question for any lawyers?

[NDdomer2]

Better Call Wooly?

 

[nlroma1o]

In my experience, yes... they would. Parking Garages have people monthly that have your same predicament. So they are setup to handle every dispute. I would also argue that they seem to be in the right here. Fine print or not, parking garages have waiting lists and I've never had an agreement with one that didn't require notice. I would just pay it.

This is a parking garage in the condo building I am moving out of. And the garage is managed by the sames company that manages the condo building. So basically they are extorting money out of the very people that pay for their salary. The buildings HOA fees pay for this horrible management group.... This is part of the reason I am leaving the building I live in. The management company is an absolute nightmare to work with... and every time i have to deal with them I have to restrain myself from punching the old hag who has been removed once from her position, but is now somehow back managing the property.....

 

[Irish8248]

No offense to the lawyers that gave you the advice, but I've yet to meet a lawyer that doesn't always suggest "lawyering up". I find it very hard to believe that this charge would have landed you in jail. You're a respectable guy with a family from out of state, with no intent to dispute the charges. It's a misdemeanor for crying out loud. I think you would have been just fine without it.

Also... this would have been a reason to never go back to NY. I probably wouldn't have paid it so I had an excuse to make my friends from there have to come see me. Ha

What? Why would you just plead guilty to a misdemeanor? That's absolutely ridiculous, especially if your first offense. Then you have to check a box on every employment or schooling application until it's expunged.

 

[woolybug25]

What? Why would you just plead guilty to a misdemeanor? That's absolutely ridiculous, especially if your first offense. Then you have to check a box on every employment or schooling application until it's expunged.

Because it's an out of state offense that the punishment is pretty much a meaningless mark on your record. Not to mention one that wont effect your record in a year or so. Not to mention he said it was "probably less than a misdemeanor". It's not like the lawyer got him off either. So what exactly is your point?

 

[NDdomer2]

thread name change..."Legal Questions for Wooly"

 

[Cackalacky]

Another example of the fine print screwing the people.


LOL

 

[Irish#1]

Everybody hates the billable hour system, most of all lawyers.

So does the average citizen.

Back around '94 I had retained an attorney. Can't remember what it was for, but he calls me one day and tells me he has to visit a client that is near where I work. He wanted to know if he could stop by my work on the way and give me some paperwork to sign. He stops by, gives me the paperwork and is gone in five minutes. When I get his bill, I see a charge for his drive time and the five minutes it took for me to sign the papers. I reminded him that it was his idea to stop by on the way to see another client and I shouldn't be billed as I could have stopped by his office to sign the papers. He agreed and dropped the charges for that.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

thread name change..."Legal Questions for Wooly"

With all due respect to wooly, I would have done exactly what Panda did. Millions of Americans get crushed by our civil authorities every year for seemingly insignificant, good-faith violations of law (of which there are far too many for anyone to be aware of). If the Eye of Sauron has trained its eye on you, no matter how trivial the matter, the safest course of action is to get expert advice and handle it ASAP so you keep your nose clean. "You'll probably be fine blowing it off" are famous last words.

So does the average citizen.

That was exactly the point of my post. Clients of course hate it, though no one hates it more than lawyers themselves. For most lawyers, the only route to sustainable successful is through client referrals, which means making sure clients believe they've received good value for their money. But that's often difficult when the client has unrealistic expectations of what can be accomplished legally, or how much time it'll take to deliver a desired result. Thus, I end up spending a lot of (usually unbillable) time trying to manage client expectations, and also end up writing off a lot of time to ensure they're happy at the end of the day and will recommend me to others. It's a miserable system. If I could do everything flat fee, I would; but there are a lot of services for which that's not feasible.

Back around '94 I had retained an attorney. Can't remember what it was for, but he calls me one day and tells me he has to visit a client that is near where I work. He wanted to know if he could stop by my work on the way and give me some paperwork to sign. He stops by, gives me the paperwork and is gone in five minutes. When I get his bill, I see a charge for his drive time and the five minutes it took for me to sign the papers. I reminded him that it was his idea to stop by on the way to see another client and I shouldn't be billed as I could have stopped by his office to sign the papers. He agreed and dropped the charges for that.

That was likely an ethical violation, though I doubt your attorney was consciously trying to bilk you. Unless travel time is required by a single client, it's unethical to bill them entirely for that time. And if a case is clearly going to require a lot of travel time, attorneys are typically required to establish a lower rate at which to bill such and set that out clearly in the engagement agreement.

Running a successful legal practice doesn't just require competence at lawyering, but a whole host of entrepreneurial and back-office management skills that most professionals simply don't have. Billing is a mess at a lot of law firms simply because they're small outfits without adequate support staff.

