How exactly do lawyers talk to each other… how does one side decide there are going to win and other side lose? For example: do they talk to each other saying… one client has more money so they split it between them to win, do they know each other well enough or trade cases to win/lose?
2007-02-20 07:18:32 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I only practice business/commercial litigation and I can tell you behind closed doors, most lawyers are very polite and also very ethical. Most of the time when we decide to settle a case, we do it on the basis of who has the stronger case, what the client is willing to pay to settle (and if the client is willing to settle at all - some have an axe to grind), and how much it will cost to try the case and the risks in that. It is a complicated dance at times and there is a fair amount of negotiating, but most of it is above board and ethical rules mandate that all offers of settlement must be taken to the client.
2007-02-20 07:54:39 · answer #1 · answered by Tara P 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've seen this happen in criminal and civil cases. Lawyers are normally very respectful of each other when presenting their respective sides "behind closed doors". Rarely is a decision to settle made then and there because the attorneys have to present all offers to their clients. The only place this doesn't happen is criminal cases - the State doesn't have to relay offers to anyone (they will consider a victim's input, but it is not the sole deciding factor in making a plea offer). The plea offer is entirely the discretion of the prosecutor.
Since all attorneys involved know the law and precedent, there is very little arguing going on back there, since they have pretty much made their case to each other in letters and pleadings throughout the case and have probably decided what to do on the phone beforehand.
2007-02-20 07:36:47 · answer #2 · answered by Rachel M 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You know, it's not the lawyers who decide who wins, it's the judge (or possibly the judge coached jury). Lawyers only get to try. One of the big skills in being a lawyer is assessing a case, and deciding what likelihood of winning you have on that. Then you decide if you take the case or not. If you can't afford not to take the case (like an established customer on the bad end of a suit he can't win, or who insists to launch a really stupid suit, or if you're a public defender), then you have to know how to cut your client's losses, which is where you go to making compromise settlements rather than going to court, or plea bargaining in criminal cases.
As to sharing the big bucks... if they get a settlement rather than a court decision, they both win : the winner's gets a cut on the winnings, and the loser usually gets a fee based on how much his client could have lost, and how much they really paid. Farther than that, they may not go, or they would indeed rist disbarment.
Of course, making it a 3 way winner by convincing the judge to give a mutually agreeable decision is a big no no.
2007-02-20 07:35:37 · answer #3 · answered by Svartalf 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm probably asking for it - but, here goes.
In CA (and the American Bar Assoc.) there is a law which forbids attorneys from "trading" a "lose" in one case for a "win" in another.
As far as the rest of your inquiries, I see a lot of "behind closed doors" negotiating between family law attorneys, which I don't like. Family law seems to be something of a different duck in that manner. Im a civil litigator and everything I do is in open court, transcribed by a reporter and open to my clients to hear.
Although I try to be professional, most of the opposing attorneys I go against, I can't stand. I believe in my clients and often have a difficult time not resenting the opposing counsel for damaging my client in someway. I would never compromise my clients' interest to benefit an attorney in anyway I don't generally like attorneys, and, in fact, have sued a couple for bringing frivolous suits against my clients.
Generally speaking, most attorneys are not smart enough to pull off the type of conspiracy you have implied.
2007-02-20 07:37:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
First of all... all lawyers are scum sucking bottom feeders who have a special place in hell designated just for them. That being said, I know for a fact that lawyers talk behind closed doors. As for "splitting" the profits, I really can't say I have heard a case of that, but I can almost guarantee it has happened.
If you ever want to get a lawyer disbarred... Just write a complaint that they abondoned a client... GUARANTEED DISBARMENT... they can use cocaine and be back in a week... they can murder and be back in a year... but abandonment... AUTOMATIC DISBAR FOR LIFE...
2007-02-20 07:24:49 · answer #5 · answered by Leroy Studying Law 1 · 0⤊ 5⤋
it is against the law for them to do so. they would be disbarred.
2007-02-20 07:20:49 · answer #6 · answered by colera667 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
lawyers are blodd sucking vampires that will go where the money is.
2007-02-20 07:20:48 · answer #7 · answered by pepsicolastar 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