Celebrating 10 years! 2007-2017

Family Court Ethics

If an attorney represents a still married lover (assume sexu adamb04/13/17
I don't think so, given that the law in our jurisdiction all jeffm04/13/17
But he is representing his still married lover, not himself adamb04/13/17
You can point out all those things and try to paint the guy jeffm04/13/17
That's a whole other can of worms easily painted when it bec adamb04/13/17
Who is the money earning spouse? Cop and nurse no attorney prodigy04/13/17
Yup -$120k to like zero. But they were married a year bu adamb04/13/17
Only what is acquired during the marriage will count as mari prodigy04/13/17
None yet. Zero is literally a zero and probably entitled to adamb04/14/17
adamb (Apr 13, 2017 - 9:34 am)

If an attorney represents a still married lover (assume sexual relationship predates representation) and tries to recover attorney fees - is that an ethical issue?

It seems like you are enriching yourself by squeezing your new lover's husband.

Reply
jeffm (Apr 13, 2017 - 9:43 am)

I don't think so, given that the law in our jurisdiction allows an attorney who represents himself to recover attorney's fees as well.

Reply
adamb (Apr 13, 2017 - 10:03 am)

But he is representing his still married lover, not himself pro se. And in federal court you often cannot get attorney fees for going pro se, if I remember correctly, like, say, a 1984 claim.

EDIT: and if I were a judge, it all would look fishy to me as the other side would paint it in the fishiest possible light.

Reply
jeffm (Apr 13, 2017 - 10:21 am)

You can point out all those things and try to paint the guy in a negative light. I still don't see an ethical violation. If that was the case, I imagine it would be an ethical violation to represent a family member, boyfriend, spouse, etc. as a plaintiff in a contract case. The elephant in the room is that the lover is still married. It might be adultery, and it might bring up a question as to whether it is an ethical violation for attorneys to bed clients. Attorney's fees have nothing to do with this.

Reply
adamb (Apr 13, 2017 - 10:27 am)

That's a whole other can of worms easily painted when it becomes he said whoever said in a preonderance of the evidence situation before a random judge in a not so gay friendly court. But I digress.

Reply
prodigy (Apr 13, 2017 - 8:20 pm)

Who is the money earning spouse? Cop and nurse no attorney fee awarded. Cop on $150,000 nurse on $90,000. Depending on how much he earns. If it is $100,000 to $30,000 then yes. Depends.

Reply
adamb (Apr 13, 2017 - 10:01 pm)

Yup -$120k to like zero.

But they were married a year but together ten.

Reply
prodigy (Apr 13, 2017 - 11:27 pm)

Only what is acquired during the marriage will count as marital assets. Well the $120,000 has to pay for the attorneys fee of the zero. Did the $120,000 acquire a license example MD, Attorney during the marriage? Do they own a property together? Give me a brief synopsis on Zero and $120,000. Zero may walk away with something but not alot. Just what is acquired during the 1 year. Depending on their lifestyle, did zero add value to the property if any? Any kids during the 1 year adopted etc? Did zero give up his career to accommodate $120,000 career?

You know the basics 401k, pension, etc zero is entitled to. Everything bought acquired in the 1 year splits in half. A house given by aunt B to either guy in the one year is considered marital asset. Even the cars as long as they are not lease. Who the dog lives with the judges are still trying to figure that one out. Here is the kicker, if zero decides to go on welfare, then DSS will automatically go after $120,000 for spousal support as the divorce until the divorce is final, and perhaps thereafter.


He may be entitled to some spousal support but, only for a few years. Depending on how the attorneys argue it, depending on the judge. He may get support until the divorce is finalized. Again depending on the situation. Anything goes in SF, the ruling flip flops from judge to judge just pray it doesn't end up in front of Murphy or he will get spousal support for ten years lol due to his lack of experience. Leo will throw him out tell him to go find a job. Joseph will read him the riot act, but will give a fair ruling.



Which judge is presiding?

Reply
adamb (Apr 14, 2017 - 7:51 am)

None yet. Zero is literally a zero and probably entitled to virtually nothing. He'd be better off settling for nothing and walking - in this particular situation. But I have a vested interest in zero's attorney not getting sucked into the nether void of IOLA investigations.

Reply
Post a message in this thread