If your lawyer still does not respond, you can send him or her a letter explaining the communication problems. If at this point you do not hear anything from your lawyer, you should consult with a legal malpractice attorney.
Full Answer
In view of the expressed judicial consternation toward instructions not to answer, a lawyer who improvidently does so runs a serious risk of being subject, along with his or her client, to significant monetary and other sanctions.
This communication failure can also result in missed deadlines and settlement offers. If your attorney has stopped responding to your message, you may wonder if they have committed legal malpractice. Learn what to do if your lawyer stops responding to you and what actions you can take to get compensation.
As a general rule, a lawyer has no right to instruct his client or a witness not to answer a question at an oral deposition unless the question calls for information that is privileged. The better practice is to object to the question and allow the witness to answer subject to the objection.
Lawyers who fail to communicate may not understand their clients’ wishes and clients may not receive crucial case information. This communication failure can also result in missed deadlines and settlement offers.
You cannot be punished for refusing to answer a question. It is a good idea to talk to a lawyer before agreeing to answer questions. In general, only a judge can order you to answer questions.
In each deposition, there is likely to be one or several questions to which you do not know the answers. When this occurs it is crucial that you do not guess while answering. If you do not know the answer to a question, or if you are in doubt, simply state that fact in a clear and concise manner.
If your lawyer does not return your call, send them a letter and keep a copy. In the letter, describe what is bothering you and what you need. Suggest meeting with the lawyer face-to-face. Your next step would depend on the nature of the problem.
The lawyer has stopped representing your case. They don't know how to properly communicate. Your case is complicated. They are away from their office.
Good ways to say anything but "No Comment" to questions you really don't want to answer:"I'm sorry but I'm not able to speak to that subject""Thanks for asking but I'm not able to answer that question""I'm sorry but that information is proprietary"
Yes, you can plead the fifth in a civil trial or deposition. But, whether you should or should not do so is often an issue that requires you to waive certain risks and benefits. If you refuse to testify in a civil matter, there can be adverse consequences for the case.
Attorney misconduct may include: conflict of interest, overbilling, refusing to represent a client for political or professional motives, false or misleading statements, knowingly accepting worthless lawsuits, hiding evidence, abandoning a client, failing to disclose all relevant facts, arguing a position while ...
Perhaps the most common kinds of complaints against lawyers involve delay or neglect. This doesn't mean that occasionally you've had to wait for a phone call to be returned. It means there has been a pattern of the lawyer's failing to respond or to take action over a period of months.
No matter what name the agency in your state goes by, they will have a process you can use to file a complaint against your attorney for lying or being incompetent. Examples of these types of behavior include: Misusing your money. Failing to show up at a court hearing.
Legal malpractice is a type of negligence in which a lawyer does harm to his or her client. Typically, this concerns lawyers acting in their own interests, lawyers breaching their contract with the client, and, one of the most common cases of legal malpractice, is when lawyers fail to act on time for clients.
A: The lawyer should be responsive to your questions within 24-48 hours after you left a message. If the lawyer is not responsive, perhaps he or she is on vacation and unable to return.
So often when a lawyer does not return your call for a few days it may simply mean your lawyer is busy getting some important work done in your case or in another client's case. There is nothing going on with your case.
Many difficult circumstances can arise during a deposition. A successful handling of these circumstances depends upon your knowledge of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, predeposition preparation, and an awareness of possible ramifications from your actions. Your knowledge and preparation will give you confidence in your decisions and a justification for your actions.
Rule 1.310 - DEPOSITIONS UPON ORAL EXAMINATION (a) When Depositions May Be Taken. After commencement of the action any party may take the testimony of any person, including a party, by deposition upon oral examination.
This page provides a cheat sheet for discovery objections for lawyers. Elsewhere on this website, we talk about the importance of forcing defendants to provide meaningful answers to interrogatories, requests for the production of documents, and other discovery responses and requests. If we do not hold defendants' feet to the fire, we toss away a powerful tool to box in defendants for trial ...
