Be wary Of Aggressive Divorce Attorneys
Wednesday, 16 December 2009 10:16 | 
Written by Rebecca Long Okura |
When an individual goes through a divorce, a common misperception is that hiring an aggressive lawyer is important in getting a fair outcome. Although generally it's appropriate for an attorney to aggressively advocate for their client, continuous aggressive bulldogging can be detrimental to the case, resulting in a more expensive, drawn out case.
When someone goes through a divorce, a common misperception is that hiring an aggressive lawyer is very important in getting a fair outcome. Although sometimes it's acceptable for an attorney to aggressively advocate for his or her client, continuous aggressive bulldogging can be detrimental to the case, resulting in a more expensive, drawn out case.
An aggressive stance can be taken:
- When the legal code clearly supports your arguments, and the opposing side isn't aware of it.
- When a client has been informed that prevailing is unlikely, yet the client insists on paying for continued legal action to take a principled stand.
- When an opposing counsel tries to bully you on specific issues, sticking to your position shows that you will not be swayed by intimidating behavior and will encourage them to try a more rational approach.
When the parties are negotiating settlement, excessive aggression can be harmful if the attorney constantly approaches the negotiations with an attitude of perpetuating conflict rather than problem solving.
An illustration of this kind of aggressive behavior would be during mediation when a lawyer rejects an offer and exclaims, "What a stupid offer, stop wasting everyone's time and bring something better to the table", instead of countering with another offer and permitting the negotiation process to move forward and increasing the likeliness of reaching a settlement.
The difference between those two examples is that the aggressiveness of the initial example does not contribute to the negotiations or move the parties nearer to settlement. It will most likely just make everyone more emotional and angry. This sort of repeated behavior can take a case that ought to easily settle and push it to trial, needlessly expending the client's time and money and potentially not resulting in any better outcome than the offers during settlement negotiations.
When someone goes through a divorce, a common misperception is that hiring an aggressive lawyer is very important in getting a fair outcome. Although sometimes it's acceptable for an attorney to aggressively advocate for his or her client, continuous aggressive bulldogging can be detrimental to the case, resulting in a more expensive, drawn out case.
An aggressive stance can be taken:
- When the legal code clearly supports your arguments, and the opposing side isn't aware of it.
- When a client has been informed that prevailing is unlikely, yet the client insists on paying for continued legal action to take a principled stand.
- When an opposing counsel tries to bully you on specific issues, sticking to your position shows that you will not be swayed by intimidating behavior and will encourage them to try a more rational approach.
When the parties are negotiating settlement, excessive aggression can be harmful if the attorney constantly approaches the negotiations with an attitude of perpetuating conflict rather than problem solving.
An illustration of this kind of aggressive behavior would be during mediation when a lawyer rejects an offer and exclaims, "What a stupid offer, stop wasting everyone's time and bring something better to the table", instead of countering with another offer and permitting the negotiation process to move forward and increasing the likeliness of reaching a settlement.
The difference between those two examples is that the aggressiveness of the initial example does not contribute to the negotiations or move the parties nearer to settlement. It will most likely just make everyone more emotional and angry. This sort of repeated behavior can take a case that ought to easily settle and push it to trial, needlessly expending the client's time and money and potentially not resulting in any better outcome than the offers during settlement negotiations.