Pet Peeves from the family law trenches

Listen to this article

Don’t be this guy. Wisconsin Law Journal asked a number of family lawyers and judicial officers about their pet peeves.

From the Lawyers:

I hate it when the other side …“

Catches my client in a lie I didn’t catch. Can’t do math. Sends a letter that is fashioned to gratify the person named after ‘cc,’ not to move the case along or solve a problem. Makes me replace ‘their’ with ‘his or her.’ Always has the spouse who has done no wrong. Has no sense of humor. Writes ‘please consider this letter a formal request for discovery.’

— Daniel R. Cross,
Peterson, Berk & Cross S.C., Appleton

“Fails to respond to letters or phone messages. I have a case where I sent a proposed Marital Settlement agreement three months ago. No response, and the trial is set for three weeks from now. They also failed to respond to a discovery demand. So I have no idea what the issues even are at this point, and I have to bring a motion. It just makes everything more anxious, difficult and expensive. Even if they’re taking unreasonable positions, at least I’d know that, and could prepare accordingly.”

— Anthony J. Menting,
Swendson/Menting Law Ltd., Oconomowoc

“Makes the issues more about what the lawyer wants, rather than what the client wants. They’ve decided the right way for how the case should be resolved, without checking with their client.” — Katherine L. Charlton,
Hawks, Quindel, Ehlke & Perry S.C.,
Milwaukee

“Sends boiler-plate discovery — 50 questions of interrogatories — instead of just picking up the phone and asking for the relevant documentation that will help to resolve the case. Or, when they refuse to negotiate until the last minute, after I’ve already prepared for trial.”

— Marta T. Meyers,
Boardman, Suhr, Curry & Field LLP, Madison

“Calls me, wondering if my client will agree to something, when they haven’t even gotten their client to agree to it. Or, when I get fax copies only of something, sent at 4:55 p.m. on a Friday afternoon, and at Monday morning’s court appearance, they assume I’ve seen it.”

— Brian J. Bushaw,
Kelly, Habermehl & Bushaw S.C.,
Madison

“Talks to my client, and more importantly, talks disrespectfully to or about my client. Like when they come up to me, with my client right there listening, and say, ‘Gwen your client really needs to stop…’ It’s disrespectful to me, and terribly disrespectful to my client.”

— Gwendolyn G. Connolly,
Law Offices of Gwendolyn G. Connolly,
Milwaukee

“Picks a fight for no apparent reason. Or, when they believe everything their client says, and act positional the whole time, instead of trying to problem-solve.”

— Karyn Gimbel Youso,
Jacobson & Ratzel, Brookfield

From the Judges:

I hate it when lawyers …

“Don’t try to see if they can reach an agreement before coming to court. When they don’t make copies of important documents; they just bring the originals and expect the court to make copies. Or when they don’t get their client to be realistic; they just spout whatever the client wants them to say, without thinking about what a court might actually consider ordering.”

— Hon. Mary Beth Keppel,
Dane County Family Court Commissioner’s Office, Madison

“Are not prepared for a pretrial conference. In Brown County, we have three steps: the status conference, the pretrial, and the stipulated divorce date. I hate it when lawyers are asking for information, essentially doing their discovery, at the pretrial, because that should have been done at the status conference or earlier. It’s not that it’s an annoyance for me, so much as it’s a waste of their client’s time and money.”

— Hon. Mark Warpinski,
Brown County Circuit Court, Green Bay “When a case is scheduled for trial, everyone is prepared to go, but there are no copies of the exhibits for court. Especially with the financial documents, as testimony is taken, I like to be able to take notes and typically do so on a copy of the pertinent exhibit, which I can’t do if it’s an original.

I also hate it when lawyers are not prepared to give an opening statement. So often, they instead want to just start right away with their first witness. Even though we’ve received and read the documents, and we generally have a good idea of what the issues are, it’s still important in my perspective for the attorneys to begin by summarizing the case — reminding of things like how long the parties have been married or why maintenance is appropriate, for example — and telling why the issues are in dispute.”

— Hon. Faye Flancher,
Racine County Circuit Court, Racine