By Lois R. Finkelstein

I was wondering the other day what it would be like to come into my office as a client.  Many people have sat across the desk from me in the client chairs looking to me to solve their legal problems.  What are they thinking?  I got a view from the client’s chair myself when I had to hire my own attorney recently in connection with my mother’s estate.  The experience was eye opening, to say the least.

I called my attorney no fewer than five times over the past five months and never received a return telephone call.  I’d call his office, only to be put in touch with his trusty assistant, Janice, who sitting directly outside of his office would tell me in her oh-so-caring voice, “I’ll see if he’s in,” and promptly put me on hold.  As far as I know, the lawyer didn’t have a trap door under his desk from which he could escape.  And he only had one door to his office and there was no side door so he couldn’t sneak out without Janice noticing him.

Inevitably, Janice would return to the telephone and provide any one of a number of reasons why my lawyer, was unable to come to the telephone.  Depending on the day, he was (a) in a meeting, (b) on the telephone, (c) on a telephone conference call, (d) at breakfast, (e) at lunch or (f) simply not available.  Interestingly, Janice would alternate reasons that Alan couldn’t take the call in the same order each time I called.  I always wondered whether she kept a running list of excuses and ticked them off as she took various telephone calls.

At first I thought up various excuses as to why he wasn’t returning my calls.  But the more excuses I made for him, the worse I felt about him and wondered what horror had beset my case.  And the longer I went without hearing from him, the more I wanted to do something about it, like maybe refusing to pay his bill.  To be continued.

Every once in a while, I get to use the word pettifogger in a letter. A pettifogger is someone who likes to bicker or quibble over trifles or unimportant matters.

I was responding to one of those lawyers who is dead right on the law, but dead wrong on being sensible.  In the middle of mediation his client has taken a small and unnecessary action that is permitted by law, but which will torpedo the good faith environment required for successful conflict resolution.

Now I am looking for a chance to use flibbertigibbet, which means a chattering or flighty, light headed person or gossip.

The first image broadcast by network television was a picture of Felix the Cat.  I remember watching Felix on tv when I was a kid.  He had a Magic Bag of Tricks and whenever he got stumped by a problem, he would reach into his bag and pull out some tool or device that would help him solve the problem.

I wish I had a Magic Bag of Tricks in real life.  A lawyer can do a lot of things, but sometimes the tools in my toolbox are limited.  Clients look to their lawyers to solve all sorts of problems.  But first you have to have a problem that the law recognizes as a problem.  For example, I wrote recently that not every marital agreement is recognized by law as an enforceable contract.

The law does not provide a remedy for every wrong.  There is no legal tool that will turn your difficult spouse into a nicer, more reasonable and responsible person.   I can get alimony and child support and property, but I probably cannot recover damages for the hurt you felt during your marriage.  The court can give you a visitation schedule, but it can’t make your child want to visit with you.  I can’t make your spouse settle on your terms and I can’t make opposing counsel return my calls if they don’t want to.

As a mediator said to one of my clients, “I only have a pen, not a magic wand.”

John Thyden was quoted in an article on Marriage and Money in Good Housekeeping:

“Financial issues are the primary reason for 90 percent of divorce cases I handle,” says John Thyden, a prominent Washington, D.C., divorce attorney. “But it isn’t necessarily the amount of money a couple has that tends to trip them up. It’s the differences in their spending habits and especially their lack of communication.”

And Mary Beth Long, who writes the VA Family Law Blog, had these mellifluous words to say about us:

“Keeping it short, succinct and entertaining. The gent who writes the Maryland Divorce Legal Crier has a neat style. It is like a New Yorker cartoon morphed into a family law blog: quirky, entertaining and thought-provoking but, best of all, brief.  He may quote lyrics from a country song, give marriage preservation tips or explain the difference between extrinsic and intrinsic fraud. All is a couple hundred words. Bravo!”

I started practicing law before there were computers or an Internet.  Now we send drafts of agreements to our clients by email.

There is a provision in most separation agreements in which the wife waives her dower rights and the husband waives his curtesy rights.

Almost always the client’s automatic spell checker will say the word “curtesy” in the waiver section should be spelled “courtesy”, and the client will bring this to the lawyer’s attention.

Neither the client nor the spell checker can be blamed, for lawyers speak in arcane and ancient code words that have their roots in olde English, French and Roman law.

Curtesy is the life estate a man inherits, under the common law, on the death of his wife in her real estate, provided they have a child.

Dower is the life estate a woman inherits, under the common law, on the death of her husband in his real estate, provided they have a child.

Police have arrested a 26 year old woman and her parents in India for running a divorce scam, according to BBC News.

She is accused of tricking nine rich businessmen into marrying her, then filing for divorce a few weeks later and demanding large sums of money.

One of the men complained to the police saying that the woman and her parents were harassing him for a dowry and threatened to file lawsuits if he did not pay up.

The woman’s lawyer denies the charges and says she has only been married once.

• First Time – maybe you forgot or didn’t get my message.
• Second Time – maybe you are busy putting out forest fires or in trial.
• Third Time – maybe you are one of those lawyers that procrastinates or is disorganized.
• Fourth Time – maybe you are embarrassed that you haven’t called me back.
• Fifth Time – maybe your can’t get your client to call you back.
• Sixth Time – maybe you don’t know the answer and don’t want to tell me that.
• Seventh Time – now you are being discourteous and disrespectful to a fellow member of the bar.
• Eighth Time – you must be unprofessional and incompetent.
• Ninth Time – you ought to be disbarred.
• Tenth Time – how do you ever get any clients?
• Eleventh Time – I don’t even want to talk to you now.  I’ll see you in court.

Washingtonian Magazine has named TGC lawyers, James J. Gross and John W. Thyden, among the area’s Top Divorce Lawyers for 2009.  James J. Gross was also selected as one of Maryland’s Super Lawyers for 2009 earlier this year.

Story #1.  A young man learns that a woman he is dating is pregnant.  Although he is not in love with her, he marries her because that is the right thing to do.  He manages to complete college and finds a job with the government.  Although he is a good provider for his family, his wife constantly berates him, argues with him, criticizes him, and withholds marital relations from him.  He tries to talk to her about their marital strife, and asks her to go to marital counseling,  but it is hopeless.  In desperation, he seeks solace elsewhere and begins a relationship with another woman.  He and the other woman are truly in love and he has a child with the other woman.  He takes on a second job to support his child from the second relationship.  He tries hard not to disrupt his marriage but after several years of trying, he cannot take it any more, and asks his wife for a divorce.  He is the father and sole support of two young children and he should not be punished for trying to do the right thing.

Story #2.  A young man learns that a woman he is dating is pregnant.  He marries her.  He then begins a life of deceit.  Although he has a child with her, he cheats on her.  He goes away on trips, seldom spends time with his wife and child, and finally impregnates another woman.  He begins a double life with his married family and his girlfriend and child on the side.  He takes money from his married family to support his girlfriend.  After several years, his wife finally discovers his infidelity and files for divorce.  This man is a liar and a coward and has dissipated his families marital assets.

If you were the judge, how would you divide assets and determine support in these two cases?  Would it be different in each case?

The interesting thing is that both scenarios are the same case.  The first is the story told by the husband’s attorney and the second is the story told by the wife’s attorney.  Which story will the judge buy into?  The judge will make a decision because that is what we pay the judges to do.  But real life is not always so black and white as the judge’s final order is.  There are always shades of gray and some truth in both stories.