In another instance of trial (family law), after cross examining the other party, the opposing counsel suddenly called a recess.
After 7 years of never being able to get a dime out of the ex, no division of property, no spousal; ex husband had already filed bankruptcy, my client, having previously used 3 different lawyers, [w/o a good result], ended up contacting attorney herein --- for trial.
The opposing attorney stopped the trial after attorney herein---- spotted a bankruptcy fraud issue during the trial, based upon the husband's testimony vs. the bankruptcy document he filed; and husband's attorney offered a combo to wife, of about $23,000 combined cash/real property $100,000, and attorney fees of $6,000.
This likely meant that if they had NOT stopped the trial, my client would had gotten spousal, but we would have had to chase him forever across the USA to get it, and go to Bankruptcy Court also.....Client elected to take the offer. Many family law attorneys do not actually know bankruptcy law, but they probably should.
Because attorney herein "caught" the ex spouse on the stand for what appeared to be potential bankruptcy fraud, the rest is history...... so, in case you have issues where you find out your ex spouse filed bankruptcy without telling you, and you got shafted, let's say in spousal support, you would likely need to run to an attorney that knows family law and bankruptcy immediately.
The person who lies in bankruptcy documents is in big trouble, and the court will nearly always take that as a sign that the person who filed the Petition in Bankruptcy court may not be honest.
In another instance, a civil case trial by a former wife against former husband and girlfriend, the husband had already been convicted in a widely publicized case of homicide in Sacramento (and was on appeal, he lost); the case then went to jury on issue on civil liability as to both husband and girlfriend.
Keeping in mind husband was already convicted of first degree murder, the jury decided that husband was only 60% at fault in the civil case. I represented the husband who was already in prison, (and had not represented him during the criminal trial in Sacramento, where he used a public defender...)
Civil cases typically have a lower burden of proof [than criminal case], so finding the husband only 60% and not 100% evidently meant, jury wanted to punish the girlfriend because they took 40% and assigned it-- NOT-- to the husband. This verdict was reported in Verdict Search, a national reporting source for large verdicts nationwide. Counsel representing the girlfriend was from insurance defense firm.
Currently, the former wife has not been able to collect much on the verdict [of millions] after paying fees/costs and it is anticipated she will not be able to collect in the future. Very interesting case, which also involved animals (pet dogs) owned by the husband/son. Son was stabbed when father went to check on condition of dogs; father claims son ran into the knife by lunging forward.
In a very unusual scenario, attorney was substituted into a case with a client who did not reside locally; a hearing on an issue Request for Order (presumed to be law and motion).... was set for a date only several days away, at which time attorney believed the hearing could be continued. It seems the hearing was in fact --- a trial (according to Judge) -- and the client was not present and Judge did not want to continue the case. Attorney went forward on the issue, with no witness or client.
Using only cross examination, with 4 witnesses,
Attorney actually
won the trial--much to surprise of witnesses present
and including opposing counsel, who was obviously shocked..........
This is rather uncommon, but imagine how your case might work out if attorney can do this, without even having a client or a witness?
Attorney thinks it's fair to say, you would be in fairly good hands. Especially if other attorneys have failed in the past on your case.
Note: All of these scenarios are actual cases but by no means are such outcomes considered standard. Each case has different facts and various laws which will apply; each case can vary tremendously, and attorney is not representing that such outcomes are common. However, attorney does have a very high percent of cases that prevail, settle or result in what the client wanted.
