tranquility
Senior Member
I'll post one more time in the hope the OP will finally understand. There is little or no chance an attorney will take this on contingency. First, probate is closed. There would be a lot of work to try to get it open again. *YOU* don't seem to want to pay for that work. *YOU* just want to sit and have someone else do the work so you could get some money. Yet, *YOU* call professionals with training and experience liars because they would rather get paid for their work than take a chance on your story.
Second, you've listed no facts for anyone to help determine if there is any chance at all. You fail to recognize that facts get harder and harder to prove as time moves along. People die or forget, bodies need to be dug up both literally and figurativey and some want to move on with their lives and won't cooperate any more. Documents get destroyed and data bases purged. Just because something is true does not make it provably true. As time moves on, it gets more and more expensive to prove something. Another cost factor you want a trained and experienced professional (aka liar) to foot the bill for. All risk is his, you don't want to pay to find out what can be proven.
Third, where's the money you want? Let's face it, that's what you seek, money. Over time it tends to disburse and becomes mingled with other money in a legally tied-up sense. It gets harder and harder to collect, if a suit is warranted, as time passes. Legal entanglements and asset protections make it less and less likely anything can be collected when we're talking about years down the line. Out of who's contingent share of the judgment should this uncollectable amount come from? Yours or the liars? I know, I know, let's split the risk equally! The one who did all of the acutal work should reduce his pay to the same level of the client who merely sat at home and called every day, sometimes twice a day, to "motivate" the liar.
Info edit:
My goodness. For some reason I looked and found what "suit" the OPs talking about at:
https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=387027
He thinks there is something "fishy" about how his *uncle's* trust was handled five years ago! That's the case! He was so close to the uncle that he did not know the uncle had *died* for over four years, and then only by looking through a social security number data base. He's suspicious because a long lost "nephew" of a client who's estate was distributed in accordiance with the terms of the client's trust five years ago can't seem to get on the phone with the attorney-executor. That's real suspicious, for sure. I'd take that one on contingency, sight unseen. Unlike an accident that I know happened and where I have a client in front of me with obvious injuries, this would be payday-city!
Second, you've listed no facts for anyone to help determine if there is any chance at all. You fail to recognize that facts get harder and harder to prove as time moves along. People die or forget, bodies need to be dug up both literally and figurativey and some want to move on with their lives and won't cooperate any more. Documents get destroyed and data bases purged. Just because something is true does not make it provably true. As time moves on, it gets more and more expensive to prove something. Another cost factor you want a trained and experienced professional (aka liar) to foot the bill for. All risk is his, you don't want to pay to find out what can be proven.
Third, where's the money you want? Let's face it, that's what you seek, money. Over time it tends to disburse and becomes mingled with other money in a legally tied-up sense. It gets harder and harder to collect, if a suit is warranted, as time passes. Legal entanglements and asset protections make it less and less likely anything can be collected when we're talking about years down the line. Out of who's contingent share of the judgment should this uncollectable amount come from? Yours or the liars? I know, I know, let's split the risk equally! The one who did all of the acutal work should reduce his pay to the same level of the client who merely sat at home and called every day, sometimes twice a day, to "motivate" the liar.
The only way you'll pursue this case? What case? What are you going to do to "pursue" it other than find someone with the specialized knowledge and desire who can? Besides, a client who comes in with the attitude you show in your posts will have to find a very hungry liar to take the case. I don't think you'd get past the receptionist's pre-screeing at our office for fear of an unwarranted malpractice lawsuit for when you lose. And, if you did fool her, you'd still have to get past the intake person and he would have to convence the principal. That's just to keep track of all the money in the suit, paid up front and not under contingency, let alone how an attorney's office would handle it when the person wants free work.
Info edit:
My goodness. For some reason I looked and found what "suit" the OPs talking about at:
https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=387027
He thinks there is something "fishy" about how his *uncle's* trust was handled five years ago! That's the case! He was so close to the uncle that he did not know the uncle had *died* for over four years, and then only by looking through a social security number data base. He's suspicious because a long lost "nephew" of a client who's estate was distributed in accordiance with the terms of the client's trust five years ago can't seem to get on the phone with the attorney-executor. That's real suspicious, for sure. I'd take that one on contingency, sight unseen. Unlike an accident that I know happened and where I have a client in front of me with obvious injuries, this would be payday-city!
Last edited:
