Lawyers and clients frequently want continuances to prepare their cases, but they don’t always get them. A continuance is a grant of additional preparation time before or during a trial. Either the prosecution or the defense can request a continuance, and sometimes even the court can order a continuance of its own accord.
For example, even if an attorney working at a law firm didn't personally work on a particular matter (because someone else at the firm handled it), if the attorney leaves the firm, he or she could still have a conflict of interest related to that matter based on the firm's work. Thank you for subscribing! The email address cannot be subscribed.
In order to comply with conflict of interest rules, the lawyer should make clear the lawyer's relationship to the parties involved. Whether a conflict is consentable depends on the circumstances.
In all of its aspects, this relationship is founded upon mutual trust, and when that trust is broken it is difficult (if not impossible) for the lawyer and client to continue to work together. What are the important considerations while changing your lawyer?
Attorneys often request continuances because their work on other cases has prevented them from devoting the necessary time to the case at hand. Courts usually allow some leeway in these situations, especially for court-appointed defense attorneys. Time for the defense.
It's usually only when the defendant's rights might otherwise be violated that a court will grant a continuance request. Absent a law or constitutional right to the contrary, judges have broad discretion to determine whether to issue a continuance.
Because continuances delay the resolution of a case , judges typically frown upon them. It's usually only when the defendant's rights might otherwise be violated that a court will grant a continuance request. Absent a law or constitutional right to the contrary, judges have broad discretion to determine whether to issue a continuance.
However, a continuance due to a change in a charging document is warranted only if the change (known as "variance") compromises the defendant's case.
the new evidence is reasonably related to evidence the defendant already knows about. the defendant has enough time without the continuance to prepare for the new evidence. the defendant wasn't diligent in anticipating the evidence (for example, defense counsel failed to read forensic reports turned over by the prosecution ...
For example, the prosecution changing the alleged date of a crime might justify a continuance to allow the defendant to prepare an alibi for the date in question.
A continuance is a grant of additional preparation time before or during a trial. Either the prosecution or the defense can request a continuance, and sometimes even the court can order a continuance of its own accord.
For example, a lawyer asked to represent several individuals seeking to form a joint venture is likely to be materially limited in the lawyer's ability to recommend or advocate all possible positions that each might take because of the lawyer's duty of loyalty to the others.
The critical questions are the likelihood that a difference in interests will eventuate and, if it does, whether it will materially interfere with the lawyer's independent professional judgment in considering alternatives or foreclose courses of action that reasonably should be pursued on behalf of the client.
[8] Even where there is no direct adverseness, a conflict of interest exists if there is a significant risk that a lawyer's ability to consider, recommend or carry out an appropriate course of action for the client will be materially limited as a result of the lawyer's other responsibilities or interests. For example, a lawyer asked to represent several individuals seeking to form a joint venture is likely to be materially limited in the lawyer's ability to recommend or advocate all possible positions that each might take because of the lawyer's duty of loyalty to the others. The conflict in effect forecloses alternatives that would otherwise be available to the client. The mere possibility of subsequent harm does not itself require disclosure and consent. The critical questions are the likelihood that a difference in interests will eventuate and, if it does, whether it will materially interfere with the lawyer's independent professional judgment in considering alternatives or foreclose courses of action that reasonably should be pursued on behalf of the client.
General Principles. [1] Loyalty and independent judgment are essential elements in the lawyer's relationship to a client. Concurrent conflicts of interest can arise from the lawyer's responsibilities to another client, a former client or a third person or from the lawyer's own interests. For specific Rules regarding certain concurrent conflicts ...
[21] A client who has given consent to a conflict may revoke the consent and, like any other client, may terminate the lawyer's representation at any time. Whether revoking consent to the client's own representation precludes the lawyer from continuing to represent other clients depends on the circumstances, including the nature of the conflict, whether the client revoked consent because of a material change in circumstances, the reasonable expectations of the other client and whether material detriment to the other clients or the lawyer would result.
[14] Ordinarily, clients may consent to representation notwithstanding a conflict. However, as indicated in paragraph (b), some conflicts are nonconsentable, meaning that the lawyer involved cannot properly ask for such agreement or provide representation on the basis of the client's consent. When the lawyer is representing more than one client, the question of consentability must be resolved as to each client.
