How to choose a lawyer? Opinion of a practicing lawyer.

[Юридическая Компания Лидер]

How to choose a lawyer? Opinion of a practicing lawyer.

Quite often you can hear the question: “How to choose a lawyer? Which lawyer is better? ” Choosing a lawyer is really not an easy task. I’ll try to consider this problem, from the inside, so to speak, but I will make a reservation right away, the stated opinion is purely recommendatory in nature. The opinion is based on personal observations of a practicing lawyer and does not extend to the choice of lawyers.
I can distinguish the following criteria:
- office - the room where the lawyer receives, his immediate workplace, the availability of technical equipment. The very fact of the presence of the above indicates a lot, since many novice lawyers can receive at home (in other places);
- a lawyer can work on its own, or be a member of a group of private practicing lawyers (colleges, lawyers associations). As a rule, in such collegiums between lawyers, over time, there is a certain differentiation according to the categories of cases. Someone is engaged in criminal cases, someone in labor, family, social, traffic accidents, etc., thereby occupying a certain segment of the legal services market. There are no universal lawyers (for all occasions). The specialization of lawyers, as well as doctors, teachers, engineers, is natural and necessary. But here I will make a reservation: to solve a simple question, an expensive and very qualified (industry) lawyer is not always needed. Sometimes, to get a qualified consultation, it is enough to contact a novice lawyer. A separate practicing lawyer, as a rule, undertakes to work with any category of cases. This is not always justified, since it is not possible to know everything, you can figure it out in any situation, but you can lose a lot of time, and time, as they say, is money;
- rumors - unfounded (not confirmed by anyone) subjective opinions of citizens who have experienced all the hardships of litigation, naively believing that the lawyer is to blame. Although a reservation may be made here, it is to whom these rumors are spreading. Rumors are rumors - discord. Particularly critical is the attitude to the opinion of law enforcement agencies (the opinion of police officers, the court, the prosecutor's office), since the primary goal of these departments is not to help citizens, but to speedy consideration of a particular case. It is extremely unprofitable for these departments to participate in the case of a competent lawyer, therefore, as a rule, they offer “their own”, “pocket” lawyer. It often turns out that an imposed (persistently offered) lawyer, in the past, was an employee of the same law enforcement agencies. How can such a lawyer fail (not help) his former colleagues, colleagues?
- age. Young or old. It's hard to say who is better. Everywhere has its pros and cons;
- appearance. Clothing does not matter as much as in what condition it is, i.e. dirty, worn, untidy appearance, etc. .. The absence of a white shirt, jacket, tie, trousers does not have the prevailing value, because Recently, not many lawyers follow the principles of legal deontology. Appearance can tell about the internal organization of the person himself, nothing more.
- speech. Not everyone has oratory and eloquence, but this is not required when providing legal advice. Communicating with a client, providing advice, the lawyer, as a rule, speaks clearly, clearly and clearly expresses his thoughts, with confidence in his voice, operates with simple sentences, while trying not to use special legal (other) terminology.
- ethics. The lawyer must always observe the correctness. No rudeness, immoral, critical statements in relation to colleagues, subordinates, the client, his appearance, personal opinion, level of intelligence, education (his absence), professional affiliation, gender, age, etc. The lawyer should not allow himself any comparisons with other colleagues in the "shop". The easiest way to seem better than it really is is to pour mud on others. A conscientious lawyer will not denigrate a colleague, he does not need it, all the more so, in the eyes of the client you can greatly fall. The lawyer does not tell confidential information regarding his other clients, he speaks about the possibility of giving a bribe to a judge, prosecutor, etc. If this is observed, I strongly recommend not contacting such a lawyer. Your opponents (the opposite side of the case) can easily buy this, so you need to be very careful in choosing your own defense counsel.
- time spent on the client. As a rule, the consultation is completed when the client really understood the answer to his question. The lawyer should not tell the client that the time for obtaining a consultation with the client is over, and it does not matter to him whether the client understood it or not. If the matter is complex and requires a deep (detailed) analysis, you can always transfer the consultation to another time. In some cases, in order to better perceive the information, the lawyer provides the client with the opportunity to read excerpts from the law so that the client can independently verify the correctness of the advice provided (clarification) and better remember (assimilate) what he heard;
