which of these 2 law firms would you choose?

[VIDEO: "What is parental alienation?"]

It's the choices here that rattle me most as I proceed thru the divorce.  Am I doing as much as I can for my kids?  Will I regret this later?  Etc.  Here's my latest conundrum: Choosing between 2 lawyers to switch to.

One works for probably the most successful family law firm in my area.  Has an excellent reptuation.  I would guess that my chances of getting what I want would be very high if I use them.  But they are very aggressive and I'm not sure how sensitive they would be to a BPD spouse... . I want to be firm with my stbx without triggering him to do things to get back at me, when not necessary.  I also have limited funds, so I don't want to trigger, say, a bunch of experts if not necessary, or a guardian ad litem, or a $100,000 divorce case that takes 2 years.  That is soo not necessary in my case.  Their retainer is $7500 to start, so you know they're serious.  I will spend any money to resolve this in the best interest of my kids, yes, but I don't want to spark a war if not necessary.  I guess I am just a little intimidated because I met with 2 of their partners last November and I was trying to be a bit soft on my husband and one of them yelled at me.  It's the other one who I'd retain in this case, so I'm not so worried about that, but I want them to be tough and sensitive at once.  I don't think they'd waste my money or time, not at all.  But I don't want them to take out giant guns and just start blasting.  I think my best bet is to talk to this guy again and see how I feel.  Only downside is, I wanted to keep them for a last ditch effort if things don't go my way, so I'm not sure I want to start using them right now.  May want to hold onto the possibility.

The other lawyer, I have had two phone conversations with, and he has had amazing knowledge of certain legal things that many other lawyers got wrong when I talked to them about it.  He also is sensitive to $$$ and seems knowledgeable about what I have to do while at the same time was clear on what the limits are of what I want to do (for instance, I'd like to get a psych eval on my husband, but it may cost a lot of money and not actually get me anything more or less of what I want than I'd get without one, so he explained all of that to me).  The retainer is $5K, still up there but not as high as the other firm.  His firm is very respected too. I have no idea how he is as a lawyer, and there aren't many places on the 'net to find people talking about their lawyers, but I do know one person who used and liked him.

So I guess it's a choice of two firms that would probably be very good, but one is known for being aggressive and I have to get a feel for if they know how to be sensitive to a nutty spouse and to two people who aren't rich... . yet, they're almost certain to win.  The second lawyer seems amazing and I'd be really comfortable with him and his firm is considered very good too, just probably won't make their opponents wet their pants the way the first one will.

I guess my next step is to talk again to the first firm, because I first talked to them a few months ago and wasn't as specific about my case then.  Then I'll have a good feel, I guess. 

[momtara]

It's the choices here that rattle me most as I proceed thru the divorce.  Am I doing as much as I can for my kids?  Will I regret this later?  Etc.  Here's my latest conundrum: Choosing between 2 lawyers to switch to.

One works for probably the most successful family law firm in my area.  Has an excellent reptuation.  I would guess that my chances of getting what I want would be very high if I use them.  But they are very aggressive and I'm not sure how sensitive they would be to a BPD spouse... . I want to be firm with my stbx without triggering him to do things to get back at me, when not necessary.  I also have limited funds, so I don't want to trigger, say, a bunch of experts if not necessary, or a guardian ad litem, or a $100,000 divorce case that takes 2 years.  That is soo not necessary in my case.  Their retainer is $7500 to start, so you know they're serious.  I will spend any money to resolve this in the best interest of my kids, yes, but I don't want to spark a war if not necessary.  I guess I am just a little intimidated because I met with 2 of their partners last November and I was trying to be a bit soft on my husband and one of them yelled at me.  It's the other one who I'd retain in this case, so I'm not so worried about that, but I want them to be tough and sensitive at once.  I don't think they'd waste my money or time, not at all.  But I don't want them to take out giant guns and just start blasting.  I think my best bet is to talk to this guy again and see how I feel.  Only downside is, I wanted to keep them for a last ditch effort if things don't go my way, so I'm not sure I want to start using them right now.  May want to hold onto the possibility.

The other lawyer, I have had two phone conversations with, and he has had amazing knowledge of certain legal things that many other lawyers got wrong when I talked to them about it.  He also is sensitive to $$$ and seems knowledgeable about what I have to do while at the same time was clear on what the limits are of what I want to do (for instance, I'd like to get a psych eval on my husband, but it may cost a lot of money and not actually get me anything more or less of what I want than I'd get without one, so he explained all of that to me).  The retainer is $5K, still up there but not as high as the other firm.  His firm is very respected too. I have no idea how he is as a lawyer, and there aren't many places on the 'net to find people talking about their lawyers, but I do know one person who used and liked him.

So I guess it's a choice of two firms that would probably be very good, but one is known for being aggressive and I have to get a feel for if they know how to be sensitive to a nutty spouse and to two people who aren't rich... . yet, they're almost certain to win.  The second lawyer seems amazing and I'd be really comfortable with him and his firm is considered very good too, just probably won't make their opponents wet their pants the way the first one will.

