Welcome to the first episode of I Do Until I Don’t, the Stern Mendez podcast. Josh and Marvin kick off the series with the goal of normalizing the conversation around divorce. They discuss how to find a good attorney and what you can expect in the process.

Transcript:

[inaudible] [Music]

Hey. I’m Marvin Mendez. I’m an attorney at Stern Mendez.

I’m Joshua Stern. I am also an attorney at Stern Mendez.

Welcome to the first episode of the first season of I Do Until I Don’t. The Stern Mendez podcast where we talk about everything relating to family law, and everything not relating to family law, so pretty much everything.
This is not one of those podcasts where I’m going to be explaining the law verbatim and what the case law says and what the statute says.

And, I think the goal with this is really to normalize the conversation. [It has to. Yeah.] Not make it such a taboo. And I think it’s also going to be in combination of just telling some stories about what we’ve learned along the way. [Yep] What we’ve heard or maybe even some gossip of the latest celeb divorces. You know what I what it’s not going to be is a sales pitch.

“Call me. [inaudible] Buy, buy, buy. [inaudible]”

We’re just going to kind of be real about it. Talk about the cases. Talk about the law. Talk about our experiences and give out some, not person specific advice, but maybe general tips or ideas.

But let’s start off with, you know: How do you find a good attorney? [Right.] How do you find a good fit for yourself?

I think the first issue is how do we get to the attorney’s office. Who’s the attorney? How do you identify someone who’s good in such an oversaturated market?

You know, if you were to go and look, “who is the single best divorce lawyer?” Go on Google. “Hey, best divorce lawyer within five miles.” You’re going to get a lot of people who are the best divorce lawyer in 5 miles.

“Divorce”, “your best divorce lawyer.” That’s a singular title. How can it be shared amongst so many people?

So, one of the things we’ve got to figure out at the highest level is how do we vet? So, we’re going to vet off some degree education, some degree experience, some degree of involvement in bar associations, various nonprofits.

Do they have any of these attorney awards? Do they have any of the awards? It usually shows how visible they are in the community.

And then you got to go pick maybe three, four, five. Start interviewing them. But at the highest level you want to only spend time interviewing decent lawyers. You really want to spend time starting out. See as much of them as you can. Read as much as they’ve written. Watch the interviews. If they do CLEs. Give speeches. Get on YouTube. Just really suss it out.

You don’t want to wind up in 20 consults sitting through the same spiel. This is someone who’s gonna serve a lot of roles in the case, right.

They’re often the first person who hears bad news. They’re one of the first people who tells you how to act. They give you advice when you’re under a lot of pressure. They’re also someone who’s going to ride out the highs and lows of the case with you.

Do they vibe or they selling you something? Do you show up and they start telling you exactly what you want to hear? Do you think they’re someone you can emote with? Someone you can plan with?

So, like, you know, can you stand being in a room with them? Like, you know, are you reaching for the doorknob halfway through the consult? That might be a bad sign. You know, you’re not looking for a therapist, but you’ve got to be able to feel comfortable being honest with them.

You know I found interesting that comment that you mentioned where how do you find the best lawyer in a 5 mile radius and you have 30-40 people that come up. All the single best. [overlapping] “the best family law” “the best [inaudible]” Everyone’s Michael Jordan. Everyone’s Michael Jordan.

But I think that in your initial interviews you not only need to argue about, okay what does the law provide for but can you color outside that line, right? If you can find someone that can communicate to you and express to you that while the law provides this, you can think about other solutions that can get you to your end goal. Right? And, I think that’s an important factor in talking to and interviewing various lawyers.

You know one of the things that I think happens a lot when people come in is they have expectations or ideas about what a a lawyer is or what a law firm looks like. And, without expressing it they’re kind of hoping you meet those expectations or hit that idea. You know, I’ll tell you Suits has not been good for us, you know? But this is true. And so, some of it’s just kind of reading the room. It’s…it’s tough. It really is.

