Showing posts with label attorney fees. Show all posts
Showing posts with label attorney fees. Show all posts

Thursday, February 9, 2017

Q: What's a reasonable retainer for a divorce?

Q: What's a reasonable retainer for a divorce? Can't I just do this myself in court without an attorney?
A: Thanks for asking. If you are looking to hire an attorney for divorce, expect to hear many different amounts for retainers. Some attorneys will quote higher than they may need to, but will refund the unused portion of the retainer when your case is done.

A retainer is an amount that an attorney estimates toward how much your case might cost, in total, or for a large portion of the case. That doesn't mean that the retainer amount will cover the whole fee for your case. Again, you may have a refund once your case is done, depending on how your case goes, whether a lot of motions are needed, and how much your spouse decides to fight.

Many attorneys will also tell you their hourly rate when you hear their retainer amount. This is because the retainer is a down payment, which usually is placed in an account. The attorney then invoices against the retainer for each hour that the attorney works on your case. For example, if an attorney charges a $3,000 retainer, and has an hourly rate of $200 per hour, your retainer will be gone once your attorney has worked 15 hours on your case.


Your second question was "can I do this myself without an attorney?" Yes, a party can represent him or herself in court. But I ask you: Is this wise? Even if it seems cost effective? Your divorce has to cover many topics, such as child custody, parenting time, insurance, division of assets and debts (including retirement accounts, property, credit card debts), and child support, among others. Do you want to do this without any idea of how to go about it, when you are also feeling emotional and uncertain? Or would it be better to let a professional, who's not married to your spouse, argue for you?

Best of luck in your situation.
Yours,
Nancy

Monday, April 25, 2016

The equivalent of a legal TED talk topic: Should non-lawyers be allowed to own law firms?

This is the equivalent of a legal "TED talk" topic: what is the future of the legal profession? Will it stay its same old way, stodgy and traditional, or will it start to change?

It's currently against the rules of professional ethics that govern lawyers for a non-lawyer to own a law firm. Most states also bar law firms and non-lawyers from sharing or splitting fees.

This is starting to change, with some states allowing fee sharing, also known as multidisciplinary practice, but overall, not OK.

However: 

An ABA commission is seeking comments on an “issues paper” examining ethics rules that bar nonlawyers from owning and managing law firms.
The ABA Commission on the Future of Legal Services “revived a contentious debate” on the issue with a request for comments, which are accepted until May 2, according to the ABA BNA Lawyers’ Manual on Professional Conduct.
The commission is asking whether it should make a recommendation to the ABA House of Delegates regarding the ethics rules that bar nonlawyer ownership, according to the article. The ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct and ethics rules in most states bar nonlawyer ownership.

Article here (via aba journal). 

Thursday, January 30, 2014

Legal advice for lawyers: If you win a massive fee, don't put it in an illegal tax shelter

This all started when a big tobacco company was sued through the office of Nix, Patterson and Roach. In 1998, the attorneys won $600 million in attorneys’ fees, to be paid over a period of time, as well as $68 million in connection with tobacco litigation in other states.
With this money in hand, the partners sought ways to shelter themselves from tax liability, and formed a partnership, NPR Investments, to invest in foreign currency.  . . .

The 5th Circuit found Thursday that the partnership and partners must pay penalties for underpaying the Internal Revenue Service through this investment scheme.
Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s recent decision in U.S. v. Woods, NPR is subject to a 40 percent gross valuation misstatement penalty.


Article here (via Above the Law).

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Ionia Newspaper editor sued for defamatory statements and lost - other side wants sanctions

An Ionia newspaper editor lost a defamation lawsuit yesterday. But the defendants' attorney fees don't have to be paid by the losing editor, the judge ruled.

Article here.

The editor sued letter writers accusing her of "yellow journalism," and criticized her in letters to supervisors and online.