal cases and divorce cases...something about lawyers being tempted to cheat in these kinds of cases if their compensation is tied to the result (e.g. the lawyer only gets paid for a "not guilty" verdict).

3) Flat Fee. If the lawyer can make a reasonable guess on how many hours it is going to take to do the work, the lawyer may take the case for a flat fee. The fee won't change with the amount of work the lawyer does. Flat fees are common for Wills, Trusts, criminal cases, simple divorces (no property, no kids, short term marriage), name changes, and bankruptcies. But, you may be able to negotiate a flat fee for other types of cases. For example, if you are looking for a lawyer for a divorce case, your lawyer might know the other lawyer and might have had similar cases with the other lawyer. This makes it (somewhat) easier to figure with some certainty how much time your divorce will take. Multiply the time by the hourly rate...add in a fudge factor and there is the fee. Flat fees insulate you from the possibility of a huge bill if your case gets complicated. Flat fees are the rule in criminal cases where you are paying your lawyer as much for what he or she knows and who he or she knows as you are for the time the lawyer puts in. A lot of what lawyers do in criminal cases is spend their goodwill and goodwill does not come cheap.

IV) THE OTHER SIDE PAYS Okay, there are at least four ways that lawyers charge fees. There are some kinds of cases where the other side pays the fee most of the time.

Generally, in Florida, you pay your own fees, win or lose, BUT: If the other side makes a frivolous claim against you, they may end up having to pay your fees. If you are involved in a divorce case, your spouse may have to pay most or all of your fees if he or she has a much better ability to pay fees than you do. There are ways to make an offer in the course of a civil lawsuit that will result in getting a judgment for fees against the other side if, after a trial, they don't come close enough to matching your offer. Contracts usually provide for the defaulting party to pay the other side's fees. Credit card agreement provide that you have to pay the company's attorney's fees if you don't pay your bill. Same thing for mortgages and car loans.

AND, there are some laws that are designed to encourage lawyers to file lawsuits by providing that the lawyers will get fees from the company they sue if the lawsuit succeeds. Lawyers can get their fees for suing for unpaid wages and, a big thing now, for suing companies that fail to pay workers time and a half for overtime. If your company has failed to pay you overtime, this could be worth pursuing. My friend Mark Cullen just got paid a truckload of money for attorney's fees for representing dozens of workers in an overtime case. I'm sure he would be willing to consider taking on similar cases.

1 comment ( 16 views )   |  0 trackbacks   |   ( 3 / 379 )

Monday, November 10, 2008, 10:43 PM
Posted by Administrator
The couple of times, so far, I have written about actual clients, I have changed names, dates, and places so that while I am able to illustrate my point there is no real chance that anybody would know who I am using to illustrate it. I don't think the client him or herself would know. If you think a client or a situation involving a client is recognizable in any way, let me know and I will delete the entry.

What I know from my clients, I am obigated to take to the grave, telling nobody (see entry below regarding lawyer/client priviledge for details). Mostly, this blog has nothing to do with clients, past or present. For example, in the following entry, I mention someone named Joe Trivisone. Joe never has been my client. I knew him 30 years ago. I always liked and respected Joe so I don't see why I should make up a name. I Emailed him before writing the entry and he did not object to my using his name.

So, to my clients, be assured that neither your name, your identity or your story will appear in this blog...unless you give me a good idea and I put it in and, with your permission, attribute the idea to you.
add comment ( 13 views )   |  0 trackbacks   |   ( 3 / 1493 )

Friday, October 31, 2008, 05:15 PM
Posted by Administrator
(Note: This morning, I did this entry. It disappeared. If it disappears this time, I will figure it is related to the subject...and not just coincidence).

In the late sixties and on into the 70's, my father owned a discount clothing store on Long Island. His idea was a factory outlet store before there were big strip shopping centers and malls like the Sawgrass Mall in Sunrise (South Florida's #1 tourist destination) centered around the factory outlet store. He had bought boy's clothes for years, first for a clothing only department store called Orbachs and later for an Eastern seaboard chain of clothing stores (I remember he once even went to one of their stores in Delaware...I had never known anyone before this who had gone to Delaware.).

