Can you fire an attorney?

roybean · 12-19-2006, 06:18 PM

Can you fire an attorney or does he or she have to withdraw from the action?

JayinGR · 12-19-2006, 06:46 PM

I fired my atty who then filed a withdraw from the action...

If I am correct its just like anything else...

But dont quote me on that. However when my one atty and I had problems we disagreed on something I told him we could not work together anymore and he would need to file a MTW ASAP

jlynn · 12-19-2006, 07:02 PM

Are you firing your attorney, or is this a formality because of their limited assistance?

centex · 12-19-2006, 07:03 PM

Yes you can fire counsel, no you may not always get a continuance in order to permit newly retained counsel to come up to speed.

What would happen is they would file the motion to withdraw. Strictly speaking, a judge *could* require that they remain on the case, but on a civil matter, I would not expect to see a judge make such a ruling. The LR in your jurisdiction may address the scenario...

You don't see it as much in civil as you do in criminal actions, but it happens all the time. I actually saw a docket sheet that showed five different attorneys of record in a four month span of time...and no, they did not all office together.

FixinThings · 12-19-2006, 07:21 PM

No, Roy, you can't fire Botch! It would ruin one of your threads.

Pale Rider · 12-19-2006, 07:25 PM

I fired the attorney I had for my Hurricane Rita insurance scam. They did require that it was in writing and signed before they released my file to me.

rubyruby27 · 12-19-2006, 08:00 PM

Roy,

I don't remember the details of this case so I will refer to the person as the defendant as the pro se, it could have been the plaintiff.

The pro se hired an attorney, sometime during the case he terminated the attorney's service. He then went on and won the case. That's the good part.

The Judge then said the pro se owned the attorney his fee's up to termination the bad part was since he fired the attorney prior to winning his case the Judge ruled he was not entitled to attorney fees.

I think I might have that case somewhere if it is really needed I will look for it.

roybean · 12-19-2006, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FixinThings

No, Roy, you can't fire Botch! It would ruin one of your threads.

I need the flame thrower. Where's Hannah when you need her?

roybean · 12-19-2006, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubyruby27

Roy,

I don't remember the details of this case so I will refer to the person as the defendant as the pro se, it could have been the plaintiff.

The pro se hired an attorney, sometime during the case he terminated the attorney's service. He then went on and won the case. That's the good part.

The Judge then said the pro se owned the attorney his fee's up to termination the bad part was since he fired the attorney prior to winning his case the Judge ruled he was not entitled to attorney fees.

I think I might have that case somewhere if it is really needed I will look for it.

Yes, please do find this case because that ruling is way out of line!!!

drivel · 12-20-2006, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roybean

Yes, please do find this case because that ruling is way out of line!!!

Whether or not a litigant is entitled to attorneys fees in the action has no bearing on whether he or she has to pay the attorney

hannah · 12-20-2006, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roybean

I need the flame thrower. Where's Hannah when you need her?

I lent the flame thrower to Qtip and he hasn't returned it yet...

And I'll have you know at the time you needed me, I was Christmas shopping...I'm broke now so I'm done...

rubyruby27 · 12-20-2006, 11:53 AM

I am sure I have the case as it referred to attorney fee's when I was searching that area of the law, I just haven't located it. I am still looking for it.

If I recall correctly when the pro se ask for attorney fee's it was denied because he terminated his attorney prior to the end of the case and he represented himself. I believe the Judge was making a comment that while the pro se still had to pay the attorney for his services prior to termination, the pro se was not entitled to fee's.

I am sure I will find it sooner or later as I have read it several times looking for other case laws.

roybean · 12-20-2006, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drivel

Whether or not a litigant is entitled to attorneys fees in the action has no bearing on whether he or she has to pay the attorney

Gee! You think?

roybean · 12-20-2006, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubyruby27

I am sure I have the case as it referred to attorney fee's when I was searching that area of the law, I just haven't located it. I am still looking for it.

If I recall correctly when the pro se ask for attorney fee's it was denied because he terminated his attorney prior to the end of the case and he represented himself. I believe the Judge was making a comment that while the pro se still had to pay the attorney for his services prior to termination, the pro se was not entitled to fee's.

I am sure I will find it sooner or later as I have read it several times looking for other case laws.

Do you remember what circuit this was in?

drivel · 12-20-2006, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roybean

Gee! You think?

I do think.

The ruling was not out of line as you propounded..

CtrlAltDelete · 12-20-2006, 11:00 PM

drivel - all your comments are entirely collectors logic.

centex · 12-20-2006, 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CtrlAltDelete

drivel - all your comments are entirely collectors logic.

Actually, no, they were not.

Firing counsel will not absolve one of the requirement to pay in accordance with the Legal Services Agreement. Further, the fact that one is or is not represented by counsel does not guarantee that one will receive fees as part of a favorable judgment.

Of course, this discussion goes a long ways towards demonstrating why we require payment of fees up front...

Enigma · 12-21-2006, 01:20 AM

I word my engagement letters in such a way that I am paid no matter the outcome or if a client terminates the relationship.

I've seen judges place awards into escrow over fee disputes.

It also depends on the court. I do a lot of tax disputes. The IRS frowns on contingency fee arrangements, even though the Bar allows them. So I get my fee upfront.

Enigma · 12-21-2006, 01:24 AM

Often times an award my not even cover attorney fees and costs. That is why fees and costs are awarded.

If you can prove costs, in general you maybe able to recover them.