 

[zelezo vlk]

There's no need for billable hours if we replace the justice system with the Thunderdome.

 

[Irish#1]

With all due respect to wooly, I would have done exactly what Panda did. Millions of Americans get crushed by our civil authorities every year for seemingly insignificant, good-faith violations of law (of which there are far too many for anyone to be aware of). If the Eye of Sauron has trained its eye on you, no matter how trivial the matter, the safest course of action is to get expert advice and handle it ASAP so you keep your nose clean. "You'll probably be fine blowing it off" are famous last words.



That was exactly the point of my post. Clients of course hate it, though no one hates it more than lawyers themselves. For most lawyers, the only route to sustainable successful is through client referrals, which means making sure clients believe they've received good value for their money. But that's often difficult when the client has unrealistic expectations of what can be accomplished legally, or how much time it'll take to deliver a desired result. Thus, I end up spending a lot of (usually unbillable) time trying to manage client expectations, and also end up writing off a lot of time to ensure they're happy at the end of the day and will recommend me to others. It's a miserable system. If I could do everything flat fee, I would; but there are a lot of services for which that's not feasible.



That was likely an ethical violation, though I doubt your attorney was consciously trying to bilk you. Unless travel time is required by a single client, it's unethical to bill them entirely for that time. And if a case is clearly going to require a lot of travel time, attorneys are typically required to establish a lower rate at which to bill such and set that out clearly in the engagement agreement.

Running a successful legal practice doesn't just require competence at lawyering, but a whole host of entrepreneurial and back-office management skills that most professionals simply don't have. Billing is a mess at a lot of law firms simply because they're small outfits without adequate support staff.

I never really thought he was trying to "double dip". From what I remember of him, he was a competent attorney, but was a little "flighty" when it came to other skills. He had no problem removing that time from his bill.

I think the average Joe gets put off because they see a line item for the attorneys time, a line item for a legal assistants time, a line item for a clerks filing time, postage, etc.. and feel they are getting nickled and dimed to death. Where as, let's say if you hire a plumber or an electrician you don't see those fees. The overhead is built into the billable rate.

 

[woolybug25]

With all due respect to wooly, I would have done exactly what Panda did. Millions of Americans get crushed by our civil authorities every year for seemingly insignificant, good-faith violations of law (of which there are far too many for anyone to be aware of). If the Eye of Sauron has trained its eye on you, no matter how trivial the matter, the safest course of action is to get expert advice and handle it ASAP so you keep your nose clean. "You'll probably be fine blowing it off" are famous last words.

So with equal due respect, I would pose a couple questions.

1) What would it have hurt for him to call the court house and request a letter to the judge asking him for options as an out of state individual. Willing to negotiate in good faith? Why not do this before shelling out money to an attorney? When I did this, it was the recommendation from my attorney friend in that state.

2) Do you really believe that if he would have shown up, was polite, and told them what happened, that the judge would have given him jail time for something like this? If not, then the max fine was less than what he paid at the end of the day.

 

[Wild Bill]

So with equal due respect, I would pose a couple questions.

1) What would it have hurt for him to call the court house and request a letter to the judge asking him for options as an out of state individual. Willing to negotiate in good faith? Why not do this before shelling out money to an attorney? When I did this, it was the recommendation from my attorney friend in that state.


2) Do you really believe that if he would have shown up, was polite, and told them what happened, that the judge would have given him jail time for something like this? If not, then the max fine was less than what he paid at the end of the day.

The Judge wouldn't or shouldn't respond to ex parte communication.

I don't disagree with part 2. I guess it depends on the person's willingness to speak on their own behalf. Most people are intimidated when they step up to that podium and speak to a Judge.

 

[Irish8248]

Because it's an out of state offense that the punishment is pretty much a meaningless mark on your record. Not to mention one that wont effect your record in a year or so. Not to mention he said it was "probably less than a misdemeanor". It's not like the lawyer got him off either. So what exactly is your point?

Doesn't matter what state it occurs in, it would still be a misdemeanor on your record. That's absolutely insane to plead to the charge and worry later.

Panda said he's in a govt job, a misdemeanor can absolutely impact his current or future growth potential.

I know what he said, I'm talking about what you said. You said you'd take the misdemeanor. That's insane and idiotic.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I never really thought he was trying to "double dip". From what I remember of him, he was a competent attorney, but was a little "flighty" when it came to other skills. He had no problem removing that time from his bill.

Sounds very typical. A lot of billing disputes come from small firm attorneys who simply don't have the bandwidth to meticulously record and breakdown their time; just lots of sloppy time sheets and in barely legible script.