I think a lot of people’s expectations of what the law is, how court system functions, [yep] the expediency and a resolution in 30 minutes like any other show. [Mhm] That’s their expectation. [100%] And I think another important thing in the initial consult is describing to your clients, right, or asking questions: Are you my attorney? Are you the only attorney? As you know, right, not all firms have just one attorney. [Of course] They work in groups. And what’s the importance of working in groups, right? You want to describe to them: well, it keeps the cost down. Right, it’s one factor. If I’m not available, someone else can pick up the phone. [100%] You know, it allows us to manage your case more effectively. You know, the initial thought for the client is: Well, this is going to cost me an arm and a leg. Here’s your hourly rate. Here’s that person’s hourly rate. Here’s this person’s hourly rate. You know the concern is multiple, duplicative or multiple billing. You have five people in a meeting and we’re all looking at the same sheet of paper and it’s a fortune. But when you rule out having other attorneys involved, you rule out collaboration. You rule out multiple people trying to solve a problem. And you rule out two heads being better than one. You’ve limited it to one head here. Only one person with their available bandwidth, time, and energy can solve this problem. And only one person can consider it. That is inherently limiting and we know it’s counterproductive.

And here’s the thing that I think sometimes scares clients, right: When you’re first having this conversation, you’re telling him or her all these details about what to expect in the process and there’s sort of a shock. [Yes] A sticker shock or emotional shock [Yep], and then they don’t know which conversation to have. How much do you tell them to not overwhelm them?

So, I often I’ll start and I like to talk about the law because I think that there are a lot of common misperceptions and misconceptions about divorce. You know, I really just am a big believer in making sure people have the tools to navigate these situations the understanding of what’s happening. I would hate to go through such a personal process and be so surprised or unaware of what governs it. I think a lot about the transition from the private household to the family in court. And so what you have are all these really personal, intricate, and also private dynamics between the household members. At some point this breaks. We wind up in court. People are fighting. Now these dynamics, these relationships, are scrutinized or picked apart, and they’re interpreted through a different lens. Not the lens the family collectively had, but through a kind of an independent third party lens. It’s a jarring sudden process. And what I find interesting is that this is one of the more common legal proceedings. This and buying a house. In the country, we all know about buying a house. We don’t know anything about divorce. I think that’s horrible. I think it’s really, really jarring and crazy, and we should be talking about this stuff. It’s not some deep secret or dark secret process. It’s not something you should be ashamed of or hide. So, I do lean towards the heavy education angle, but I’m not sure it’s the right thing for everyone. Sometimes people get overwhelmed or confused, so I’m still working on that I’d say.

And you want to approach this with sensitivity but I, like I said, I don’t know. I don’t know the answer to that. To this day I still have difficulty when someone picks up the phone and they’re like “Where do I start?” [Where do I start?] And then I start communicating to them like “Wait hold on. Why don’t you tell me where you want to start with this?”

Because you don’t know what state they’re coming in. They come to you and sometimes they’re like: “Let’s do it! I should’ve been divorce last week.” And sometimes they’re in shock. They were told like an hour before, or they’ve had an upsetting experience. Sometimes they’re overwhelmed or they’re scared. And a lot of the emotions they bring in, it really dictates how that conversation is going to go. Consults are hard. [Yeah] I’m glad we’re actually having this conversation because I think that if you watch divorce lawyers talk about it, it’s like “Oh don’t worry. It’s so smooth.” And everyone wants to show they’re in control of the situation. There’s no concerns. They’ve done this a million times. It’s like plugging something in. And that’s just that’s not real.

I think you should be a soundboard for your client. I think you should listen to what they have to say and dissect what they’re really trying to get to.

[Music]

Leave us a comment. Tell us, you know, if you’re hiring a lawyer what you’re looking for in a lawyer [or] maybe some glaring red flags. What made you run for the door, or maybe not walk through the door in the first place? And if you’re a lawyer, and you don’t have to, I’d love to know what are red flags for clients. You’re half of this consult. So, what makes you unsure about a case. Leave us a comment.