Every Case is Different

Is there a "best lawyer" for everybody. In my layman's opinion: Not really. Every case is different. Outside of Hollywood's movies, no single lawyer can be a winner at all areas of civil litigation, criminal defense, or personal injury. There are also lawyers and attorneys who have been suspended or disbarred, for professional misconduct. I would avoid those. But that's just my two cents.

Link to: Confessions of a Personal Injury Attorney
http://inside-personal-injury.blogspot.com/

Sherlock Holmes Guide to Lawyers, Part One
http://a-good-lawyer.blogspot.com/

Play the Insider's Game -
Learn some tips about competent law firms
http://law-firm-insider.blogspot.com/




If you are extremely wealthy, you can probably stop right here, as you will be able to afford the best that money can buy, i.e. big-name lawyers, those who have defended billionaires and mega-millionaires. This blog is meant to educate the middle class. Some big name lawyers may already have 200 to 600 cases ongoing, anyway. Imo, a lawyer with 200 live cases is like a chess player trying to play 200 games simultaneously.

For a civil lawsuit, finding the best lawyer for your particular circumstances can be like looking for a needle in a haystack. If you select a lawyer from the yellow pages or a website or a referral agency, you are not really getting a specialist in your particular case. If a lawyer is unfamiliar with "the law" of you circumstances, that lawyer will have to do some research, which may cost hundreds or thousands of dollars, before that lawyer can even provide "legal advice" to you. Do you want to pay for legal research just to advise you whether or not you have a "good case"?

How to save legal research dollars. If a lawyer has actually succeeded in a similar case, then that lawyer already has the necessary caselaw and "reasons" that need to be stated in a Factum (legal brief) in previous cases. This is somewhat like having a typist who has a saved Word document file with exactly the text you need -- why should you pay to have it typed up 'from scratch' by a newbie?

Now, how does someone find the winning-est lawyer? First of all, are you looking for a motions or a trial lawyer? That may depend on facts, strategy, and tactics. There are some lawyers who never get to trial because they win, and end, their clients' cases with motions. Those types of cases are usually where the caselaw or facts are "unsettled"; or, the facts/caselaw are so clear that the case can be won with a motion for a Summary Judgment. However, you still have to read numerous cases of the lawyer(s) that you think are competent in your circumstances, based on reported outcomes; interpret (read between the lines) the caselaw; and, check for reversals on appeal(s). There is no substitute for going to the Law Libraries (not public libraries) which are usually only open to the legal community.

However, if you have a potentially large claim (larger than $100,000, say), you should imo probably seek a trial lawyer, in my opinion. If you have a personal injury case, you definitely want an established trial lawyer.

But, what is a "trial lawyer"? Not every lawyer is a trial lawyer even though he/she may claim to be one. In my view, a trial lawyer is one who has vanquished the other side, repeatedly, in a particular area of litigation, such as "defamation of character", "medical malpractice", or "negligent taxi drivers", or "bicycle injury cases." There are only a very small handful of trial lawyers in a big city like Las Vegas, Halifax, or Hamilton. Very few. If you actually check the outcomes of even the authors of law books (in a particular area), you may find that these authors aren't actually particularly good at winning cases in the area of law that they have written about. So, check carefully, before hiring anybody.

Remember this: Loser Pays. If you lose your case, what can you expect? You may lose big. How big? In an actual case, one Vancouver parent has spent $254,000 on his, and on his ex-wife's lawyers, over ten years. In spite of that expenditure, this dad still has little access to his daughter; has lost his house; and, is still paying onerous child-support. Another father who has also not done well in Family Court is even facing more dire circumstances. In courts, there is a "loser pays" rule. If you lose, you will pay (some or all) of the winning side's legal costs and lawyer fees.

READING BETWEEN THE LINES
in
REPORTED CASELAW

So let's take a look at actual caselaw, and see how a motions or trial lawyer execute his/her craft, shall we? I've got a number of examples (decision of the courts) right here, below. But, before I show you some cases, make sure that the lawyer's reported cases survived one more appeals. Why? Because a judgment can be reversed, on appeal. If you're interested in knowing how to research cases, be advised that the best way, in my opinion, is to go to a law library and look up the various volumes of "reporters" (encyclopedia's) of cases, usually organized by territory or practice of law. Yes, it is tedious and time-consuming. The alternative is to use a computerized database such as Quicklaw at approximately $125/hour. However, Quicklaw will not automatically tell you what the "leading case" is. The "leading case" (caselaw), and whether it applies to you, is the *key* to success.


CITATION: Propjet Management (Ontario) Inc. v. Pascan Aviation Inc. Interesting case. It was won on a Summary Judgment motion. However, a successful appeal, with fresh evidence, overturned the initial judgment. In my opinion, the defense lawyers succeeded in a particularly high threshold, as the appeal judges noted. Kudus to these two successful appeal lawyers: Paul D’Angelo and Andre Ducasse. The appeal was successful because the Summary Judgment was obtained on a partial transcript, and the appeal judges held that the Summary Judgment was obtained on "misleading" grounds. In reading between the lines, though, I am of the view that the defendant (meaning, in reality, the defendant's lawyers) wasn't entirely without fault, as the appeal judges gave the plaintiffs $5,000 (partial) costs. The judge was disappoving of the plaintiff's lawyer's "misleading" tactic, and so am I. The plaintiff paid for that "misleading" tactic, of course.


CITATION: 585430 Alberta Ltd. et al v. Trans Canada Leasing Inc. et al. As the judge noted, this is an exception to the rule. This appeal from a Summary Judgment motion was successful in reversing a judgment against a certain Mr. Cantin. Therefore, my personal kudus to Cantin's lawyer, Ted Spyracopoulos, for winning a difficult motion appeal. However, the judge noted that Spyracopoulos, didn't supply caselaw in support of at least one of his legal arguments. My opinion :This is not sloppy paper (Factum) work by Spyracopoulos; but, rather, there were no comparable cases reported anywhere, for him to show the appeals judge. His client [Mr. Cantin] won, because the facts were very strong for Cantin. Ted Spyracopoulos relied on a broad doctrine that a judgment can be reversed if it "..serves the interests of justice."

For the record, here's what the appeals motions judge actually ruled: "Counsel for Cantin has not submitted any cases where it has been found that facts not brought to the attention of the court because one party failed to appear are “facts arising or discovered after entry of the order”. Nonetheless, he submits that there are facts arising or discovered after the entry of the judgment in this case. Specifically, the judge who granted the summary judgment did not know that Cantin did not have actual notice of the proceedings. As well, the judge was unaware of the facts now before the court about Cantin’s lack of involvement in the subject matter of the claim."

My guess, at this point, is that Ted Spyracopoulos is a gifted motions lawyer. A Quicklaw search may reveal all of his reported motions and trials, which I estimate to be 30-50 outcomes. If Ted Spyracopoulos was successful in at least 60% of these outcomes, he should be worth hiring, in my opinion.

Opinions herein blogged by:
wiseuncle [@] operamail [dot] com

Disclaimer: The statements in this blog represents my personal opinions on the matter of lawyer-selection and lawyer research. This blog is written by a layman and does not provide any legal advice. Ask a lawyer, if you seek legal advice (i.e. "do I have a good case?" or "should I sue"?) I am merely a researcher. If you need someone to teach you how to research lawyers on your own, please contact me.

- Still under construction -
- New text being added continually -

wiseuncle [@] operamail [dot] com