Friends of his in the clothes manufacturing business were going to consign clothing to him and he would sell the clothing at discounted prices and this is how he would make our family's fortune. But, it didn't work. Around 1975, sadly, he closed up shop....and he died a few days later.

To supplement the revenue from clothing, he had begun to sell candy and cigarettes. He bought the candy and cigarettes from a
wholesaler not too far from our house. After he died, everything he had went automatically to my mother. The business was only in his name so the business debts died with him and all of the creditors went away....except for the cigarette wholesaler.

Every couple of weeks after my father's death, a big man with a deep voice, nicely dressed, would come and knock on my mother's door. She would open the door and the man knocking would say, more or less "I'm from the wholesaler and your husband owes us money." "But", she would say, "he is dead and there is no money." "Okay," the man would say "but whether or not he is dead he still owes us money and I will be back to collect it." And, after a while, he would come back.

I don't think my mother, all 4'11" of her, was particularly scared of this guy but she did find it annoying. So, she hatched a plan to get rid of him.

For years, she taught 4th grade down the block from where we lived...at my elementary school...and her kids really liked her. Once a year was parent/teacher conference day.

She knew that one of the girls in her class lived in an unusually large Tudor type house, newly built, that stood on a street dotted with much smaller houses. The girl's father was a garbage man. My mother put 2 and 2 together.

When, the girl's parents came to school for parent/teacher conference day (and, after assuring the parents that their daughter was doing great in school) my mother turned to the father and told him the story about the cigarette wholesaler. "What should I do?", she asked. He said he would take care of it.

Now, when I tell this story I often get the impression that the person I am telling it to believes that the garbage man with the big house sent his thugs down to the cigarette wholesaler and beat him up. Of course not. The garbage man with the big house got on the phone and called up the cigarette wholesale...they probably knew each other or, if not, they knew someone in common...and, he said, more or less "My daughter really likes her 4th grade teacher and could you do me a favor and not send your guy over to her house about the money?" And, the cigarette wholesaler no doubt said "Sure." Because he would rather have the garbage man's friendship or have the garbage man owe him a favor than make a big stink about a few dollars.

Of course, the man never came back.

My family has had other run ins with the mafia over the years. When I worked selling cars (of course not at the Bayside Volkswagen dealer, it was that other place), the sales manager's brother, Carmine, would come in every Saturday with a giant tureen of lasagna or stuffed shells...lunch for everyone. Carmine brought his friend Joe and, though I knew both of them for quite a while, it was pretty clear that...at least in the conventional sense...they did not work for a living. They were both free all week and stopped by the dealership from time to time...never in any rush at all; they drove very big (American) cars; they never said a word about work; and Frank, the sales manager, never did mention what either one of them did for a living.

Frank, sold Chevrolets for years and years before he moved to Volkwagen (car salesmen and managers, then and now, move from job to job all of the time). He had never sold a foreign car before the stint at Volkswagen and he made it clear that he really didn't like the whole idea. He was a Chevy guy.

Frank had people who had bought Chevys from him for years. But, when he started selling Volkswagens, they started buying Volkswagens. Now, Frank was a very nice buy but, nice as he was, there had to be some other reason the former Chevy buyers bought whatever Frank was selling. And now only did they buy Volkswagens from Frank, they bought fully loaded cars with every option at the highest price Frank could say with a straight face and they didn't bargain. Frank was a good salesman but he wasn't that good.

Did all of these buyers owe Frank's brother Carmine a favor? And Carmine was just looking out for Frank? Yes, I think.
(Though I don't know whether the cigarette wholesaler, the garbage man with a big house, or the man who came and knocked on my mother's door drove Chevys...or Volkswagens. Okay, all of these guys drove Linconln Continentals or Cadillac Sedan Devilles.)