I think the average Joe gets put off because they see a line item for the attorneys time, a line item for a legal assistants time, a line item for a clerks filing time, postage, etc.. and feel they are getting nickled and dimed to death. Where as, let's say if you hire a plumber or an electrician you don't see those fees. The overhead is built into the billable rate.

I agree that a lot of it is simply perception; but that sort of breakdown is usually mandated by the state bar. Lawyers have an ethical obligation to delegate work to in-house paralegals and support staff whenever possible for the sake of efficiency. Otherwise, the attorney is required to track and bill his time differently depending on the complexity of his task, which is a billing nightmare.

So with equal due respect, I would pose a couple questions.

1) What would it have hurt for him to call the court house and request a letter to the judge asking him for options as an out of state individual. Willing to negotiate in good faith? Why not do this before shelling out money to an attorney? When I did this, it was the recommendation from my attorney friend in that state.

I have no idea how things work in New York, but it's very unlikely he could have communicated directly with a judge/ commissioner/ magistrate prior to his hearing. Here in Maricopa County, the clerk of court would just direct him to self-help forms you can get at the court house or on the court website. So I would have started there, and if it was clear from the self-help materials that I could handle the violation on my own with minimal risk, I'd do so. But even then, I'd be strongly inclined to reach out to a local expert for advice. My practice is primarily estate planning, post-death administration, and probate/ trust litigation. There are countless errors a layperson can make trying to handle these things on their own, and I see it all the time. So I'm painfully aware that in areas of law outside my scope of expertise, it's what I don't know that could end up costing me dearly.

2) Do you really believe that if he would have shown up, was polite, and told them what happened, that the judge would have given him jail time for something like this? If not, then the max fine was less than what he paid at the end of the day.

I have no idea. A lot hinges on whether jail time was a real possibility here. If his lawyer was wrong about that, then your advice above may have been correct. But I still would have checked out the pro se resources first, and then consulted with a local attorney second if I didn't feel very confident from the self-help materials that I could manage things safely on my own.

 

[woolybug25]

Doesn't matter what state it occurs in, it would still be a misdemeanor on your record. That's absolutely insane to plead to the charge and worry later.

Panda said he's in a govt job, a misdemeanor can absolutely impact his current or future growth potential.

I know what he said, I'm talking about what you said. You said you'd take the misdemeanor. That's insane and idiotic.

First of all, cool it with the "insane" and "idiotic" comments. You're pissing me off.

Secondly, I'll let Panda respond to that. As far as I can tell, he didn't get it dropped and I don't see why my method would stop it from being expunged. It's exactly what I did and mine was expunged.

 

[woolybug25]

Sounds very typical. A lot of billing disputes come from small firm attorneys who simply don't have the bandwidth to meticulously record and breakdown their time; just lots of sloppy time sheets and in barely legible script.



I agree that a lot of it is simply perception; but that sort of breakdown is usually mandated by the state bar. Lawyers have an ethical obligation to delegate work to in-house paralegals and support staff whenever possible for the sake of efficiency. Otherwise, the attorney is required to track and bill his time differently depending on the complexity of his task, which is a billing nightmare.



I have no idea how things work in New York, but it's very unlikely he could have communicated directly with a judge/ commissioner/ magistrate prior to his hearing. Here in Maricopa County, the clerk of court would just direct him to self-help forms you can get at the court house or on the court website. So I would have started there, and if it was clear from the self-help materials that I could handle the violation on my own with minimal risk, I'd do so. But even then, I'd be strongly inclined to reach out to a local expert for advice. My practice is primarily estate planning, post-death administration, and probate/ trust litigation. There are countless errors a layperson can make trying to handle these things on their own, and I see it all the time. So I'm painfully aware that in areas of law outside my scope of expertise, it's what I don't know that could end up costing me dearly.



I have no idea. A lot hinges on whether jail time was a real possibility here. If his lawyer was wrong about that, then your advice above may have been correct. But I still would have checked out the pro se resources first, and then consulted with a local attorney second if I didn't feel very confident from the self-help materials that I could manage things safely on my own.

That's interesting on the judge. I'm aware that you cannot speak to the judge directly, and I'm sure the rules are different from state to state, but I had no problem writing the judge a letter in my case. He didn't respond directly to me of course, but the court worked it out for me. I mean, it's a common issue that all courts deal with. Every state has odd rules where they require physical presence, but common sense is often applied to non residents on minor offenses. In my mind, it seems like there's nothing to lose with asking for the courts cooperation before shelling out big bucks. It worked for me.

