Missouri Family Law Blog

The other day, a salesperson really ticked me off. This was one of those faceless customer service people on the phone. After an hour of not getting what I needed, I escalated the call to the next level, then the next level. Several days passed, without resolution. Finally, a week later, I got the issue resolved.

The entire time that I was dealing with these folks, each one “apologizing” for the inability of the one before to assist me, I thought about my own profession and the requirement that each of us delivers competent service. Yes, yes, I know: you have your own horror story about your divorce lawyer and the failures that you perceive in his or her conduct of you divorce or custody case.

The difference is that in my profession, we have an ethical standard, and if we do not meet that standard, you can complain to an official board that will investigate and levy punishment if we have not fulfilled our ethical mandate. Make no mistake about it: Lawyers are punished. Each month, when the Missouri Bar Journal arrives in the mail, I turn first to the “Disciplinary Actions” section to see who is listed. It’s a bit like reading the obituaries: If my name does not appear, I go ahead and eat breakfast.

No, it doesn’t come as a surprise — you get warning first. A letter, containing a copy of the complaint. You answer. You are obligated to make your file open to the committee. They send your answer to the complainant. They make an initial decision. Sometimes it escalates to the next level, which functions as a prosecutorial body. It’s scary, I assure you. I have had 2 or 3 complaints against me, all resolved in my favor — but each of which I took very seriously.

Divorce lawyers are subject to more complaints than most, I suspect because divorce clients need a lot of attention and don’t always feel as though it is given. Then, too, there are some complicated features of divorce, especially where pensions, investment plans, and business evaluations are concerned.

When I hear a “lawyer joke”, I cringe. Only blondes have a worse reputation than lawyers, I think; and with just as little rational basis. Most lawyers are good, honest, hard-working people who care about their clients. Many of us, myself included, awaken in the night worrying about our cases and whether we have done what needed to be done that day. Solo practitioners such as myself rarely get a vacation, and those of us who do custody cases really stress out about the outcomes. Believe me — I’ve been doing this for a long time, and I still worry about cases that I did years ago.

Lawyers are held to a very high ethical standard. If you feel your divorce or custody lawyer has not done what he or she is supposed to do, by all means, file a complaint with the Missouri Bar. Bear in mind that successful outcome is not necessarily the determinant. In every contested divorce or custody case, there will be a winner or loser. Your lawyer can do a very conscientious job, perform admirably, and honor his or her ethical mandate, but still lose.

Lawyers’ ethics are important. I, for one, strive at all times to return calls or answer e-mails, treat each client as though they are the most important client that I have, and treat the client, the opposing side and the court with respect, dignity and honor. I hope each of your lawyers does the same.

Someone recently asked me if I did complicated property cases. I’ve done them, of course; after 25 years of practicing family law, of course most every kind of case has come my way. But I don’t like them. Why not? Well, because they involve fights over stuff.

Nobody should fight about stuff. Oh, come to think of it, they shouldn’t fight about their children, either; but at least children are important.

What’s my advice about “stuff”? Simple. You’ve got to make a detailed list of everything that the two of you own, in order to complete the property statements. So, when you are making that list, break it down into two categories. Those categories are as follows:

STUFF I WOULD HATE TO LOSE IN A FIRE
and
STUFF THAT I CAN EASILY REPLACE AND IS NOT WORTH A FIGHT.

In the first list, you should put things such as “my dead grandmother’s lace handkerchiefs”. In the second list, you should put — well, most everything.

Here’s my message: Stuff is not worth a fight.

Make your list, and then ask yourself this: What’s more important, this stuff, or this person to whom I was married, and for whom I have at some point felt love?

Then offer to give your soon-to-be-ex-spouse first pick over the half of the stuff he or she wants, and offer to take the other half.

You can replace couches, pots, pans and dinnerware. You can never replace your self-respect.

Will I fight for my clients’ “stuff” if they direct me to do so? Yes, I suppose. But I don’t really take cases that are about “stuff”. When there is personal or real property involved in a case that I am handling, I counsel my client to be fair, reasonable, and not to spend their children’s college savings fighting over furniture.

They usually take my advice, and we can usually work out the property issues, and move on to what is really important — the children.

When I represent people who don’t have children, I counsel them to make the argument over the “stuff” as reasonable and easy for both as possible, and I have even been known to send a client to another lawyer if they wanted a widely disparate property distribution without even an arguably justifiable basis.

Because when it comes down to it, there are legally defensible reasons for a disparate property distribution, and those legally defensible reasons are grounded in logic and reason. They include a greater contribution to the acquisition of the asset by one party, a greater financial need by one party, and secondary financial resources that enable one party to re-acquire property more easily than the other party. Egregious fault on the part of one party could also lead to a disparate distribution, though I have always found this provision to be ironic, since the emotional devastation can hardly be assuaged by getting a greater share of the “stuff”.

Absent a legally defensible basis for an unequal property distribution, I usually counsel fairness and as close to a 50/50 share as possible. I encourage my clients to understand that being fair, and reasonable, and civil, will ultimately enable them to heal more quickly than being vindictive and hateful. Most of my clients listen to this, and understand what I am trying to tell them.

Divorce is a hard thing to endure. In the final analysis, divorcing parties should do what they can to make it easier on everyone — because in so doing, they enable themselves to heal. And healing is the real stuff of which divorce, and recovery from its pain, is all about.