- the procedure for receiving citizens (customers). The implementation of the reception of citizens can occur by appointment (call), through the secretary. The improper organization of their activities by a lawyer leads to the so-called overlays in the work. There may be a queue, resentment among citizens, etc. The lawyer begins to "spray", this creates red tape in connection with which, the quality of work may deteriorate. The line under the office is not an indicator of the demand for a lawyer, but rather his lack of organization;
- work experience. It is not unimportant when choosing. It is quite simple to find out the work experience of a lawyer if you carefully read the date of its issue on the certificate of the right to practice law (usually in a visible place), or you can simply ask the same lawyer;
- previous place of work of a lawyer. Before conferring professional status (lawyer), a person must have at least 2 years of special postgraduate work experience. The place of work where the person worked before the bar determines his professional and ethical qualities.
Earlier, in Soviet times, there was an unwritten rule of selection for advocacy. Former police officers, prosecutors, the KGB (SBU), under any pretext, were not admitted to the bar. Over the years, this unwritten rule has been applied, but there have been exceptions to the rules. Despite the authoritarianism of this rule, it justified itself, since it did not allow a law enforcement official to change his job, thereby “linking” him to a specific structure. To the so-called the defectors have always had a kind of biased attitude; the transition from one structure to another was not encouraged. Another reason for this lay in the so-called. professional deformation of personality, which is inherent in almost all professions. A former police investigator (prosecutor's office) cannot impartially defend (represent) the criminal, or thoroughly understand civil law. It is difficult to rebuild your thinking, mentality, etc.
I bow to the same position. Indeed, there must always be professional cleanliness of the ranks, driven not by an avaricious goal - it is easy to cash in (earn) on the illiteracy (trust) of the client, and, using professional skills, help the client. Those. there should not be a substitution of concepts: remuneration - as an end in itself of a lawyer, for remuneration - as a motivation to work.
The lawyer evades meetings with the client. The sign is not good. Perhaps this is a subtle hint to the client that he does not want to work with him. Do not be offended by a lawyer if he refused to conduct your case. A lawyer is a creative person; he cannot and will not (and should not) work “from under the stick”. Perhaps the judicial prospect of a favorable outcome of the case seemed doubtful to him or his moral and ethical convictions did not allow him to participate on your side, maybe he was just busy with work. Often, with a very large number of cases, the lawyer simply does not have time to properly prepare for the defense of his clients.
Payment. An honest, decent and principled lawyer will surely enter the position of a client and reduce the fee to an acceptable amount. Often, lawyers take matters not because of a fee, but only because they find the case interesting from a professional point of view or resonant, and this is better than any advertisement, or simply out of sports interest.
No lawyer can give a 100% guarantee of a positive resolution of the case in court, since he does not control the process and does not make decisions. In the process of considering a case in court, a lot of “pitfalls” often emerge that can affect the final outcome of a case. Therefore, an experienced and qualified lawyer will never categorically declare a win-win case.
A free (as appointed by the investigator or court) lawyer is a certain presence of complete absence. Nobody will give all the best and competently work for free.
Many will not agree with the foregoing, many will be criticized, but I am simply obliged to share with worldly wisdom.

 

[Матушкин Андрей Николаевич]

Thank.
Interesting!

 

[Краев Евгений Леонидович]

Thanks, informative!

 

[Турабян Владимир]

Thank you, we will keep in mind!

 

[george]

Thank you, the information is useful

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Thank you Vitaliy))) In principle, I agree with many things ... Interesting material ...

 

[Дмитрий ЦЭББ Калининград]

Thanks for the interesting stuff!

 

[Частный детектив Киров]

THANK!!!

 

[Плотников Юрий Михайлович]

Thanks, interesting!

 

[Детективное агентство ОПЦИОН]

There are interesting points. Disagree
"The lawyer refuses to meet with the client. The sign is not good. Perhaps this is a subtle hint to the client that he does not want to work with him. Do not be offended by the lawyer if he refused to conduct your business. The lawyer is creative, cannot and will not (and should not) to work “from under the stick.” Perhaps the judicial prospect of a favorable outcome of the case seemed doubtful to him or his moral and ethical convictions did not allow him to take part on your side, maybe he was just busy with work. to protect your customers. "
This speaks of dishonesty and not professionalism - if you don’t want, you don’t know, there is no time, tell the person honestly and directly, otherwise some games will start!