Personal Interest Conflicts. [10] The lawyer's own interests should not be permitted to have an adverse effect on representation of a client. For example, if the probity of a lawyer's own conduct in a transaction is in serious question, it may be difficult or impossible for the lawyer to give a client detached advice.
If a lawyer does withdraw from a case, he or she still has ongoing duties. For example, he or she must maintain client confidentiality. Additionally, if the lawyer has any of the client’s property, he or she must return it. He or she must provide the client’s file upon request and cooperate with the transfer process.
One common reason is because the client has not paid the bill. Lawyers are not expected to work without compensation. The professional rules of conduct may permit the lawyer to withdraw when he or she will not be negatively impacted by the withdrawal or if there is a suitable replacement that is willing to take on the case.
Typically, a lawyer must get the judge’s permission before he or she can withdraw from a case. A judge is less likely to approve the withdrawal if the client will be prejudiced or otherwise adversely affected by the lawyer’s withdrawal, such as if the case is close to trial. A lawyer makes a motion to be relieved as counsel before he or she will be permitted to stop working on the case. He or she cannot simply refuse to pass along information or act on the client’s behalf simply because the judge has not yet granted the motion. The court can refuse to honor the request to withdraw. If the court does grant the motion to withdraw, the client may have additional time to find new counsel.
The professional rules of conduct may permit the lawyer to withdraw when he or she will not be negatively impacted by the withdrawal or if there is a suitable replacement that is willing to take on the case. The professional rules of conduct often allow the lawyer to abandon the client even in some situations when it may harm the client’s interests.
Prejudicing the Client’s Position. The court is less likely to allow withdrawal if withdrawal would materially prejudice the client’s ability to litigate the case. This may be the case when a trial is imminent. Additionally, the court may not honor the request to withdraw if the facts giving rise to the request to withdrawal are in dispute.
The first place to look for issues regarding representation when a lawyer has not been paid is in the client agreement that he or she has in place and that the client signed. This agreement may state how the lawyer will be paid and when the lawyer can withdraw from representation. There may be a clause that states that failing to pay for ...
If the lawyer is owed money, he or she may have a right to sue the client. He or she cannot realistically be opposed to the client and provide proper representation in his or her case.
If you hire a new lawyer in the middle of a case, that lawyer will need to get up to speed on the case and that will likely cost you some more time and/or money.
If you cannot resolve your issue (s) with your lawyer, you have the right to fire that lawyer and replace them.
Judges have the discretion to keep a lawyer on the case if the case is too far along in the court process to have a new person be able to step in and take over. Firing a lawyer is your right but it can be costly in both time and money and is often a last resort when things between just can’t be resolved.
Can I change lawyers in the middle of a case if I’m unhappy with the lawyer I’ve hired? Yes. You can replace your lawyer if you have lost faith or confidence in your lawyer to represent you, you have the right to change counsel. Ideally, it would be good to speak with your lawyer about what is making you unhappy or uncomfortable and give ...
First, the lawyer that you fire is likely entitled to be paid for work already done. If you are current with your payments this may not be an issue.
the attorney is not competent to continue the representation. the attorney becomes a crucial witness on a contested issue in the case . the attorney discovers that the client is using his services to advance a criminal enterprise. the client is insisting on pursuit of a frivolous position in the case. the attorney has a conflict of interest ...
The attorney must cooperate with the client's new counsel and must hand the client's complete file over as directed. An attorney who has withdrawn from representation has a continuing professional obligation to maintain the confidentiality of all matters within the attorney-client relationship, so for example the attorney cannot become ...
When an attorney withdraws in the middle of a client's case, that withdrawal is usually categorized as either "mandatory" or "voluntary." In this article, we'll explain the difference between these two processes, along with some examples of each. Keep in mind that with either type of withdrawal, the attorney usually needs to ask for and obtain the court's permission before ending representation of one of the parties in a civil lawsuit in the middle of the case.
withdrawal would materially prejudice the client's ability to litigate the case.
the client is refusing to pay the attorney for his or her services in violation of their fee agreement. the client is refusing to follow the attorney's advice. the client is engaged in fraudulent conduct, and.
