Attorney suit for fees

[GHINFLA]

I engaged an attorney to collect on a Civil Theft Judgement. The thief decared BK. Although not a BK attorney, he agreed to pursue the case and deposed the thief. As the case progressed, he informed me that I owed an additonal $600+ and that continued representation would cost me $2500-$10,000. I paid the bill and informed him I could not pay that additionalmoney and instructed him to withdraw. The thief's attorney filed for withdrawal at the same time. The thief's attorney was allowed to withdraw and mine was not. In essence the Judge conscripted him. The case continued, the attorney informed me he would attempt no further collection and the case ended with the Judgement being excepted. 2 years later he is suing me for $9000 in additional fees saying I had received a benefit. Nothing has been collected. To top it off the BK judge originally awarded attorneys fees to me then a month later reversed his decision.
No contract was ever executed between the attorney and myself.
In his judgement, the judge mentioned that my attorney "merely" excepted the judgement.
Any direction on my defense? G. Headrick

 

[Michael Wechsler]

I remember seeing this issue before and I wonder whether it was so replied.

With regard to the attorney, on what basis is he suing you for attorney's fees? Is there a retainer agreement? Is there any statement that you ordered him to withdraw from the case? If the attorney filed paperwork to withdraw, the reasons for withdrawal should be listed.

How large is the judgment? A $9,000 suit is pretty substantial for attorney's fees and many courts will also take into account the size of the judgment and the recovery/benefit conferred, although I don't personally think this is a proper application of the law (although it works for you.)

My thoughts are that if the attorney was to withdraw because you told him you would not pay for any further services, then you have no obligation to pay for the services. If the court required him to stay on the case, that is not your problem since you did not have any agreement with the attorney to continue to work for you. In fact, the lack of any recovery would make it ludicrous for you to pay the huge bill for services you didn't want which left you with no benefit except for a huge bill.

It seems that there are still another of items that I think I may be missing here.

 

[GHINFLA]

Attorney's fees

The attorney is suing for breach of contract stating there was an initial oral agreement that I would pay him on an hourly basis. He acknowledges in the suit there was no written agreement.
He is suing for Quantum Meruit. As part of this section of the complaint, he states "Plaintiff and Defendent ageed to move the Bankruptcy Court to allow Plaintiff to withdraw, but the Bankruptcy court denied the motion" He is also suing for unjust enrichment.
I did not get a copy of his motion to withdraw but it is acknowledged.
The Civil Theft Judgment was for $70K. Nothing has been collected on the Judgment.
I contend any implied agreement was stopped when I directed him to withdraw because I could no longer afford the fees and wanted to continue Pro Se. His motion must have been defective because the opposing attorney in the case was allowed to withdraw. Alternatively, he should have appealed to a higher court or re-filed the motion stating tha BK was beyond the scope of his practice. He contends my only option after the ruling to avoid further uncontrollable legal fees was to drop the case.
Is there any case law I can use here?
Thank you. Gary Headrick

 

[Michael Wechsler]

I've seen my share of incompetent attorneys out there but also I've seen many misunderstandings occur as well. Something happened here that is difficult to determine. Since we are discussing your understanding of the facts, let's assume that what you are saying is factually accurate and that the attorney may have overextended him/herself and for some reason was not excused from a case voluntarily, despite consent from the client.

The first rule of law I'd use is common sense -- exactly what you said.

1) Why was one attorney allowed to withdraw but another attorney, despite telling the court that he would not be paid, compelled to continue? We are missing something here. Check the reason for the court's denial. Should be in a ruling of the court (paper that is signed by the judge with a ruling on the motion to withdraw.)

2) I'd argue that you were never "enriched." All you received were more bills for work which didn't get you much father than you were before. In fact, it only made sense that the attorney withdraw because the cost far outweighed the benefit.

3) If Bankruptcy was beyond the scope of is practice, you may want to consider filing a countersuit for legal malpractice. He should not have told you that he could handle a suit that he had no experience with and should have known of the problems and cost attributed to you. This ties in with the quantum meruit theory (that a party is enriched and they shouldn't be allowed to just pocket the windfall) in that you weren't really enriched -- in fact, the attorney wants you to pay for his learning bankruptcy and in essence, suing you for his own incompetence while learning the ropes.

Given the limited information, this seems to make the most sense. It's difficult to make arguments in a case like this without facts. The key is determining why the attorney was compelled to handle the case, why his motion was denied, and whether the attorney knew that this case was beyond the scope of his ability to provide professional services to you.

 

[GHINFLA]

Attorney's Fees

Thank you very much for your time and effort. Yesterday I received a settlement offer from the attorney for $3K. In talking with another attorney I understand that this is a setup so he can claim attorneys fees in prosecuting his case if he gets 25% over the offer. His letter goes to lengths on how he has "used this startegy" to turn a $3K claim into a $32k judgment. Smacks of extortion to me but understand I am not home free because I did cooperate with him post withdrawal motion. How I could have done anything else is beyond me. Supposedly the Judge to hear the case is a "split it down the middle" type and I would wind up owing something. Bottom line-I will likely take the offer just to rid myself of the problem. I'd like to take it to the Fl Bar but really see that as the fox in charge of the chicken coop. Again, appreciate your help but my already sour view of lawyers has reached an all time low.

 

[Michael Wechsler]

In these difficult times I think that attorneys are no different than anyone else trying to "find" money.

Regarding attorney fees, I'd like to see him turn a $3,000 case into a $32,000 judgment by tacking on attorneys fees. This simply, does not happen in the ordinary course. If it would, it would turn the justice system on top of its head. At the same time, it is also what sometimes makes things difficult to prosecute small cases -- but the small ones should be brought in small claims.

I'd go to the bar as a last resort. First thing to determine is why YOU were forced to keep the attorney and, if so, why should a judge compel you to pay for attorney's fees for services you did NOT want rendered? This is a paramount issue in your case. I think determining these reasons will be the key to getting results. You will need it anyways before the bar could even begin to understand the full issues.

 

[GHINFLA]

Attorney's fees

Thank you again for your time. Wish you were here with me in Fl.
Will go ahead with settlement and include demand for copies of all the motions etc. Then will go to bar. Not so much to get any money back but to stop this crap from happening to someone else. In hindsight, the biggest problem is a Federal Judge doing whatever he pleases. I've seen several of these pompous judges and we need stronger oversight. Thanks again.

 

[Michael Wechsler]

There is an old joke regarding Federal Court judges. What is the difference between a FC Judge and G-d? G-d doesn't think he's a Federal Court Judge. Enough said!!!! The appointment system and tenure may need reworking...