 

[Emcee77]

With all due respect to wooly, I would have done exactly what Panda did. Millions of Americans get crushed by our civil authorities every year for seemingly insignificant, good-faith violations of law (of which there are far too many for anyone to be aware of). If the Eye of Sauron has trained its eye on you, no matter how trivial the matter, the safest course of action is to get expert advice and handle it ASAP so you keep your nose clean. "You'll probably be fine blowing it off" are famous last words.

I have no idea how things work in New York, but it's very unlikely he could have communicated directly with a judge/ commissioner/ magistrate prior to his hearing. Here in Maricopa County, the clerk of court would just direct him to self-help forms you can get at the court house or on the court website. So I would have started there, and if it was clear from the self-help materials that I could handle the violation on my own with minimal risk, I'd do so. But even then, I'd be strongly inclined to reach out to a local expert for advice. My practice is primarily estate planning, post-death administration, and probate/ trust litigation. There are countless errors a layperson can make trying to handle these things on their own, and I see it all the time. So I'm painfully aware that in areas of law outside my scope of expertise, it's what I don't know that could end up costing me dearly.

I have no idea. A lot hinges on whether jail time was a real possibility here. If his lawyer was wrong about that, then your advice above may have been correct. But I still would have checked out the pro se resources first, and then consulted with a local attorney second if I didn't feel very confident from the self-help materials that I could manage things safely on my own.

All of this, and the bolded is a great bottom line. I have much respect for wooly for being willing to try to figure things out on his own and for having the balls to take a risk. Everyone should make an effort to educate themselves about their legal issues to the greatest extent possible. But so much in legal practice depends on nuances unique to a particular locality, and it's hard to know what you don't know. If two local lawyers told me jail was a possibility, I would do everything in my power to make it NOT a possibility. You should NEVER roll the dice in litigation if you can't afford to lose because you never know what the result of litigation will be, no matter how unlikely a particular outcome seems. I have seen some utterly shocking outcomes in my short legal career. And Panda couldn't afford to go to jail because of the career consequences, so I think he handled it properly.

 

[NDdomer2]

I wrote the state of Minnesota about a traffic ticket and they offered me a $25 reduction for the Fine to pay remotely and not return (gee thanks) Otherwise I'll see u in court. Woo fucking hoo.

Not all things are equal when dealing with courts.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

That's interesting on the judge. I'm aware that you cannot speak to the judge directly, and I'm sure the rules are different from state to state, but I had no problem writing the judge a letter in my case. He didn't respond directly to me of course, but the court worked it out for me. I mean, it's a common issue that all courts deal with. Every state has odd rules where they require physical presence, but common sense is often applied to non residents on minor offenses. In my mind, it seems like there's nothing to lose with asking for the courts cooperation before shelling out big bucks. It worked for me.

I don't disagree with you, wooly, but this wasn't a typical speed trap in a podunk town on the interstate looking to generate some revenue. In my experience, such violations are categorically different than those that carry the potential for jail time. If the attorneys he consulted with were accurate in opining that jail time was a possibility, then he was absolutely correct to handle it as he did. But I have no idea if that's the case, or if $1000 was a fair fee given the amount of legal work involved.

Your approach--of educating yourself first and proactively seeking out options--is almost always a good idea. I'd just caution against taking that too far. It's what you don't know that can really hurt you, and once serious risk is involved, it's always worth consulting a local expert.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Be sure to tune in next week for "Legalese Is Not the Preferred Nomenclature, Dude" with wooly and Whiskey:

 

[Irish8248]

First of all, cool it with the "insane" and "idiotic" comments. You're pissing me off.

Secondly, I'll let Panda respond to that. As far as I can tell, he didn't get it dropped and I don't see why my method would stop it from being expunged. It's exactly what I did and mine was expunged.

Stop saying insane and idiotic comments then? At no point is pleading to the charge without negotiations a good idea, especially if that charge carries jail time. All you need is a judge or DA in a tight election year to find yourself in jail. Not to mention the ramifications of having that on your record.

 

[woolybug25]

Stop saying insane and idiotic comments then? At no point is pleading to the charge without negotiations a good idea, especially if that charge carries jail time. All you need is a judge or DA in a tight election year to find yourself in jail. Not to mention the ramifications of having that on your record.

Ha. Nice bait kiddo. Since you're kinda a nobody on here and I just got off a vacation, I'll just have some tact and ignore you.

Considering Whiskey doesn't think my comments are either, and he's a billion times more intelligent than you, I'll sleep okay tonight.

 

[Irish8248]

Ha. Nice bait kiddo. Since you're kinda a nobody on here and I just got off a vacation, I'll just have some tact and ignore you.