11 comments ( 37 views )   |  0 trackbacks   |   ( 3.1 / 1466 )

Wednesday, October 29, 2008, 07:05 PM
Posted by Administrator
I just read a piece on MSN (a crappy search engine that refuses to acknowledge my existence but a good place for news and current events) about traffic tickets. As it says in the piece, here in Florida there are some law firms that only do tickets so they charge very reasonable rates because they are in traffic court with stacks of tickets every day. I don't go to traffic court much but if you need a traffic lawyer, call me or shoot me an email and I'll give you the names of who I like (here in Palm Beach County...I know someone in Hendry...I think Doug Leifert has people in Broward).

When I do go to traffic court...because a family member or close friend who I owe a favor got a ticket...after I get the file from the clerk, I walk over to whatever traffic ticket lawyer is staking out the counsel table and ask them to have a look. The traffic tickets lawyers know the statutes and know what to look for much better than I do.

If there is a mistake with the state statute the officer wrote down (the speeding statute for a state road when it happened on a
county road or a ticket written for turning onto a state road from a highway as opposed to turning from a county road from a state road, for example, and, yes, there are different statutes when you wouldn't think there would be) or some other obvious deficiency with the ticket, the Traffic Magistrate (lawyers who are trained, sworn in and paid a few dollars to judge non-accident, non-criminal tickets) will usually dismiss the ticket. The ticket will also get dismissed if the police officer doesn't show up (unless the court is made aware that the officer has a medical or personal problem and that he or she really wants the case continued). Dismissals for both of the above reasons are very common. Police officers can also dismiss tickets on their own. Here in Florida the police prosecuted the tickets and if the officer doesn't want to prosecute the ticket, it gets dismissed.

When you are stopped, here (in my opinion) is what to do and not to do.

1) Open the driver's window. Turn to your left and grab the top of the car door and wait for the officer to come over. I think that putting your hands in view relaxes the officer and makes it easier for him or her to be nice to you. Cops are afraid of getting shot. There could be a gun in your car and you could be reaching for it. A lot of cops are killed in traffic stops. You don't want to put your hands in the air but, if you make it obvious to the cop walking up to your car that your hands are empty and that you mean him or her no harm, it is bound to help. Don't look for your license until the cop gets to the car, otherwise, what he or she will see is you rooting around looking for something...a gun...or are you just hiding drugs? (I recently ran a stop sign and cut off a Deputy Sheriff at a 2 way stop sign. I stopped when he turned around. I had my hands on the window and when he walked up and I shrugged my shoulders (trying to say with my body language "that was stupid of me"). "Sorry about that Deputy", I said. He laughed, shook his head, walked back to his car and drove away.

2) Call the cop who stops you what he or she is. Call the police "officer"; the Highway Patrol "trooper"; and a deputy sheriff "deputy". They are what they are. A deputy is not an officer (and a trooper certainly isn't) and doesn't appreciate it if you don't know that. Look at their name tag (reading the name tag pretty much assures that the cop who stopped you won't think you are drunk). "Could I just get a warning, Trooper Smith?"

3) Ask for a warning. You are more likely to get it if you ask for it.

4) Be old. Okay, you have no control over this but I have noticed that the older I get, the fewer tickets I get. I still get stopped but when the cops see how old I am they figure I'm just not a threat to anyone, so, why bother writing me a ticket.

5) If you are going to drop names, drop them. I don't do this but, if you are going to, do it RIGHT FROM THE START AND BEFORE the ticket starts getting written. I think the way to go is this:
a) As the cop approaches the car start thinking who you know from his or her department.
b) Say the following (substituting the name(s) you are going to use): "Sgt. Dalingberg would be real happy if you just gave me a warning." Better than this: "My uncle, Capt. Warner, just mentioned you at the BBQ the other day...could you maybe give me a warning, please." Or, "Angela Black, Al Smith, Charlie Davie, and Dick Reeves are all good friends of mine. Could you do me a favor on this one?"
You should, of course, actually know the people whose name you are using. The cop will probably check you out with the people whose names you are dropping. A few years ago, I asked for and got a warning from a local Deputy Sheriff. As he was leaving, I said "do you know if Gary Smith is working today?" I knew Gary was on his unit. I really did want to know if he was working. Even though he didn't know that I knew Gary until after he decided to only give me a warning, he still called Gary to check me out. Gary called me later that day "Yeah" Gary said "I told him you were my lawyer." (Which, I am.)