I guess my next step is to talk again to the first firm, because I first talked to them a few months ago and wasn't as specific about my case then.  Then I'll have a good feel, I guess. 

[newlymarried]

Consult with both of them so hubby can't use the more aggressive one. It would be a conflict of interest. Your soon to be ex husband is going to get triggered, you only question is, are you going to allow your fear of him triggering to set you up to end up with a crap deal in court. BPD is an attachment disorder and you are leaving him. You need to expect triggering, lying, raging, and all the other bad behaviors. If my husband and I could have gotten a good attorney we would have sole custody of SD4.

You need to go for the jugular in the family court if you want anything.

[momtara]

I've already initially consulted with both, so that's taken care of, but good suggestion.  He has a lawyer from another area, so he's at a disadvantage already.  You're right about fearfulness and triggers.   

I think a lawyer is like any other professional - you don't always know what you're getting until you've already sunk  a lot of money in.  I'll just have to go on faith.

All opinions, after reading my descriptions, are welcome!

[ForeverDad]

Probably you've already read this on another thread... . You can't live your life being overly concerned about triggering your ex.  Odds are, your spouse will overreact no matter what you do or don't do.  Likely the lawyers know that?

On the one hand, you don't want to needless trigger overreactions by doing whatever you want.

On the other hand, you do need to keep firm boundaries and you can't make decisions based solely upon trying to avoid conflict or threats.  Appeasement and dancing around the issues didn't work in the past and it won't work now.  The more you give in, the more an acting-out disordered person will push.

You need to find a balance between the two extremes.  Keep in mind that he always 'won' the disordered dance in the past since it turned out you didn't have much information nor know what to do.  With education, support and objective reasoning, you'll be able to make more informed and more confident decisions.

Don't consider just the retainer.  For all you know the one with the higher retainer could end up charging you less overall on your billing hours.  Or not.  So the retainer amount (the advance deposit) is not the only factor.

What you're looking for is a no-nonsense lawyer, one who isn't going to sit back, walk you through the process and passively keep trying to make deals, right?  You just need your lawyer to be firm, assertive, 'cut to the chase' and get it done with the minimum of fuss, right?

Whichever lawyer you choose needs to avoid trying to make 'deals' since that's unlikely to happen until your spouse feels here is no other choice but to deal.  Until then, negotiations and soft-pedaling are likely to just go in circles.

Your lawyer also needs to keep the case moving along.  Delays will wear you down and eat money.  While the court generally allows some continuacnes, your lawyer needs to keep the case moving along as much as possible.  For example, if the other saide asks for a hearing to be cancelled while they prepare or consider an offer, tell them to please do so but the hearing stays on the court's docket.  In most cases putting the case on hold gets nothing for you except a few months of added delay.  In other words, keep the pressure on.

[seeking balance]

which one gave you the best strategy based on the facts of the case?

which one has had success in high conflict divorces?

[marbleloser]

Here's the thing.Regardless of who you hire,you'll be doing most of the work.This lowers cost.Don't depend on the lawyer to do your leg work.

Ask them: How much they charge per hour face to face?How much for emails or phonecalls?(This should be cheaper and billed per 1/4 hour)

Do they charge travel time to court? When does the clock start ticking? Will they hire experts without your consent? How soon do they respond to emails?

I'll say this,an aggressive atty will file all kinds of paperwork.That amounts to more money from you.See what their strategy is.Ask them what they want to do first.If they say,we'll start filing complaints with the court,PO's,etc.,, you don't want them.

I wanted an aggressive atty.I chose the wrong one as she isn't aggressive at all.This has been to my advantage.She's methodical and calm when I would have went in guns blazin(figuratively of course.)

Your atty isn't going to tell you what to do in every situation either.Sometimes you need to tell them what YOU would like done and then they'll let you know if they can and if it's in your best interest.

[arabella]

I posted a reply that directly relates to this issue in another of your threads. My suggestion was to seek out a mediation specialist if they are available in your area. If you have already decided on one of these two lawyers/firms then I would recommend the second one. Why? Because you sound more positive about him and in a high stress situation you want someone you feel very comfortable with. Plus, 'winning' in the traditional sense isn't everything. Sure, you may get what you think you want now - but at what cost? You are inevitably going to have to deal with your ex, re the kids, in the future. Your best best, imho, is to try to preserve as much good will as you possibly can. Being aggressive is a good end tactic when all else fails, when you have nothing to lose, it is not a good place to start. Do not add more stress or drama to an already volatile situation if you can at all help it. A calm, collected, and knowledgeable lawyer is far better than scare tactics or bullying. That's just my .02

[momtara]

Interesting, Arabella. Thank you!

