I have caught a lot of undeserved heat on this board lately. I have been called everything from an attorneys worst nightmare, to having a chip on my shoulder to how dare I critisize how other attorneys have treated me.
I have also been chastised for asking for free legal advice, especially when you consider that this is presumably what this board is for.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I have no desire to rub salt into an already open and festering wound. I would also like to thank mrphilly and others who have treated me with respect, and who have taken my problem seriously. However, the overwhelming majority of those who have responded to my posts have taken the position that I am totally out of line. To this I respectfully ask the following. What ever happened to the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 6.1?
We all know this is the pro-bono rule. Now I admit that in theory at least a lawyer has no legal obligation to comply. But is that true? If that were true, why, in addition to the ABA Rules do many if not all states have their own Rules of Professional Conduct, with their own suggested standard? In addition, since the ABA has as strong(and many argue illegal)a stranglehold on the legal industry, we were taught in Professional Responsibility class that in point of fact the language of the rule should be interpreted as mandatory, as opposed to suggested.
Therefore, it really amazes me that all of the attorneys I spoke with gave me such a hard time, when they, the same as all other lawyers have an ethical obligation to do at least 50 hours of work for free. Naturally, none offered to do any pro bono work for me. I get the general idea that with the exception of a relatively few lawyers pro-bono is a dead issue.
I know several lawyers that do quite a bit of pro-bono. Sadly none of them practices in my required area.
The question I must pose is the following: In spite of the ethical requirment to comply why do most in the legal community refuse to do so? Again, I know that there are some who do. However, they appear to be in the distinct minority.
Perhaps I am incorrect. However, I am going on information I was taught and published.
Ladies and Gentlemen I await your replies.
Many attorneys -- probably most -- do 50 hours or more of pro bono work. But giving somebody a few pointers for free is not the same thing.
Pro bono work generally involves helping someone in particularly serious need or handling an issue of public significance. Helping a single mother of six avoid an illegal eviction for free would qualify as pro bono, but helping her landlord for free would not.
If someone whose needs don't meet these criteria calls me for advice and I give it for free, should that count as pro bono? I give free consultations all the time, but I wouldn't dream of arguing that such work should count toward any pro bono expectations or requirements I need to meet. If I did, it would make a mockery of the whole concept of pro bono. If I haven't verified that the person I'm helping is in dire straits (and that means more than just taking his/her word for it) or that the issue is important, then I shouldn't be able to call the work pro bono.
I didn't read your prior posting or the follow-ups in detail, but what I saw didn't give any indication that you are in a situation which warrants pro bono assistance. Maybe you are, but it wasn't clear from your postings.
It did seem, though, that you were asking for specific legal advice as to how you should proceed in your own circumstances. That is different from most of the other questions on this board, which seek explanations of legal doctrines or practices. Seeking advice is different from seeking information, and that is probably why some users thought your post was inappropriate.
Would I have reacted to your posting as harshly as some others did? No. But then you were asking professional people to work for you for free. Imagine how a provider would react to a request for a little free service. They probably don't like such requests either, and they probably get more of them even than lawyers do.
Pro bono publico obligations of members of the bar are directed at the indigent. Not at people that are trying to save money by getting a lawyer to work for free. There is a misconception that since lawyers dispense only intangible work product that it should somehow be available for the asking. It makes no more sense than telling an escort her services should be free since she presumably has the same inventory available at the end of the session that she had at the beginning. For a profession that
paraphrases Abe Lincoln in so many of its webpages (You are paying only for my time) I am surprised this would even be an issue. Remember, lawyers do provide free services for the indigent. Do you?
First, there is no such animal as the pro bono rule. I have no idea what the ABA Rules are and don't care. It's a busybody group in Chicago which has no jurisdiction over me in California.
Second, all lawyers are licensed creatures of the state(s) in which they are licensed to practice. Few know (or care about) other state's professional conduct rules. Nonetheless, only California's rules apply to a California lawyer; Nevada's rules apply to Nevada lawyers and so on. The ABA rules are not imposed on a California lawyer.
In fact, about half of America's lawyers do not belong to the ABA for a host of reasons. There is obviously no requirement to belong or to subscribe to its rules which may or may not be similar to a state's rules. The pro bono rule which you posit is a wish list of the ABA.
No lawyer owes a duty to donate any free time to anyone for any reason. In truth, because of the problems all lawyers have in collecting earned fees from clients, their uncollectible accounts receiveable is in fact pro bono work. (Mine is currently at $200,000 or so. Last month a guy simply said: "I can't pay you the $28,000 I owe you. Sorry." Notice he didn't argue that the money wasn't fairly payable, just that he couldn't pay me.
Well now, if I sue for a judgment, he will counter sue and allege malpractice for some trumped up reason; I will have to call my insurance carrier which will defend me, raise my rates and I'm marked for the rest of my career. The deck is stacked against lawyers.)
I know of no other business where people are expected to give of themselves for free. Try getting the providrs to give 10 or 20 per cent of their services for free. See what laughter really is in response to that one.
Your statement that lawyers have an ethical obligation is just so much bs, like most of your other positions. It isn't that perhaps you are incorrect. You are incorrect purposefully so as to initiate this type response. When you get it, you then whine.
Get off our case.
Apparently you went to law school for a time. Have you passed the Bar yet?
