Assuming that you are representing yourself in pro per (as it appears) the defendant's attorney can contact you directly. That would only be improper if you are representing by an attorney and the defendant's attorney is aware of that representation.
Feb 22, 2012 · Thomas Allen Neil. As noted, an attorney may directly contact a party who is in pro per. The attorney may not contact a party who is represented by counsel. The attorney may contact witnesses, including plaintiff's family or friends. This response is for information purpose only and does not constitute a legal advice.
May 31, 2016 · If you're unrepresented, yes. You can still impose reasonable restrictions pertaining to medium, frequency, and scope. You may want to consider 'evening the odds' so to speak by hiring your own attorney. Even if you intend you proceed unrepresented, you should take advantage of a free consultation.
May 14, 2016 · Posted on May 14, 2016. Posted on May 14, 2016. Normally it is a conflict of interests for an attorney to represent both the defendant and the plaintiff in a law suit.It is hard to fight for both sides and represent both sides equally. If you already have an attorney, you should be asking your questions of him, unless you sense a conflict of interest, at which point you …
The short answer is yes. The legal answer is, there is no rule against speaking with an opposing party, but your lawyer would rather you did not for the sake of litigation. Listed below are a few ground rules. Always Be Polite Depending on the size of your community, you may run into the opposing party in the grocery store or at the doctor’s.
(a) In representing a client, a lawyer shall not communicate directly or indirectly about the subject of the representation with a person* the lawyer knows* to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the consent of the other lawyer.
No California legal ethics rule expressly prohibits a non-lawyer client from contacting another party directly, although clients cannot be used as conduits for indirect prohibited contact from lawyers.Sep 26, 2016
Parties to a matter may communicate directly with each other, and a lawyer is not prohibited from advising a client concerning a communication that the client is legally entitled to make.
Wolfram's “Modern Legal Ethics,” the no contact rule, as a general proposition, prohibits a lawyer who is representing a client from contacting a party known to be represented by another party. The no contact rule first found its way into the American Bar Association's canons of ethics in 1908.
(A) While representing a client, a member shall not communicate directly or indirectly about the subject of the representation with a party the member knows to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the member has the consent of the other lawyer.
In a nutshell, if opposing counsel isn't responding:Document your repeated efforts at contact, including your statement of the consequence of continued nonresponse.Wait a reasonable amount of time.To be safe, get a court order authorizing direct contact.More items...•Jun 22, 2018
Pro se legal representation (/ˌproʊ ˈsiː/ or /ˌproʊ ˈseɪ/) comes from Latin pro se, meaning "for oneself" or "on behalf of themselves", which in modern law means to argue on one's own behalf in a legal proceeding as a defendant or plaintiff in civil cases or a defendant in criminal cases.
Judges and lawyers typically refer to defendants who represent themselves with the terms "pro se" (pronounced pro say) or "pro per." Both come from Latin and essentially mean "for one's own person."
Communicate Clearly and Often It is important to avoid using legal jargon when a lawyer communicates with clients. Using plain language will allow a client to understand the provided information easily. Lawyers should always invite their clients to ask questions and reach out if necessary.Sep 20, 2021
Paralegals handle a large range of work delegated to them by an attorney. One of the most important duties of a paralegal is communicating with opposing counsel. In any given case, there can be hundreds to tens of thousands of pages of documents to review and exchange with opposing counsel.Sep 22, 2020
A good example of this is the "no contact" rule. This rule states that an attorney should not speak to a person known to be represented by another counsel unless that other counsel has given consent for the attorney to speak directly to their client.Apr 18, 2016
Under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, a lawyer who is a party in a legal matter but who does not represent any other party in the matter may communicate concerning the matter directly with a represented adverse party without the consent of the adverse party's lawyer.
As a party representing oneself, it will be necessary for Father's attorney to communicate with you, but it is never appropriate for that communication to become threatening or harassing.
It sounds like this is a civil (family) law case, so there are no "defendants", there are plaintiffs and respondents. You are I believe, the Respondent.
If you're unrepresented, yes. You can still impose reasonable restrictions pertaining to medium, frequency, and scope. You may want to consider 'evening the odds' so to speak by hiring your own attorney. Even if you intend you proceed unrepresented, you should take advantage of a free consultation.
