The question is whether it is the text records that make the lawyer withdraw.
If not, then apparently he has some sort of relation either with John’s wife, or the other lawyer, that places him in a conflict of interest position.
If it is the texts, then something in the material has made him a witness to the case which means he cannot (usually) represent one party in it. He might be mentioned in the stream of text messages. ie: “Yeah, after I eff your brains out I’m filing for divorce with my Lawyer X on Tuesday the 23rd!” He can now be deposed as to whether someone did meet with him on that day. The content may be privileged, but I doubt the meeting itself is. Another example might be, if my lawyer were to be looking at my phone when my ex texted me yet another death threat, he just became a witness to that act. He cannot (easily, in the eyes of the court) continue to represent me, because he is now a witness in that case.
Alternatively, there is a conflict of interest somehow where he has a relationship with the other person in the texts.
That’s my .02 cents, marked down from .04 for today only!
IANAL, but could it possibly be the 2 lawyers work for the same firm? I know when I was looking at divorce lawyers, they wanted to make sure of who my ex was using, so there would be no conflict of interest.
Another possible conflict of interest scenario - the girlfriend in the texts is divorcing her husband and lawyer man in representing one or the other of them.
If you Google “Texas Christian Lawyers,” you get over a million hits, including a Christian divorce lawyer in Dallas. Is it possible that John has gotten a lawyer from a firm that represents professed, practicing Christians, for a reduced fee? or that in this particular case, the lawyer is representing John pro bono at the request of John’s pastor, because the pastor has vouched for his good character and genuine need? Finding out that the wife may have grounds for a divorce with cause because John is an adulterer may nullify a contract John has signed where he promised that he lives according to Christian principles. Finding out not only that John has committed adultery, but that he made further plans to do so after signing a contract with the lawyer, certainly would release the lawyer from his obligation, I think. However, IANAL.
Texas is no fault divorce and no alimony. He could be boinking half the county and it wouldn’t make any difference on his divorce proceedings. If this is at the beginning of the proceedings, he may have decided to take on a case that will take all his time, he may have decided he’d rather take a vacation, or he may have decided that having a liar for a client wasn’t such a great deal. Or, since we don’t know the emotions or voice levels or anything like that of the scene where the wife showed him the texts, he may have decided not to get involved in a case which would lead to shrieking and angry confrontations in his office. Some people like a peaceful life.
In fact, why did she show him the texts? It’s not going to get her any more property or money.
And if he was that big into right wing Christian ethics, he wouldn’t have signed on for a divorce case in the first place.
My money is on the lawyer in question having previously spoken to his client and attempted to impress upon him that he must be fully honest with his lawyer. Maybe even asked, “Anything else I need to know? If I find out you’ve lied to me we’re done, understand?”
Maybe he’s been blindsided before, wants to avoid it in future, and told this guy as much. So when the evidence was brought forth, he wisely said, ‘I’m out!’
Or,
The woman whom his client was pursuing is known to him in some way. Cousin, secretary, former college roommate, a former client, etc, etc, on almost endlessly.
This is incorrect. Fault divorce for adultery is an option in Texas, and one of the grounds is adultery. It is also possible to get an award for spousal support (alimony) in certain circumstances in Texas.
Y’know, since this is a real situation, and not a riddle, with a logical solution, what we know is what the lawyer could say in front of third parties, which was “I can no longer represent you,” and that’s it.
But what may have been the case-- as long as we’ve been invited to speculate-- is that what the wife thought she had uncovered as evidence of adultery or at least planned adultery, may have been something else-- in particular, stalking. I don’t know what the criminal laws covering stalking are in Texas, but I assume there are some. Perhaps someone else in this lawyer’s firm helped prepare a TRO application, and the lawyer was not aware of the name of the person, but had heard the content of some of the texts, or emails, and recognized them when he saw them again.
I assuming there would absolutely be a conflict of interest there, as he would not be able to refute the adultery charges without violating the privacy of another client at his firm, and also accusing his client of a crime. Now, maybe his client would prefer to assent to the accusation of adultery, rather than admit to the stalking. I’m not sure what the lawyer is allowed to do. It may be that as long as he knows only what his client has told him, he is in the clear if his client lies, but if he goes along with a lie he knows through other means to be untrue, he can get into trouble.
My boss says “Clients lie.” She only has an obligation to make sure the client doesn’t lie or otherwise misrepresent something to the court.
If John had previously signed a declaration that was part of a Request for Order/Order to Show Cause/Motion that the lawyer then filed with the court, and then the attorney saw the texts and found out that the client made a false statement, I could see the lawyer feeling that an irreversible breakdown of the attorney-client relationship had occurred. She would probably ask John to sign a Substitution of Attorney; if he declined to do so, she could file a Motion to be Relieved.
But just because he was dipping his quill in a strange inkwell? No.