Rule 1.330 - USE OF DEPOSITIONS IN COURT PROCEEDINGS (a) Use of Depositions. At the trial or upon the hearing of a motion or an interlocutory proceeding, any part or all of a deposition may be used against any party who was present or represented at the taking of the deposition or who had reasonable notice of it so far as admissible under the rules of evidence applied as though the witness ...
If the court later sustains the objection, the objectionable testimony will be ruled inadmissible. In view of the expressed judicial consternation toward instructions not to answer, a lawyer who improvidently does so runs a serious risk of being subject, along with his or her client, to significant monetary and other sanctions.
The defendants attempted to obtain information about the plaintiff’s school records and former teachers. At the depositions of the school personnel, the defendants’ attorneys asked numerous questions about the plaintiff’s background, to which the plaintiff’s attorney objected and instructed the witnesses not to answer.
During pretrial discovery, the defendant took the deposition of the plaintiff’s principal witness and plaintiff’s counsel effectively stopped the examination through persistent instructions to the deponent not to answer questions posed by counsel for the defendant. In ruling that it was indefensible for plaintiff’s counsel to direct ...
A statement much too frequently made by a witness’ counsel during a deposition is: “I object to that last question and I instruct my client not to answer it.” This impeding declaration is usually swiftly met with the sharp response: “Certify the question.” 1 W hile there exists a variety of reasons why an attorney may instruct a deponent not to answer, in most situations this brief dispute between counsel expires upon the conclusion of the deposition.
In situations where a deponent fails to answer a deposition question, Rule 37 (a) (2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that the deposing counsel may apply for an order compelling discovery either to the court where the action is pending or to the court in the district where the deposition is being taken.
Like the federal rules, the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure provide no basis for an attorney’s instruction to a witness not to answer a question submitted at an oral deposition. Moreover, Rule 1.310 (c) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, which precisely mirrors Rule 30 ...
However, when these alternatives prove futile, counsel may be required to seek a judicial’ resolution of the dispute over the controversial question in the form of a motion to compel and/or a motion for protective order. This article will discuss the propriety and the wisdom of instructions not to answer questions asked at an oral deposition ...
First, if you only gave counsel 24 hours to reply, your offer may have expired before it could be presented to the client, and thus, no response. The exact wording of your correspondence may be important. It is also possible that the your opposing counsel did present your offer to the client and the client rejected it, producing no response...
The lawyer has an obligation to let his client know about your settlement demand but he does not have an obligation to respond to your letter. The only thing you can do is push on with your case. I agree with Mr. Brophy that you should get a lawyer.
Presenting a settlement offer is the opposing counsel's duty to his client, it has nothing to do with you. You are apparently representing yourself, never a good idea. Granted you are apparently succeeding in getting rulings of some sort in your favor, but there is a lot more to litiigating than succeeding in court.
Next, Burbine argued that the interrogation violated his Sixth Amendment right to counsel because he had formed an attorney-client relationship that police failed to honor. The court also rejected this contention. Said the court, "The suggestion that the existence of an attorney-client relationship itself triggers the protections ...
Burbine's sister learned that her brother had been arrested, and she called a public defender. The public defender phoned the Cranston station, said that she represented Burbine, and instructed police not to talk to him until she arrived at the station.
Police did not tell the lawyer that Burbine was suspected in the Providence murder, or that he was about to be questioned in that case. They also did not tell Burbine a lawyer had phoned on his behalf. Instead, Providence officers gave Burbine a Miranda warning, obtained his waiver, and conducted an interrogation, ...
Although neither Miranda nor the Sixth Amendment right to counsel prohibits police interrogation of a willing suspect merely because his attorney has informed police his or her client is not to be questioned, some jurisdictions may have statutory rules restricting such contacts. Officers should consult local prosecutors or legal advisers to determine the existence and application of any such statutes.