[GustheDog]

I posted a reply that directly relates to this issue in another of your threads. My suggestion was to seek out a mediation specialist if they are available in your area. If you have already decided on one of these two lawyers/firms then I would recommend the second one. Why? Because you sound more positive about him and in a high stress situation you want someone you feel very comfortable with. Plus, 'winning' in the traditional sense isn't everything. Sure, you may get what you think you want now - but at what cost? You are inevitably going to have to deal with your ex, re the kids, in the future. Your best best, imho, is to try to preserve as much good will as you possibly can. Being aggressive is a good end tactic when all else fails, when you have nothing to lose, it is not a good place to start. Do not add more stress or drama to an already volatile situation if you can at all help it. A calm, collected, and knowledgeable lawyer is far better than scare tactics or bullying. That's just my .02

I agree as to the latter firm for the reasons you've articulated.  It's always interesting to hear people talk about their "bulldog" or "shark" attorney - interestingly, these types aren't particularly effective in my experience.  In my opinion, the best lawyer will be someone who's a "gentleman (or woman) and a scholar" - this is a lawyer who's effective because s/he facilitates amicable exchanges with the other side, respects and is respected by the court, is prompt and clear regarding correspondence with clients (i.e., you) and especially about being on the same page in terms of expectations, the "next steps," timetables, potential adverse outcomes, etc.  This should be your attorney's interpersonal disposition - the "bulldog" should emerge in his/her written work and knowledge of the law, and, at times, with opposing counsel if and when there is overstepping or other improper conduct taking place.

Mediation is an interesting thought.  Family law is not at all my arena, and I've been in practice only a couple of years, but in that time I've not seen an effective mediation take place.  Everyone's time gets wasted and we end up in arbitration or court, or arbitration and then court.  Moreover, there are different "types" of mediators - "facilitative" and "evaluative" come to mind.  A facilitative mediator is not supposed to inject her personal assessments into the process, whereas an evaluative mediator does just that.  The goal of each is to push the parties toward settlement, but with different styles.  Painted in very broad strokes, you might say the evaluative mediator has more of a "JADE" approach while the facilitative mediator employs more of a "SET" attitude.  Yet the whole ordeal is still unavoidably adversarial in nature and I can see a BPD easily manipulating a soft mediator or abusing this alternative approach to resolving the dispute as a means to stall or create an impasse.

[livednlearned]

I posted a reply that directly relates to this issue in another of your threads. My suggestion was to seek out a mediation specialist if they are available in your area. If you have already decided on one of these two lawyers/firms then I would recommend the second one. Why? Because you sound more positive about him and in a high stress situation you want someone you feel very comfortable with. Plus, 'winning' in the traditional sense isn't everything. Sure, you may get what you think you want now - but at what cost? You are inevitably going to have to deal with your ex, re the kids, in the future. Your best best, imho, is to try to preserve as much good will as you possibly can. Being aggressive is a good end tactic when all else fails, when you have nothing to lose, it is not a good place to start. Do not add more stress or drama to an already volatile situation if you can at all help it. A calm, collected, and knowledgeable lawyer is far better than scare tactics or bullying. That's just my .02

It's good to get other opinions, and I'm glad you're presenting a hopeful perspective, but divorcing someone high-conflict is so different than anything else many of us will ever deal with in our lives. It's extreme. "Winning in the traditional sense" is not what people here on this board tend to be about, in my experience anyway. More often it seems like people want to be safe, want their kids to be safe, and don't want to be bled financially dry by legal bills. A lot of us -- nons, or targets as Bill Eddy refers to us -- are not assertive. Preserving good will during a high-conflict divorce can backfire, especially when we already have shaky boundaries to begin with. It's better to think about goals, values, and strategy. No one wins in high-conflict divorces.

Not saying that a calm, collected, and knowledgeable lawyer won't work as well as or even better than scare tactics or bullying. In the end, momtara, you should ask a lot of questions and trust your gut. I have a lawyer who adapts her situation accordingly. She is very psychologically aware and that has been a huge advantage for me. I like her, and I like working with her. Retainer was $5K. Chances are you will like some things about both approaches, and dislike some things about the same approaches. If you go with a lawyer who messes things up, or doesn't get back to you promptly, or fails to file things on time, or doesn't listen to you, you can always switch lawyers. Your lawyer works for you, not the other way around. In my case, when my L did something I didn't like, I had to screw up the courage to tell her directly. We've had a few conversations that were super uncomfortable for me, and our relationship is awesome. She even offered me her beach house 

It sounds to me like you have two good options. FD gave good advice, and Seeking Balance's questions are excellent. I'd ask both attorneys to answer those Qs and then come here and work out what the answers mean to you. It's hard to figure out your strategy when you're starting out because there is so much to consider, but people here who have been through this will give you excellent insights. You're not alone, and people have so much good advice to share here.

It's great that you're putting so much thought into this. You will be your own best advocate throughout all of this, and that's what matters most, imo.

[GustheDog]

If you go with a lawyer who messes things up, or doesn't get back to you promptly, or fails to file things on time, or doesn't listen to you, you can always switch lawyers.

If this happens, you should be reporting such a lawyer to your state bar's grievance committee for sanctions.  Not one of these things is acceptable conduct.  And failing to file on time is straight-up malpractice.

[momtara]

Hmmm, talked to the second firm.  They both seem good.  And they both made it clear that my lawyer isn't doing the best job (they didn't say that, but their advice is totally different from my lawyer's advice.)