Hate’s too strong a word. It’s that, guided by experience, she seems to be acting just like every other potential client I’ve ever had who seemed like a walking attorney grievance complaint. Or, to paraphrase Rex Stout, my “intellect, guided by my experience”, tells me that she’d be a difficult client, to say the least.
Every client I’ve ever had who did the sort of research she’s done (which is not easy, by the way), acted as if they were more experienced/better at this than I am. I would bet you the beverage of your choice that every practicing attorney could quote you at least 4 such clients that they either knew of, or dodged.
There are two reasons you hire an attorney in litigation. #1 is that we generally know the law of the relevant area, and how to make the facts fit the law, and vice versa. #2, and no less important, is that your attorney does not care. That does not mean that we are not your advocate, far from it, but we are NOT personally involved in the deal. Thus, we can, you know, advocate on your behalf without getting wound up.
I don’t hate Stoid at all. I don’t know her. I hope she wins her case or comes to some mutually acceptable resolution. I hope the vibe I get from her posts on this issue is entirely wrong. But, her posts throw off all kinds of crazy signals and cause the words “Danger, Danger, Danger” sound from the Malpractice Warning System (patent pending).
The downside of a malpractice claim being raised, even if ultimately dismissed, is far out of proportion to the dubious benefits of offering free advice (and, it is advice she is seeking). When you apply that basic risk to someone who claims to have divined the Secrets of the Law through selective self-study, who either refuses or is unable to comprehend the very clear posts above regarding information vs. advice, and who demonstrates a willingness to see things well past the rational stopping point (as she admits regarding the house) … well, let’s just say I’d make whatever polite noises were necessary to get out of a conversation as quickly and neutrally as possible.
Well, IANAL, and this is the first Stoid thread that I remember reading. Probably read others and forgot. Based solely on this thread I asked myself the same question glee. I expressed that mystification to someone who also reads these boards and he suggested I take a stroll down memory lane and see the threads that led up to this one. Boy howdy, that was an eye opener! This has been a soap opera since 2006 and Stoid has received a bunch of good solid rational “advice” from a lot of the lawyers on this board. She has basically spurned them one and all if they in anyway contradicted her view of how the legal system works. IMHO.
And I hate to say this Stoid but I think you totally screwed that young man you were living with and say you love so much. And not in a nice way. As I now understand it when the break-up originally occurred you insisted that when buying him out of the equity he had in your shared home his share should be reduced by an amount equal to what a real estate agent would charge to sell the place, even though the place was not going to be sold. Based on this thread I thought he was the greedy one but it was actually you.
You then essentially forced him to sue you for partition and in the process, as the real estate bubble burst, he lost between $100-200K in equity. And now at the age of 35, when he probably wants to settle down and have kids, he is still tied to you thru the now worthless house you two still have. And you are taking him to court again.:smack:
Go read some of the original threads glee. She really is bat-shit crazy. Again, IMHO
I know who I am. People who actually know me know who I am. And I know what’s going on in real life.
It is evident that the majority of the people who are interested in taking any time to engage me on this subject have no interest in doing so in a way that is even slightly helpful to me, but rather serves some purpose of their own, and there’s certainly nothing wrong with that, we come here for our own purposes and owe each other nothing.
I have provided plenty of fodder, I’m glad you got something out of it.
Maybe instead of trying to persuade this set of lawyers to give you what, for whatever reason they say they won’t give you, you can simply try one of the other bazilliion or so other places where lawyers congregate online and ask there.
I don’t hate her, I am laughing at her mostly and weirdly fascinated. I’ve rarely come across this level of self-delusion.
I am a lawyer and I have worked in mediation. There was a certain type of person that I would work with who would seem almost reasonable until you heard what they were upset about. People who could just not drop it no matter how many years had passed or how worthless the original thing they were arguing about had ended up. In mediation you would try to get the parties to agree on their own settlement, but when this type of person showed up nothing would persuade them into making a fair agreement. Believe me. I tried. Every approach in the book, gentle nudging, logic, appeals to emotion, nada. They were RIGHT and the other person was WRONG and they would make that wrong person SUFFER because that’s what they DESERVED.