6) I don't know if it matters that much if you admit that you know why the cop stopped you. Yes, it is an admission that can be used against you in court but if you are doing 90MPH in a 60MPH zone, you are going to look like a shmuck if you claim you have no idea whey you are parked on the side of the highway with red and blue lights flashing in your rear view mirror. How about anwering "Do you know why I stopped you?" with "Sorry about that Deputy." It's not really an admission and the cop won't hate you for being a liar. And, you are sorry. You would have hoped that the cop had better things to do than stop you. I guess you don't have to speak at all but you are almost certain to get a ticket if you give the cop the silent treatment (unless he or she sees your license and you are, for instance, Tom Cruise or Jennifer Aniston).

7) I have seen my wife get out of a ticket for 90MPH in a 70MPH zone. "I'm sorry", she said. (My wife has corrected me, she says that what she told the Trooper was: "I am very sorry."

8) Do hot women get stopped because they are hot? Yes. And while you shouldn't make a date with the cop who stopped you, you should at least be polite and avoid the ticket rather than act nasty (though you do have a right to be nasty, he has abused his power)and land up with a ticket. Life is unfair...don't make it worse.

Have you been to traffic school?
Do you have a bad driving record that is going to be held against you if you hire a ticket lawyer to take care of things for you?

You will pay higher insurance rates if you get points on your license....avoid points if there is any way you can.

4 comments ( 16 views )   |  0 trackbacks   |   ( 3.1 / 2198 )

The Lawyer/Client Priviledge---Hunter Mountain, NY 1983? 
Sunday, October 26, 2008, 04:29 PM
Posted by Administrator
Hunter Mountain is about 100 miles north of New York City...the closest there is. It is an unusual ski area in that there are chair lifts everwhere. Most ski areas...looking up from the bottom...have narrow slopes with a lift here and there. Hunter Mountain is laid bare, top to bottom, except for the occaisional stand of trees. There are chair lifts everywhere you look...from top to bottom...from middle to top...from bottom to middle...sideways from right to left...from left to right...anywhere they could fit one. All of this to maximize the number of skiers from Manhattan able to buy a lift ticket and have a reasonable chance of making a few runs (after standing on a lift line for half an hour) on a below zero, windy Sunday in January.

One of the great things about Hunter though is the ice. Go to Vail, for instance, and all you get is mile after mile of thick snow cover. It is almost blissful to ski in the Rockies...back and forth and back and forth...about as much challenge (unless you head for the bumps) as sitting in a Jacuzzi. But Hunter's got patches of ice all over...lose your concentration for a few seconds and you are down hard on your ass.

But, I digress...the subject is the lawyer/client priviledge and one day, about 20 years ago, I was visiting New York and riding up on a chairlift at Hunter with my friend Bob Jones. Bob had graduated from the Culinary Institute of America (down the valley and to the left), the best cooking school in America, a few years before. He had been working in Manhattan cooking for executives. He had found some people with money who wanted to buy a restaurant with him.

So, we rode up on the chairlift and Bob started talking about the deal and he told me "Steve, they even showed me both sets of book." So, okay, I was admitted to the Bar (but it was the Florida Bar and we were in New York) and everything you tell a lawyer is a secret, so, it was okay to tell me that he was buying a business from tax cheats. Was it?

Prospective clients frequently come to see me about a bankruptcy or a divorce and I need to find out about their assets. "Do you own jewelry?", I frequently ask...(really, I'll ask "What kind of jewelry have you got?"...yes/no answers usually don't reveal much and I can usually tell who has jewelry or valuable assets, generally, by looking at their haircut and their clothing and shoes). "Well", the answer goes "nobody knows about it." Okay, but now I know about it.

Here is the priviledge.......
1) Everything you tell me is a secret. If you committed murder last week, that is a secret. I will take it with me to my grave. I will not tell my wife. I will not tell your wife. I will not tell my mother. I will not tell the cops.