Rodmewell
I really don't know who caharmon is. I read posts on TER all the time, but I don't usually try to remember posters' names. I first became aware of caharmon when he posted a message on Los Angeles board inquiring about a particular provider, who works with a group of girl friends. (Do a search on LA board dating back 10 days) When one of her friends responded, not only did caharmon misunderstood her post, he went on offense. I posted a message clarifying the misunderstanding. The ironic part is, not only did the provider apologize for the misunderstanding (When she did NOTHING wrong), caharmon NEVER once apologized for his uncalled for tirade. caharmon posted a message saying let's move on, yet a day later I received an email from him regarding the matter. I replied to his email today and told him I do not wish to have an argument nor a discussion with him. I stopped short of saying please do not write me anymore, he did anyways. Just so caharmon knows, I deleted his email without reading it.
I was browsing through legal board because I had a concern and wanted to see if it has been asked here. I read some of caharmon's posts here, and I am quite honestly surprised how some of you are "so nice" to him. It seems to me caharmon is an angry man. In his posts and email, he tends to use "no offense, but..." a lot. There are ways to ask questions and get help. No one likes a person charging in with the attitude that the whole world owes him something. That's the attitude I get from caharmon. In a post below on this particular board, he even managed to insult all people from Ukraine. How ironic of him to criticize a group when he seems to be least liked here.
I am just wondering...if someone constantly gets negative feedbacks about himself, would it ever occur to him that maybe, just maybe, there might be something wrong with him? with his approach? with the way he asks questions? the way he acts on the board? Just a thought. Of course, caharmon will just turn around and say everything he gets from TERers is "undeserved".
Time to sharpen that social skill a bit.
P.S. Sorry if this post offends some of you. I am not one to normally criticize people, but this guy's attitude has really been bugging me.
My fellow attorneys have covered your latest question pretty well, but since you took such violent exception to my earlier post, I need to add a point or two.
As Rodmewell said, the ABA is a voluntary group that has NO authority over me or any other practicing attorney. Its Model Rules are just that; a model for others to follow or ignore as they see fit. The rules in my state are similar to the ABA model, but they do not mandate that I hand out free advice to everybody that comes asking for it.
You also forget that our time and advice are what we sell; how we make our living. I cannot imagine you demanding that a person in any other business give away free product just because you don't want to pay for it. That is EXACTLY what you want attorneys to do, then you have the BALLS to get angry when one of us refuses.
Finally, you disagreed with my analogy between the legal and medical professions. Would you take out your own appendix? Perform your own root canal? No. But you expect us to give away the knowledge of years of schooling and experience so you can ATTEMPT to collect on a claim that may have a material effect on the quality of the rest of your life. You are precisely the type person that goes to court charged with a serious crime, defends himself ineptly,and then blames the criminal justice process for your situation. We have two technical terms in criminal practice for persons such as yourself, both found in the dictionary under the letter I: Idiot and Inmate.
]
I have been reading the responses generated as a result of my inquiry, and have come to the conclusion that I was not specific enough in what I wrote. So much so that it generated the firestorm that it has.
Quite honestly, I don't appreciate, nor do I believe that I deserve the name calling, even though I now understand all the resentment that my post generated, for which I will accept my proportional share of the responsibility.
The fact of the matter is that every one misinterpreted what I was asking for. Did, I write the original post? Yes I did, did I ask for legal advice? yes I did. The issue is what type of advice I was asking for.
At the risk of being accused of back peddling, something that I am not. All I was asking for was an objective opinion as to whether or not I should retain counsel,and if so why? I did in fact speak to those I complained of, and they in fact did treat me the way I said they did.
Now, looking back at this catastrophe I created, I can see why the majority of you took offense the way you did. Now, it appears to me that many of you took offense because you thought that I was asking you to actually perform substantive work. Now hold on! Yes I posted the issue of pro - bono. Yes I dredged up the ABA rules, and yes I admit to going a bit overboard with some of my replies. However, I can only explain my reasons for being so adamant about it because of my own past experience, something which need not be repeated now. In addition, based on my past experience, ie, the large amount of pro -bono I see being done,it provided more than ample justification for asking what I believed were reasonable questions. My reaction to the answers I got were just that, reactions to predominantly hostile replies. All of you believe that what you understood I was asking for to be unreasonable,and I can understand that now. However, had your responses been less abrasive, Mine would have been the same. Had that happened then perhaps this whole thing would not have happened.
I agree that legal representation is what an attorney sells, which is at the very heart of my demand for information. I wasn't asking anyone to appear at a hearing for me. I wasn't asking anyone to write letters of representation, or draft pleadings. If I asked that for free, then I definitly would have deserved what I got. If I am going to give you 25% of my recovery, all I ask is that you justify your fee. In other words, yes representation and legal advice is what the lawyer sells. I am a potential client. Sell me on why I need you, that's all, nothing more. Even when I go to the Doctor, I always question her why she is doing what she is doing.
Bottom line, this whole thing is a misundertanding. I apologize for offending any of you. However, since I was using this board for what I preceived to be its intended purpose, and since I must not know what the purpose of this board is, would someone please tell me what the purpose of this board is.
Finally: I would once again like to thank "Sidone" and "Mr.Philly", for their support and help in clarifying matters for me.
I think I'll quite while I'm ahead.
Respectfully.
caharmon
All