No Attorney-Client Relationship or Legal Advice Communication of information by, in, to or through this Web site and your receipt or use of it (1) is not provided in the course of and does not create or constitute an attorney-client relationship, (2) is not intended as a solicitation, (3) is not...
Normally it is a conflict of interests for an attorney to represent both the defendant and the plaintiff in a law suit.It is hard to fight for both sides and represent both sides equally.
You will see them in the courtroom, and you may bump into them in the parking lot, the lobby, and the elevator as you go to and from your court dates.
These situations can be tense because you have come prepared to watch your attorney argue your side of the case, but it is vital to keep your composure when you are near the courthouse because there are law enforcement personnel all around. Do your best to remain cordial outside the courtroom.
The short answer is yes. The legal answer is , there is no rule against speaking with an opposing party, but your lawyer would rather you did not for the sake of litigation. Listed below are a few ground rules.
If you are working through a personal injury claim, the only people you should be talking it through with are your attorney, the other lawyers, and support staff in the office, and any family member included in the case.
If you have hired an attorney, the opposing party’s attorney is never allowed to speak to you without your attorney present. He or she can acknowledge you and be polite, but he or she cannot discuss your case or attempt to settle the case with you without your attorney’s consent.
Normally, you wait for the other side to put the witness on the stand, and then " cross examine" him or her. So you would do this only if 1) there was a good chance that the defendant won't testify (so you don't get your "cross") and 2) there are important facts you want to get into evidence using the defendant.
Further, each side is generally permitted to choose the order in which it calls witnesses, so a plaintiff could call the defendant and then take the stand himself . Note, though, that as a matter of trial strategy, this is generally considered a bad idea.
If you have proof proof, not suspicion that he is romantically involved with his client, you could report him to the California State Bar Association, as that is an ethical violation. Don't threaten to report him, as that would be wrong, but you have the right to report him for such wrongdoing.
An attorney cannot use threats against someone to gain an advantage in a civil matter. However, the attorney can warn that person that he is about to file a lawsuit to resolve a matter.
It is permissible for an attorney to write a demand letter and say that he will file suit if you don't pay the demand, but after that, he ought to just sue or shut up. You don't have to meet him personally, and you probably should not. If you have proof proof, not suspicion that he is romantically involved with his client, you could report him to the California State Bar Association, as that is an ethical violation. Don't threaten to report him, as that would be wrong, but you have the right to report him for such wrongdoing. You can also hire an attorney to represent you in this matter, and that will put a stop from the attorney's contacting you at all. Good luck.
Sometimes an in-person meeting is a good way of resolving disputes without resorting to a lawsuit. That being said, in the situation you describe, the aggrieved party should at least consult with an attorney to go over the specifics, the background, the evidence and then options and recommendations. It will be worth the cost of the consultation fee.
It is not unethical to threaten a lawsuit if you refuse to negotiate a settlement. You, or whoever is receiving the message should offer to consider any demands, but let the lawyer know you are uncomfortable meeting, if you are. If the lawyer becomes uncivil, or threatens action he knows he cannot take, such as threatening criminal charges, that would be unethical.
Anybody can have more than one lawyer represent them in an action. It happens frequently. However, as a general rule, they all must be listed on each pleading that is filed. If there appears to be inconsistencies, your attorney should consider bringing it to the attention of the judge on the case. Report Abuse.
The answer is yes. It depends on the nature and complexity of the litigation. As a plaintiff, you also have the right to retain more that one lawyer if the lawsuit is complex and needs certain legal specialization.
A defendant can have as many attorneys as it wants. Whether the motions are "valid" or not would depend on what the motions are for , and what arguments they make, but it's likely that they are legitimate. There is a time limit for responding to the motions, if you don't have an attorney you should find one as soon as possible.
In some civil cases because of the way insurance rules work a defendant and even a plaintiff may have more than one law firm. But, one should take the lead.
Also, at trial the defendant's attorneys have to divide up the duties. Only one of them can make the opening statement, only one can make closing argument , etc. Report Abuse.
Yes. A defendant can have as many law firms as it wants. The two firms can work together - as they have, apparently, here. Both motions would likely be valid.