Said the court, "The defendant may waive the Sixth Amendment right, whether or not he is already represented by counsel; the decision to waive need not itself be counseled. And when a defendant is read his Miranda rights and agrees to waive those rights, that typically does the trick.". (Montejo v. Louisiana)
Instead, the law focuses on whether the suspect is willing to talk without his or her attorney present. Although this is a well established principle dating back at least a quarter of a century, some officers and attorneys (and some judges) still experience uncertainty and nervousness about police interrogation of a represented suspect.
In another case, the Supreme Court held that even after a suspect is arrested and has been arraigned and has counsel appointed, he can still be approached by police, in the absence of counsel and without any notice to counsel, to see if he is willing to discuss the case.
If you don't pay your lawyer on the day of trial, or however you have agreed to, then while he or she may be obligated by other ethical duties to do his/her best, they won't be motivated by sympathy for you, and it will show in court.
Tell the Truth. If your lawyer doubts you in the consultation, or doesn't think you have a case, while that may change over time, getting over an initial disbelief is very hard. You have to prove your case. Your attorney is not your witness. They are your advocate - but you are responsible for coming up with proof.
Most people hired attorneys because they don't want to sit in court. Well, truth be told, neither do I. The difference between lawyer and client is that the lawyer expects it to take a long time and understands. The client typically thinks it's unjustified. So, your hard truth is that each case takes time. Be patient.
Credibility is one of the most important things in this world - and most important in a courtroom. If you care enough only to wear sweats to the courthouse, then the judge will see that you don't care, and that will be reflected in their desire to help you, listen to you, and decide in your favor. Step it up.
If the judge can see your boobs, he's not listening to your story. If I can see your boobs, then I know you didn't care enough about yourself to talk to an attorney. Dress like you are going to church. Credibility is one of the most important things in this world - and most important in a courtroom.
If no one can confirm that the story is true, you will at least need something external, such as a hard copy document, to prove your case. Be prepared.
While lawyers can certainly take your money and your time and we can file a case that will be very hard to win, if you don't care enough about your life to get a contract, the judge is not very likely to be on your side. At least, not automatically. Oral contracts are extremely hard to prove. What are the terms.
If the court later sustains the objection, the objectionable testimony will be ruled inadmissible. In view of the expressed judicial consternation toward instructions not to answer, a lawyer who improvidently does so runs a serious risk of being subject, along with his or her client, to significant monetary and other sanctions.
The defendants attempted to obtain information about the plaintiff’s school records and former teachers. At the depositions of the school personnel, the defendants’ attorneys asked numerous questions about the plaintiff’s background, to which the plaintiff’s attorney objected and instructed the witnesses not to answer.
During pretrial discovery, the defendant took the deposition of the plaintiff’s principal witness and plaintiff’s counsel effectively stopped the examination through persistent instructions to the deponent not to answer questions posed by counsel for the defendant. In ruling that it was indefensible for plaintiff’s counsel to direct ...
A statement much too frequently made by a witness’ counsel during a deposition is: “I object to that last question and I instruct my client not to answer it.” This impeding declaration is usually swiftly met with the sharp response: “Certify the question.” 1 W hile there exists a variety of reasons why an attorney may instruct a deponent not to answer, in most situations this brief dispute between counsel expires upon the conclusion of the deposition.
In situations where a deponent fails to answer a deposition question, Rule 37 (a) (2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that the deposing counsel may apply for an order compelling discovery either to the court where the action is pending or to the court in the district where the deposition is being taken.
Like the federal rules, the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure provide no basis for an attorney’s instruction to a witness not to answer a question submitted at an oral deposition. Moreover, Rule 1.310 (c) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, which precisely mirrors Rule 30 ...
However, when these alternatives prove futile, counsel may be required to seek a judicial’ resolution of the dispute over the controversial question in the form of a motion to compel and/or a motion for protective order. This article will discuss the propriety and the wisdom of instructions not to answer questions asked at an oral deposition ...