AutoClownMaker
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2020
As a lawyer for Patty, I don't think you'd run afoul of any sort of sanctions if you warned him about the massive risks and he insisted on blundering full speed ahead, but I'm not super well versed in the obligations lawyers have to their clients so my bad if I'm off on this.
Clients complaining about lawyers goes no where from the governing body unless there was money mismanagement.
Judges filing a complaint will make you uninsurable. Non practicing bar card holder or ones that become in house council are likely to have insurability problems. But the governing body not issuing a formal sanction can still make your premiums so high it makes no sense to hang out your shingle.
Lawyers will do this: 'Sounds like you have a case, pay me a retainer.' Then after spending down the retainer 'this case is more complicated, pay me more'. with the hope you'll just pack up and go someplace else or just bleed more money to them. After a couple of filings cribbed from Westlaw and the responses you'll get another 'oh, gee. This is complicated. You might not prevail. Pay me.' If the lawyer gets caught out pushing a lie and care about their bar card they will bail with a generic 'due to differences of opinion with the client on how to proceed I now move the court for allowing me to withdraw'. That verbage is also used with the 'difference' is the law dog ain't getting paid.
In Patrick's case he didn't help himself with his interviews and suing autists who'd go over everything he said and did looking for holes in his fact pleadings. An easy and accessible example was the request for a restraining order with Pat saying 'that didn't happen' while the other guy had messages showing it did.