Where the circumstances permit, but do not require, the attorney to cease representation, the withdrawal is considered voluntary.The circumstances under which an attorney may withdraw mid-case include:
Even where withdrawal is mandatory, an attorney must first seek and obtain the court's permission before ending representation in the middle of a case.
Notify your attorney in writing that you have decided to terminate his or her services. Be sure to mention how you would like a copy of the contents of your case file (mailed to you, to your new attorney, or provided to you in person, for example).
Lack of professionalism. The lawyer perhaps arrives late to meetings, doesn't remember key facts about the case, cannot find documents already provided by the client, and even forgets to submit documents by key deadlines.
Choosing a lawyer is a crucial step in the resolution of your legal matter. Whether you are a plaintiff or a defendant, or merely a party looking for counsel, the right lawyer is key. But like all relationships, the lawyer-client relationship does not always last forever. Common problems that clients report with attorneys include: 1 Poor results. The lawyer is simply not achieving the results you were led to believe he or she could achieve. 2 Bad communication. The lawyer is not communicating about crucial legal matters and decisions, leaving you uncertain of where your matter is or what's expected of you. 3 Lack of professionalism. The lawyer perhaps arrives late to meetings, doesn't remember key facts about the case, cannot find documents already provided by the client, and even forgets to submit documents by key deadlines.
Judges in particular might become annoyed at a client who is "lawyer shopping," because this delays the matter and clogs their dockets. It also suggests that you are a difficult client, or that your claims are not meritorious.
If you believe that professional conduct was violated, you can report your attorney for ethics violation.
Bad communication. The lawyer is not communicating about crucial legal matters and decisions, leaving you uncertain of where your matter is or what's expected of you. Lack of professionalism.
Choosing a lawyer is a crucial step in the resolution of your legal matter. Whether you are a plaintiff or a defendant, or merely a party looking for counsel, the right lawyer is key. But like all relationships, the lawyer-client relationship does not always last forever.
There are a variety of conflicts of interest that can prevent a lawyer from taking on a particular case. The conflict may occur between the prospective client and one of the attorney's current or former clients. There can also be concerns if a client's interests are in conflict with the lawyer's professional or personal relationships.
In the legal field, however, one of the legal duties every lawyer must observe is to avoid conflicts of interest when it comes to their clients. In fact, if a lawyer represents a client knowing that there's a conflict of interest, they can be disciplined by the state bar and sued by the client for legal malpractice.
While an attorney may be able to easily identify a conflict, sometimes they're not always easy to spot. Because of this, it's the attorney's responsibility to perform regular conflict checks when taking on a new client.
An attorney can not only answer any questions you may have about the scope of an attorney's obligations to their client, they can also answer other questions you may have about the law.
Conflicts of interest can occur in a number of real-life situations. While these may be ethical dilemmas, acting one way or another will not likely lead to any kind of formal punishment. For example, if a business executive is her son's direct manager, there will likely be a conflict of interest when she has to conduct a performance review of her son's work. This might create a problem for the company and lead to policy changes, but it wouldn't necessarily violate any laws.
It's also important to note that a law firm may be able to represent a client even though a single attorney had a conflict of interest, if a "firewall" can be successfully put around the attorney with the conflict. This essentially means that the matter would not be discussed with or around the attorney with the conflict, ...
It's also possible for there to be an issue if the potential client's interests are at odds with the attorney's own interests. A conflict of interest can also occur at the law firm level. For example, even if an attorney working at a law firm didn't personally work on a particular matter (because someone else at the firm handled it), ...
Generally, you hire the firm not the lawyer, but call your lawyer and/or the firm and ask why he switched the case. If the firm insists on this new lawyer, you could ask her to seek a delay, but there is no guarantee you will get one.
Our Rating is calculated using information the lawyer has included on their profile in addition to the information we collect from state bar associations and other organizations that license legal professionals. Attorneys who claim their profiles and provide Avvo with more information tend to have a higher rating than those who do not.