A friend of mine substituted into a consumer bankruptcy case, taking over for another lawyer in the area. The original attorney couldn’t handle the esoteric mortgage litigation that was required to get the client what she needed, so he tagged someone with more experience.
So the litigation goes forward, my friend gets an excellent result for the debtor, and sanctioned by the court.
Wait … huh?
Yup, he got sanctioned. Seems as if the original attorney didn’t do some of the basic work on the underlying Chapter 7 case properly. Once the former attorney was out of the case, the judge had my innocent friend on the hook.
The original lawyer was sanctioned as well, but my friend was totally without blame because he had no part in the otherwise-routine portions of the Chapter 7 case. He stepped into the proverbial pile of crap. Thankfully, the sanction was small enough that it didn’t hurt too badly.
I’ve done similar things in the past, agreeing to litigate a discharge violation case only to find after the fact that the original lawyer had failed to properly list the debt. In those cases, I was able to bow out or change tactics before commencing litigation. Not so for my unfortunate buddy.
The lesson here is that you should always look at the entire case before you agree to substitute into it. Even if the original lawyer is a respected member of the bar and a trusted colleague. Even if you step in because the judge asks you to do so.
Remember, at the end of the case it’s your neck on the line.
The situation you described above is the exact reason why in my practice (plaintiff’s personal injury) we almost never take a case after another lawyer has had it at all, especially after the case has been filed. There is just too much risk that the other lawyer will have made bad choices about handling the case early on that will doom the case to a bad result and an unhappy client when all is said and done. It is also why I believe that smart marketing involves showing consumers how to make good decisions about hiring a lawyer and why making a bad decision about which lawyer to hire can be a disaster
Barry, thanks for the comment. You make an excellent point – one I’m sure my colleague will be keeping in mind next time around.
I took over a chapter 13 from a debtor who filed pro se and reached a point where the judge told him to get a lawyer. I should have realized that his rants on the foreclosing bank were a symptom, not that he did not have some legitimate issues, but now I am the subject of his rants and he has told the judge he does not want me as his attorney.
I don’t think he will find another lawyer, he really can’t afford one, and I am afraid if I withdraw I will be open to sanctions for letting him represent himself once again.
Sounds as if withdrawal is the ONLY way to go on this one.
A very tasteful graphic indeed. Too bad you couldn’t find a picture of a shi* storm. My ego got me into a case because the client found my site online. True his attorney did a really bad job for him. Didn’t take all exemptions in chapter 13, and his payments were through the roof. I got in to convert him. the judge is requiring much more work in the conversion than we do in Cleveland. I’m doing this one at a huge loss. The client’s biggest gripe was that the old lawyer never returned his calls. I’ll tell you why. It is impossible to do. The client always calls. I will not make that mistake again. Great article.