“What do lawyers learn in law school? They learn to win… What we’ve got to start thinking about is how do we solve problems?”
Dr. Benjamin Carson
How many times have you heard “we can win this case”?
Let me clarify this “winning issue”. I love to win, most humans I know also love to win, but winning is not always the best way to solve a problem as you will learn in the following example.
Harry and Sally:
Sally was being paid child support by Harry. The money always came on time and when some extra money was needed, Harry was always willing to assist when he could. Harry deeply loved his children and still had feelings for Sally.
For the first year after the divorce, Sally and Harry were in constant contact and had excellent communication between them until Sally met someone, a new partner.
Harry was somehow frustrated, disappointed. Maybe because he still had dreams about them reuniting or maybe because he couldn’t imagine his children living under the same roof with a stranger “posing as their father”.
Something goes wrong:
Sally under the influence of her partner started to be very petty with Harry, especially regarding his visitation times. Truth be told, Harry wasn’t very punctual and due to the nature of his work as a self-employed salesperson, he was late picking up the children several times.
True Harry was late sometimes (too many as Sally claimed) but even when he skipped a visitation, he made up with some other time later. Harry didn’t give up on his children and respected Sally’s need for free time, time for herself. Harry needed time too, at least another year before he could commit himself fully. He was building his own company and therefore dedicating much of his time to it.
Sally and I meet again:
Sally, an old client, wanted to hire a lawyer to sue Harry. She met a friend of her new partner who told her “he would win the case”, he would have a judge impose penalties on Harry every time he was late. The lawyer promised he would win an even more significant alimony amount for her.
Sally didn’t believe him and contacted me for advice. She wanted me to represent her under the condition that I promise her I would win her case.
After consulting with my partners I decided to answer her in person. We set a meeting at my office where I told her: “I will positively win – you will certainly lose”. How could it be? Sally asked me. In the end she decided that I am not the kind of lawyer she was looking for and she left my office to hire the other lawyer.
Harry and Sally meet again:
This time they met in the courtroom arguing about child visitation rights, or as I like to call cases like this one: child visitation obligation.
A judge can impose visitation, but only on paper. No judge or police can force a father or a mother to be on time or even to fulfill the visitation agreement the parents have regarding their children. All a judge can do – and it’s rarely done – is increase the amount of child support or impose some type of penalties on the negligent parent.
Harry explained to the Judge how hard the past year had been for him and how important the next year would be. Harry’s lawyer did a good job, but Sally’s lawyer was an outstanding litigator. He succeeded in convincing the judge in every one of Sally’s claims – the lawyer won and Sally lost, Sally lost big time.
Harry, the exemplary father:
Sally and her partner broke up soon after the court case. Sally was alone again and because of a new job position offered to her just after the court case, she had many occasions where she was in desperate need of a helping hand with the children. Baby sitters were expensive and she couldn’t afford them as often as she needed them.
Harry was now the “exemplary type of father” regarding visitations. He came a few minutes before the scheduled time to pick up the children, always returned them on time, always brought them clean and neat, but because of the courtroom experience Harry would give no extra, absolutely nothing to help Sally.
Harry fulfilled his obligation and even bought gifts for the children, but when it came to Sally he was determined that she would receive nothing extra, not a minute or a shekel – despite how desperately she needed it. She was alone, had no free time at all for herself, and all the extra money she was receiving from Harry as result of the increase in child support that she had been awarded was now being spent on babysitters.
Harry and Sally have a long way to go:
The children are still minors and the couple has at least 6 years to go “together” raising the children. Despite their difficult relationship, they are both very good parents.
Sally told me that Harry will very soon be not only wealthier financially, but also will have much more free time as the CEO of his own company – as he had planned and communicated in court.
Sally is not only a client of our firm, but she became a good friend of my partner’s wife during this past year so we are updated about her situation frequently. Sally recently told us that Harry will not even talk to her unless it is extremely necessary. Since that day in court, Harry became a distant person to her, estranged – but he has been a “punctual” father who never misses visitation with his children.
Sally gave up on her new position and is now “happily alone, happily in her old job and happily conformed” – her words, not mine.
You judge:
Who was right and who was wrong in this case?
Did the “winning” lawyer, with his very short vision, provide his client with a winning solution?
Winning or compromising:
Winning is certainly good, but compromising could be just perfect for you.