2) But, if you tell me (for example) that you have jewelry and you are about to sign a sworn statement in which you say you don't have jewelry (or you don't list the jewelry that you told me you have) there is no priviledge. By lying under oath...and not disclosing the jewelry...you are committing perjury. And I know you are committing perjury so, if I let you sign the sworn statement...or testify in court that you don't own jewelry...or make any sworn statement at all that I know isn't true then there is no priviledge at all. I've got to try to get you to tell the truth..I can't represent you if I know you are lying...and I may have to tell the court that you are lying if you do it in front of me. (Note that the rule for criminal cases is a little different.) BUT, FOR CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CASES THERE IS NO PRIVILEDGE FOR FUTURE CRIMES. You tell me you are going to go kill someone tomorrow and I am calling the cops.

Here is an example... I had an injury client a few years ago who owned a Greek restaurant. He had a helper working for him who was an illegal alien. The Defendant's lawyer took his deposition. One of his claims was that he couldn't work at the restaurant like he used to because of his injuries.

At the deposition, the Defendant's lawyer asked: "Do you have anyone helping you at the restaurant." "No", he said.

I told the other lawyer I needed to take my client outside the deposition room and talk to him. Now, this is a very tacky thing to do in my opinion. I have seen lawyers advise their clients at the beginning of their deposition that if they have questions about how to answer a question that I ask they should just tell their lawyer and we will all just stop the deposition and so they can go outside and talk about it. Why? So the lawyer can make up the answer?

I wouldn't do this with my clients. We'll take a break if you need to use the bathroom but you need to answer the questions you are asked truthfully and I'll be paying attention ready to object if the other lawyer asked something that is out of line. On the extremely rare occaision I have had a witness who I am deposing wanting to go outside and talk to their lawyer before answering my question (I really can't stop them from leaving) first, I ask the witness on the record ("on the record" means a court reporter...sometimes just a tape recorder... is taking down what is said) "So, just to make it perfectly clear on the record, you are unable to answer my last question without going outside and talking to your lawyer about it, right?" I think this gets the point across.

Anyway, the other lawyer had no idea why I wanted to take my client outside and figured it was so that I could coach him. And it was to coach him.... to coach him to tell the truth because the ethical rules say that I can't sit there and let a client lie. So, I took him into the hall and told him that he had to tell the other lawyer about his illegal alien employee. I told him to answer the question and not add anything to his answer unless he was asked. Yes, he had an employee...this is what the employee did. I told him nobody cared if the employee was illegal, nobody would call the INS.

We went back inside. The deposition continued. "Do you have anyone helping you at the restaurant?" "No", my client said. Off we went back into the hallway. The other lawyer was getting angry. "I have to do this", I said.

Now, remember, I told my client to answer the question and leave it at that unless he was asked a follow up question. "Do you have anyone helping you?" "Yes", he said. "What does he do for you?" A few (unrelated) questions later it happened. "My employee, he is illegal...please, please, please do not get him deported." My client started to cry.

After the deposition was over, I asked the other lawyer "Were you going to ask if the guy was here legally?" "No", she said "I really don't care."

Okay, here is the rule for criminal cases: If your client tells you that he or she is going to lie on the witness stand you can't help him lie by asking questions directed to helping your client get the story out ("So, what happened next?" "Did you go to the car or did you stay?" "Where was Johnny while this was going on?"...you can't ask questions like this...your client is own his own). All you are allowed to do is sit your client on the witness stand and say, more or less "So, tell the jury what happened." I have never seen this happen at any criminal trial. I have never heard of a lawyer just sitting his or her client on the stand and having them tell their story. So, I am convinced that either criminals never lie or, at least, they are smart enough not to tell their lawyers they are going to lie.

If you have things to hide, you need to consider whether a lawyer is going to risk his or her license to help you lie. (I have had prospective clients ask me to help them lie...give them advise on hiding assets, for instance... for a $1,000 fee...are these people crazy ? Or, are they just contemptous of lawyers?)

Sometimes it is a good idea to keep your mouth shut.

Lawyers (at least the ones I know) are generally honest.

8 comments ( 49 views )   |  0 trackbacks   |   ( 3 / 1938 )

<Back | 1 |