Legal Representation

[Zephyr]

Yes hire another attorney, and this time do not involve yourself at all except to be a witness if needed. Have your son deal with the attorney, you pay for the attorney- that is the best way to help your son right now.

 

[Antigone*]

Yes hire another attorney, and this time do not involve yourself at all except to be a witness if needed. Have your son deal with the attorney, you pay for the attorney- that is the best way to help your son right now.

OT...sorry for the hijack OP

Zephyr, I had to laugh at your siggy. I get attacked every morning by a maltipoo and a toy poodle. Tomorrow morning when they get me I will say..

As God is my witness, as God is my witness they're not going to lick me. I'm going to live through this......(Scarlett)

 

[Zephyr]

That's perfect!:d

 

[ProSeDadinMD]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California
My son is in the midst of a court case involving child custody, visitation and child support. His attorney has bailed out on him and we have a court date on January 7, 2010. Must we hire another attorney? Can I represent my son in court for this matter? I certainly know more about the details than any attorney I could hire in the next week or so. Any advice would be so appreciated.

I'm thinking that you would be A) kicked out of the courtroom by the judge, and/or 2) charged with a crime. The following is from the LA county DA office:
http://da.co.la.ca.us/pdf/UPLpublic.pdf

a. Licensure Required
Section 6125 establishes the basic requirement of licensure to practice law: “No person shall practice law in California unless the person is an active member of the State Bar.” (§6125.)
The California requirement of licensure to practice law is a valid exercise of the state’s police power and serves the legitimate state interest of assuring the competency of those performing this service. (J.W. v. Superior Court (1993) 17 Cal.App.4th 958.). The licensure requirement does not violate First Amendment free speech rights (Howard v. Superior Court (1975) 52 Cal.App.3d 722), and has survived Equal Protection challenge (People v. Sipper
(1943) 61 Cal.App.2d Supp. 844).
b. Unauthorized Practice or Attempted Practice Prohibited
Section 6126 is the basic charging statute for most UPL crimes. Section 6126(a) provides, in relevant part:
Any person advertising or holding himself or herself out as practicing or entitled to practice law or otherwise practicing law who is not an active member of the State Bar, or otherwise authorized . . . to practice law in this state at the time of doing so, is guilty of a misdemeanor . . . (§6126(a).)
Misdemeanor violation of section 6126 is punishable by up to one year in county jail or a fine of up to $1000, or both.