O
out4blood
Guest
What is the name of your state? MI
We have a lawyer for a civil matter regarding a bogus real estate transaction. So far, I am getting the gist that he is trying to get us to fire him, since he has taken the case and is supposed to represent it until the end unless we dismiss him.
He failed to file the answer to the complaint and put us in default, which he then fixed, and now he is trying to get us to settle and pay them for things they had a duty to mitigate prior to filing a complaint. The plaintiff's new we had to go back to the table and meantime they sent out surveyors and the soil and water guy. Now they want us to pay for them. Without going into detail the guy basically tried to take title to the house without even applying for a loan to pay off the current mortgage and planned to leave it in our name and make payments. The contract makes no sense, as it conflicts with itself on several material points.
Our lawyer has put us in default, not entered important material evidence, and his arguments and answers are weak. Is he lazy or is he on the other side?
We have a lawyer for a civil matter regarding a bogus real estate transaction. So far, I am getting the gist that he is trying to get us to fire him, since he has taken the case and is supposed to represent it until the end unless we dismiss him.
He failed to file the answer to the complaint and put us in default, which he then fixed, and now he is trying to get us to settle and pay them for things they had a duty to mitigate prior to filing a complaint. The plaintiff's new we had to go back to the table and meantime they sent out surveyors and the soil and water guy. Now they want us to pay for them. Without going into detail the guy basically tried to take title to the house without even applying for a loan to pay off the current mortgage and planned to leave it in our name and make payments. The contract makes no sense, as it conflicts with itself on several material points.
Our lawyer has put us in default, not entered important material evidence, and his arguments and answers are weak. Is he lazy or is he on the other side?