It really sucked sometimes because these people usually had a pretty good relationship in the past, but their argument ruined it, and by the time they were at court they had taken inimicable sides and were coldly furious. My favorite endings were when the parties were open enough to take a realistic look at the situation and could walk away without more tugging and snarling. “Hey, how did we get here, this isn’t worth it, we liked each other once, it’s too bad it came to this, let’s just call it a day…”
Heh, I miss mediation, too bad it’s not so popular in England!
So anyway, if it isn’t evident, Stoid reminds me of those YOU ARE SO WRONG AND YOU SHALL SUFFER people. She can’t grasp that she’s also wrong, because if she accepts that her whole house of cards collapses.
I guess I’ve been reading this thread in the hopes it’ll have a happy ending…she’ll realise they used to be good for each other, and decide not to hurt him any longer. Fat chance!
Well, your purpose in opening this thread did not seem to be to seek assistance, but to vent against, to use your own words, “Arrogant Attorney Asshats.” If you truly were seeking assistance from lawyers on the SDMB, I would suggest that’s not a particularly effective opening strategy.
Personally, I did respond because I was trying to be helpful. However, since what I said was not what you wanted to hear, in your view I’m not being helpful. However, I would suggest that hearing things you don’t want to hear can, in the long run, be helpful.
Honestly, Stoid, I don’t think that this is evident in the least, and I think it’s unfortunate that you see it that way, when it’s clear to me that most if not all of the lawyers who have participated in this are trying to help you.
Wow. I think all you well-meaning rational lawyers need to just give up on this one. She’s hopeless. I’m an MBA entrepreneur and guess what? I dealt with a nutjob today. They’re out there and here is your nutjob quota for today. Let it go. Give up. She just doesn’t get it. You are not going to be the one to make the breakthrough. Leave it to a psychiatrist with meds for that.
Let this thread die along with any more “advice” for this nutjob. :eek:
I don’t hate Stoid at all. I have a great deal of sympathy for the rotten things that have happened to her in the legal system. The least of which is hardly that enormous fees and costs were incurred by “professionals” who appeared to be running up the biggest bills possible.
But there really isn’t a lot that can be done at this time, and especially over the internet. There are well over 100,000 lawyers in California, and how does a potential client find the right one and know if it is the right one?
With that said, it seems that the receiver sued Stoid for unlawful detainer and lost, when the receiver had no right to bring an unlawful detainer suit. That might be grounds for a malicious prosecution suit against the receiver, including enjoining all such suits in the future. But I don’t know, I can’t recall having ever brought a similar suit.
As for the appeal, after hundreds of posts, I still think that the only suitable course of action is talking to an appellate lawyer with experience in LLPs.
I should have put a smilie (like :eek: or :smack: ) in after “Why do you hate Stoid?”, because I meant it in the same way as “Why do you hate America?” comments.
I am staggered by how upset Stoid must be to assume that every lawyer on the SDMB is engaged in a conspiracy against her.
It’s Thomson-West textbooks and the Federal Register when the IRS is being made out to be the bad guys.
It’s Foundation Press textbooks and the US Code when it’s insurance companies being made out to be the bad guys.
Didn’t you get the memo?
[actor in suit]Let’s DENY the claim! Mwah-hah-hah![/ais]
[younger actor in suit]Mr. Figginbottom, they have LAWYERS.[yais] slides over piece of paper (actaully blank)
[ais]The law firm of Happy, Scrappy, Hero, and Pup?.. let’s settle this one.[/ais]
Happy, Scrappy, Hero, and Pup!
Fighting for YOUR rights!
The insurance sompanies have lawyers on THEIR side. Shouldn’t YOU?
