Valid Stipulation

[Clark20]

Regarding California Family Law;

My counsel stated that I did not have to be at a hearing which was scheduled only for the purposes of validating visitation after mediation. I needed to go out of the Country for work and did not make an effort to attend either in person or by phone.

I found out later that my counsel made non-visitation decisions on my behalf and without my knowledge and had these "agreements" put into a stipulation. A current California Case Law states that an Attorney can not agree to a stipulation without the client present. I had brought up my concerns about these "agreements" and stated that I never would have agreed to a couple of them. Now I am being asked to sign the stipulation to ratify the agreements.

What do I need to do, so I can state to my counsel, that I do not want to ratify only 1 maybe 2 of the agreements in the stipulation because, (of course), I disagree with them. (But the others "agreements" are fine.) Apparently my disagreement has fallen upon deaf ears.

 

[LdiJ]

Regarding California Family Law;

My counsel stated that I did not have to be at a hearing which was scheduled only for the purposes of validating visitation after mediation. I needed to go out of the Country for work and did not make an effort to attend either in person or by phone.

I found out later that my counsel made non-visitation decisions on my behalf and without my knowledge and had these "agreements" put into a stipulation. A current California Case Law states that an Attorney can not agree to a stipulation without the client present. I had brought up my concerns about these "agreements" and stated that I never would have agreed to a couple of them. Now I am being asked to sign the stipulation to ratify the agreements.

What do I need to do, so I can state to my counsel, that I do not want to ratify only 1 maybe 2 of the agreements in the stipulation because, (of course), I disagree with them. (But the others "agreements" are fine.) Apparently my disagreement has fallen upon deaf ears.

What your attorney actually agreed to matters. If its pretty standard stuff that a judge would expect to see in an agreement, you may have little recourse.

 

[HomeGuru]

Regarding California Family Law;

My counsel stated that I did not have to be at a hearing which was scheduled only for the purposes of validating visitation after mediation. I needed to go out of the Country for work and did not make an effort to attend either in person or by phone.

I found out later that my counsel made non-visitation decisions on my behalf and without my knowledge and had these "agreements" put into a stipulation. A current California Case Law states that an Attorney can not agree to a stipulation without the client present. I had brought up my concerns about these "agreements" and stated that I never would have agreed to a couple of them. Now I am being asked to sign the stipulation to ratify the agreements.

What do I need to do, so I can state to my counsel, that I do not want to ratify only 1 maybe 2 of the agreements in the stipulation because, (of course), I disagree with them. (But the others "agreements" are fine.) Apparently my disagreement has fallen upon deaf ears.

**A: now you realize the importance of being present at a court hearing either in person or by phone.

 

[latigo]

Regarding California Family Law;

My counsel stated that I did not have to be at a hearing which was scheduled only for the purposes of validating visitation after mediation. I needed to go out of the Country for work and did not make an effort to attend either in person or by phone.

I found out later that my counsel made non-visitation decisions on my behalf and without my knowledge and had these "agreements" put into a stipulation. A current California Case Law states that an Attorney can not agree to a stipulation without the client present. I had brought up my concerns about these "agreements" and stated that I never would have agreed to a couple of them. Now I am being asked to sign the stipulation to ratify the agreements.

What do I need to do, so I can state to my counsel, that I do not want to ratify only 1 maybe 2 of the agreements in the stipulation because, (of course), I disagree with them. (But the others "agreements" are fine.) Apparently my disagreement has fallen upon deaf ears.

Just in case there is a question lurking in here, it seems that you've supplied the answer; to-wit:

". . . I am being been ASKED to SIGN the stipulation and RATIFY the agreements."

If those hi-lighted words are confusing to you, consult a dictionary.

 

[tranquility]

A current California Case Law states that an Attorney can not agree to a stipulation without the client present. I had brought up my concerns about these "agreements" and stated that I never would have agreed to a couple of them. Now I am being asked to sign the stipulation to ratify the agreements.

While not precisely true, it is in its essence. See Blanton v. Womancare, Inc., 696 P. 2d 645 - Cal: Supreme Court 1985 for a more through discussion. But, as the court warned:

Finally, while unauthorized acts of an attorney may be binding upon his client through ratification (Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. Abraham, supra, 70 Cal. App.2d 776, 783), no ratification appears here. Immediately upon learning of the arbitration agreement plaintiff fired her attorney and engaged new counsel to set it aside. At that point defense counsel, knowing of plaintiff's objections and her attorney's lack of actual authority, could have allowed the case to proceed to trial but chose not to do so. Only after the trial judge refused to invalidate the agreement, and reaffirmed his order that the case proceed to arbitration, did plaintiff appear and participate in the arbitration hearing.

 

[Clark20]

Just in case there is a question lurking in here, it seems that you've supplied the answer; to-wit:



If those hi-lighted words are confusing to you, consult a dictionary.

Okay let me clarify... I was asked by my own counsel.

 

[Clark20]

While not precisely true, it is in its essence. See Blanton v. Womancare, Inc., 696 P. 2d 645 - Cal: Supreme Court 1985 for a more through discussion. But, as the court warned:

The case law, (which I do not have), is around the End of February, begining of March 2013 that Counsel can not Agree on the Terms of a Stipulation when the client is not present.

 

[Zigner]

When you told your attorney that you do not wish to sign and you do not agree to the terms, what does he say?

 

[tranquility]

The case law, (which I do not have), is around the End of February, begining of March 2013 that Counsel can not Agree on the Terms of a Stipulation when the client is not present.

Search for the case I cited. It was the Supreme Court after all. It will show you the issues. I suspect the case you are thinking of does not say things as clearly as you think.