I seriously doubt your w's L is telling her to be mean and uncivil. Frankly, that's what the Ls are for. the L is probably telling her the MOST she can get is "X" and SHE"s driving the "I want more" train. As a L, I suggest that clients let US do the dirty work, partly b/c I think it helps couples stay civil, which is both cheaper AND easier on the kids AND increases the chances of a recon.
I have not seen "SOB L's" win more than strong, calm advocates. It's a question of whether the L is experienced in Family law so they can accurately predict out come, to the extent that's done, AND experience in actually going to trial, YET while trying to avoid it.
(In family Law, trials are ALWAYS horrid affairs and no one ever feels as if they "won"...how can they?) For regular litigation you want a litigator. For div, you want someone who's willing and able, but who's willing to avoid it if it's a close call (and who is realistic). When 5 L's all say you'll get no more than "X" and then ONE L says "Oh I can get you double that", you don't hire that one.
There are not that many surprises in Family law since guidelines are more specific in that area, mostly to avoid trials. They spell out as much as they can. There are not that many facts to dispute, so juries are not as needed. Also, "no fault" divorces greatly reduce what there is to dispute.
Last but not least, SOB Ls are pricey and can actually prolong the ordeal b/c they have their egos involved, and or they want to churn billable hours,and or they simply irritate the other spouse or other Lawyer (hey, we all have egos) so much that things get worse, not better.
Just my thoughts. I cannot think of when being civil would hurt you. Are you meaning to say "wimpy"? That's not what I mean.
Good luck Fut, and remember you can be fair, strong and assertive and NOT be an ass&^$%. Maybe that's the lesson for many of us. j
I definitely will be civil, and she is being civil too. The problem is, the laws in this state offer almost no room to maneuver. Our state does not recognize shared custody, at least not as related to child support. All child support money goes to the "custodial parent", which by definition is the parent that makes less money. If she wants to insist on full payment as per state formulas, it'll nearly bankrupt me, and my only recourse is to go all out and try to have me established as custodial parent, based on the fact that I've been there for the kids while she's left them several times to go see OM, and therefore I'm due all support, not her. That's not even what I want. I want her and I to work out how much it'll cost for us to raise the kids together, and come up with a split of money that acknowledges the fact that we're sharing custody, and that we both need to provide homes and food for the kids. Our state law has no provision for this sort of negotiation. It's all based on which parent is named "custodial parent". If we go the lawyer route, her lawyer is going to tell her she can get X dollars per month based on state formulas. He already has, I can tell from her e-mails to me. She took the state formula amount, and offered me a small reduction for food for the kids, that's it. I pointed out that I need to provide a home for the kids, a family sized car, food, toys, etc, and she ignored me and told me to talk to her lawyer.