Considering Whiskey doesn't think my comments are either, and he's a billion times more intelligent than you, I'll sleep okay tonight.

He pretty much said the same thing just not as blunt as i did lol. But there's no bait here skippy, just real shock that anyone would think that's a good idea.

 

[wizards8507]

So my wife was just in an accident in which the other driver was 100% at fault. She was driving about 10 MPH through a construction zone when he pulled out of an adjacent parking lot and smashed her on the side of her rear bumper. They exchanged insurance information but then he ran off when he learned she called the police. My wife smelled liquor on his breath and the police are out searching for him now. He was driving a Comcast Xfinity truck. No physical injuries are immediately apparent but my wife is extremely shaken up. Is it worth pursuing legal action? I'm not a litigious person but "drunk guy hits-and-runs pregnant lady and toddler with his work vehicle" seems like the appropriate time for a lawsuit if there ever is one.

 

[NorthDakota]

So my wife was just in an accident in which the other driver was 100% at fault. She was driving about 10 MPH through a construction zone when he pulled out of an adjacent parking lot and smashed her on the side of her rear bumper. They exchanged insurance information but then he ran off when he learned she called the police. My wife smelled liquor on his breath and the police are out searching for him now. He was driving a Comcast Xfinity truck. No physical injuries are immediately apparent but my wife is extremely shaken up. Is it worth pursuing legal action? I'm not a litigious person but "drunk guy hits-and-runs pregnant lady and toddler with his work vehicle" seems like the appropriate time for a lawsuit if there ever is one.

Man... this guy is toast.

 

[ACamp1900]

He'll state he thought they were done and had exchanged info in good faith.. had to run... no big deal.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

So my wife was just in an accident in which the other driver was 100% at fault. She was driving about 10 MPH through a construction zone when he pulled out of an adjacent parking lot and smashed her on the side of her rear bumper. They exchanged insurance information but then he ran off when he learned she called the police. My wife smelled liquor on his breath and the police are out searching for him now. He was driving a Comcast Xfinity truck. No physical injuries are immediately apparent but my wife is extremely shaken up. Is it worth pursuing legal action? I'm not a litigious person but "drunk guy hits-and-runs pregnant lady and toddler with his work vehicle" seems like the appropriate time for a lawsuit if there ever is one.

Based on your description of him, he's probably judgment proof, so it's not likely worth the trouble to go after him personally. But his personal insurance company, Comcast, and their insurance company all have deep pockets, and if they're not immediately forthcoming with a generous settlement, it wouldn't be a bad idea to hire a good civil litigator to negotiate on your behalf.

 

[BobbyMac]

Free cable and internet for life!

Don't go overboard though... Murphy's Law says if you do, the Roberts clan will buy the Mouse just to get to you.

 

[IrishLax]

So my wife was just in an accident in which the other driver was 100% at fault. She was driving about 10 MPH through a construction zone when he pulled out of an adjacent parking lot and smashed her on the side of her rear bumper. They exchanged insurance information but then he ran off when he learned she called the police. My wife smelled liquor on his breath and the police are out searching for him now. He was driving a Comcast Xfinity truck. No physical injuries are immediately apparent but my wife is extremely shaken up. Is it worth pursuing legal action? I'm not a litigious person but "drunk guy hits-and-runs pregnant lady and toddler with his work vehicle" seems like the appropriate time for a lawsuit if there ever is one.

Depending on what exactly she said to the cop, you should absolutely sue. I'm not a lawyer, but in my line of work this kind of thing happens all the time with contractors doing dumb stuff and causing damage/injury through their negligence. Every time it's covered under their insurance, and every time it's a legitimate claim it is settled almost immediately as long as the plaintiff is reasonable.

 

[NDRock]

So my wife was just in an accident in which the other driver was 100% at fault. She was driving about 10 MPH through a construction zone when he pulled out of an adjacent parking lot and smashed her on the side of her rear bumper. They exchanged insurance information but then he ran off when he learned she called the police. My wife smelled liquor on his breath and the police are out searching for him now. He was driving a Comcast Xfinity truck. No physical injuries are immediately apparent but my wife is extremely shaken up. Is it worth pursuing legal action? I'm not a litigious person but "drunk guy hits-and-runs pregnant lady and toddler with his work vehicle" seems like the appropriate time for a lawsuit if there ever is one.

Just curious, what exactly would you be suing for? Vehicle damage? Emotional stress? To prevent this guy from doing it again? All of the above?

Obviously you need to do what's right for your family but if my wife and kids were fine (I hope yours are) I probably would let it go, beyond getting property damage. Seems like a much more stressful endeavor going through litigation but I typically aim for a more stress free lifestyle than you corporate guys