Suing a Lawyer

[Zigner]

Because you don't understand the rules of evidence.
As you were told, you NEED an attorney

 

[Shadowbunny]

Why?

I have all emails and text with phone bills backing up every text so to prove there not photo shopped etc. That's all I have. There is no contract. Her spelling out are deal in emails, text. Month's of them her keeping track deducting what would be paid me against rent.. .

Emails and texts are notoriously easy to fake. I can make a text look like it came from anyone. Same with emails. Unless you have the money to hire forensic experts, texts and emails would not hold up in court.

 

[ppk]

Emails and texts are notoriously easy to fake. I can make a text look like it came from anyone. Same with emails. Unless you have the money to hire forensic experts, texts and emails would not hold up in court.

 

[ppk]

I'm not sure how you fake a phone bill that shows the date, time, phone number where the text came from. Match those up with text that were all downloaded from an app that documents every text; date, time who it came from. Not sure what ore a "forensic" guy could do. Actually its exactly what a forensic guy, does.

 

[ppk]

Because you don't understand the rules of evidence.
As you were told, you NEED an attorney

I agree. We were trying too handle this on my own without any damage being done to someone's reputation.

 

[quincy]

I'm not sure how you fake a phone bill that shows the date, time, phone number where the text came from. Match those up with text that were all downloaded from an app that documents every text; date, time who it came from. Not sure what ore a "forensic" guy could do. Actually its exactly what a forensic guy, does.

The easiest way to get texts and emails introduced into evidence is to have your defendant-lawyer agree they were sent by her. I suspect she won't, though.

If she argues their authenticity, you need to call a forensics expert as a witness to testify.

A link to the Texas Rules of Evidence (there have been some amendments since this 2015 publication): http://www.txcourts.gov/media/921665/tx-rules-of-evidence.pdf

Unfortunately, you are priced out of small claims where the parties are not expected to know the law and you will be presenting your case in a court where the parties are expected to know the law.

This is why it would be to your benefit to have a lawyer.

 

[LdiJ]

LdiJ, your definitive statement is a problem and your personal story is a really unfair and inaccurate portrayal of attorneys.

Its not an unfair portrayal. There are bad apples in every industry and in particular, an attorney is going to have no incentive to settle with someone who isn't even filing suit.

 

[quincy]

Its not an unfair portrayal. There are bad apples in every industry and in particular, an attorney is going to have no incentive to settle with someone who isn't even filing suit.

I found your portrayal of lawyers unfair and inaccurate. Your personal experiences often seem to fall outside the norm.

 

[Taxing Matters]

She will NEVER settle with you. Period. It will not happen. Your only hope of getting paid is to sue her and win a judgement against her. The only way that you might force a settlement is to hire an attorney of your own for the case, and raise the stakes by asking for a lot more money to cover attorney fees and punitive damages.

You don’t know that she won’t settle. You may have had some bad experiences with lawyers, but most attorneys are not like those you portrayed in your reply. Most attorneys would look at this like any other (well informed) person in that situation would and determine what to pay based on whether or not he or she believes the money is truly owed. Most attorneys do NOT refuse to pay things they owe and look to sue or otherwise try to use legal maneuvers to avoid bills they owe.

My brothers are both contractors and I have many tax clients who are also contractors. As a whole, sadly, most of them refuse to do business with anyone who is an attorney, because they have all been burned by attorneys.

To be fair, I've seen a number of clients burned by bad contractors, too. But that doesn't mean I think all contractors are bad.

 

[LdiJ]

You don’t know that she won’t settle. You may have had some bad experiences with lawyers, but most attorneys are not like those you portrayed in your reply. Most attorneys would look at this like any other (well informed) person in that situation would and determine what to pay based on whether or not he or she believes the money is truly owed. Most attorneys do NOT refuse to pay things they owe and look to sue or otherwise try to use legal maneuvers to avoid bills they owe.



To be fair, I've seen a number of clients burned by bad contractors, too. But that doesn't mean I think all contractors are bad.

I do not think all attorneys are bad either. I just don't think that they settle unless the case is totally unwinnable. They have little to lose except some of their time. None of the contractors I know will work for any attorney anymore, no matter how potentially lucrative the job might be. So, the few bad apples in the barrel have poisoned things for the others.

 

[quincy]

I do not think all attorneys are bad either. I just don't think that they settle unless the case is totally unwinnable. They have little to lose except some of their time. None of the contractors I know will work for any attorney anymore, no matter how potentially lucrative the job might be. So, the few bad apples in the barrel have poisoned things for the others.

You are generalizing again based on your limited personal experience.

 

[Ohiogal]

Its not an unfair portrayal. There are bad apples in every industry and in particular, an attorney is going to have no incentive to settle with someone who isn't even filing suit.

You are a jerk. Completely and totally.

 

[Taxing Matters]

I do not think all attorneys are bad either. I just don't think that they settle unless the case is totally unwinnable. They have little to lose except some of their time.

Then you haven't dealt with many lawyers in this context. You say that the lawyer has nothing to lose but time. That's not true. The lawyer may end up with damaged credit, just like anyone else. Late payment fees and penalties can accrue. Furthermore, for a lawyer time is money. At my billing rate, for example, it would not take a whole lot of time dealing with something like this to add up to a large amount of fees I could have generated in that same time. As a result, unless I think I had a good shot to win and the cost to defend it in terms of foregone fees was worth it, I would indeed consider settling it. Most other lawyers I know would also take that practical approach — just like nonlawyers evaluate such situations. Simply refusing to settle unless you think it totally unwinnable is foolish and shortsighted, and most lawyers are smarter than that.

 

[Zigner]

I'm not sure how you fake a phone bill that shows the date, time, phone number where the text came from. Match those up with text that were all downloaded from an app that documents every text; date, time who it came from. Not sure what ore a "forensic" guy could do. Actually its exactly what a forensic guy, does.

And this shows...very clearly...that you don't understand the rules of evidence.

 

[ppk]

And this shows...very clearly...that you don't understand the rules of evidence.

I don't know. Why do you think I'm here asking Zig. But I was told by a forensic accountant for the IRS that matching your cell phone bills (which show text by text who sent and received. Date and time) to my actual cell phone with text still on it is the first, easiest step.