Subsection 5.3.  The Agreement is Clear;  The Accounts Transparent

 

The last important point, and a very important point, is the issue of attorney's fees. To minimize losing control of expense and conflict in future billing, the attorney and client have to make clear from the beginning the method of billing and the approximate prices.  In the United States, before the client employs a lawyer, he should find out clearly how the lawyer is charging his fees. Of course, in a complex litigation or matters the involve many subjects, it is difficult for the lawyer to estimate in advance, but he should tell the client the hourly rate he charges and estimate the amount to cover the basic legal work, and remind the client that there may be expenses beyond the estimate, and so on.

 

Generally speaking, it is difficult to make a financial projection, because there are two sides to each litigation. Your side may want to move simply and quickly, but if the opposition chooses to delay or the judge demands unexpected extra proofs and documents, even the best lawyer cannot control expenses and can only respond to any situation. Extra spending becomes inevitable. The client who does not understand will become unhappy with the lawyer.

 

In the United States, especially in litigation or bigger matters, such as demands for compensation, after the lawyer and the client have had preliminary discussions and the attorney has agreed to accept the employment, generally he will enter into a retain agreement which explains the method of billing and principles (not the actual amount).

 

In more important matters or representation in a litigation, the lawyer will ask for an initial deposit of a certain sum of money.  The deposit is kept in the lawyer's trust account.  When the client authorizes the attorney to commence work, the attorney will withdraw from the deposit to pay the expenses related to the case. In the event the client changes to another attorney, the balance of the deposit will be returned to the client.

 

Many immigrants from Hong Kong may never have been involved in litigation, or even if they have, the fees are different. After arriving in the United States and the need arises to require the service of a lawyer, most of the time it is through the introduction of friends. Some may feel a little embarrassed to ask about prices. Further, some may have no idea how expensive the costs may be.  So the person may say to the lawyer with some bravado, "When you are done just bill me for the lawyer's fees and related expenses".  If this is said, the American lawyer will assume that the client understands clearly the prevailing practice and charges in the United States.  Finally the bill arrives, and the client discovers that it is much higher than expected, He then complains that the lawyer bills excessively. These are rather common occurrences. Thus, please remember the slang saying  "be petty first, be a gentleman later;  First ask about the price and then both sides can be comfortable in proceeding with the work.

Subsection 5.4.  Be Sincere and Open, Respect Each Other

 

The ideal relation between a lawyer and the client can be summarized in one sentence, that is "be sincere and open, respect each other". From the first interview between the client and the lawyer till the conclusion of the matter and the end of the relation, this principle should always be a guide.

 

In the first meeting, the client and the lawyer should engage in a frank and sincere exchange. The client should provide the lawyer with suitable and detailed information that are necessary, including private and perhaps even embarrassing matters. As long as they are necessary references, they should be disclosed frankly.  On the lawyer's side, he has to analyze the subject of the client and tells him the estimated expenses, and so on.  He should answer as fully as possible the questions from the client.

 

As the case continues to go forward, sincerity and frankness are even more important in the relation between the lawyer and his client. If the client hides certain matters because he believes on his own that those are not important, or actually information that are unfavorable are hidden intentionally, they lead often to the defeat in the case.  Besides, such action makes the lawyer lose confidence in his client and he ends up spending extra time and energy to double check everything.  The increased burden is just for no purpose.

 

Not only sincerity and frankness are important;  the more important is mutual respect. If the client already finds in the first meeting that the lawyer is indifferent about his affairs and has a short temper, he should be wary.  A very skillful lawyer who does not respect the client is to be avoided respectfully; another lawyer can be hired. Conversely, the client needs to respect equally the lawyer. That is a healthy, benign relationship.

 

Subsection 5. 5.  Clear Division between Public and Private

 

Chinese people have some habits, perhaps even flaws, that do not work in American society and need to be changed.  For example, some people believe that because they are friends of a certain lawyer, when they have legal problems they will use social event or dinner as an opportunity to ask the lawyer during dinner for advise. There are other people who intentionally do not go to the office of the lawyer but call him at home in the evening and ask about legal matters because they are friends. Or they even ask the lawyer to take care of a matter as a "friend".  All that is of course simply to save completely paying legal fees. 

 

If this situation happens with an American lawyer "friend", it is certain the result will be negative.  It is almost certain the lawyer "friend" will say, "Please call my office tomorrow;  my secretary will give you an appointment and we can talk in the office". I and many Chinese lawyers often perform services for free for friends.  However, it must be clear that "friends" of a lawyer may be many, and you may believe that you are a friend of the lawyer but the relation may actually not be at the level deserving free service by the lawyer.

 

The Chinese people are used to do business through personal relations. But in the eyes of Americans, public business is public business; personal relation is another matter. At dinner or at home, the time is the personal time of the lawyer. Americans tend to detest an invasion of their privacy by another person. Bothering them at night is particularly impolite, because that is a precious time for rest and for family. If you run into a lawyer who is particularly discourteous, the next day you may receive a bill for service, charged at double the normal rate.

 

So, unless you are quite sure that the lawyer will render service for you for free, you must ask about payment. If the lawyer decides not to charge, then you need not be too polite.  But if he asks for service charge, it is better that this is understood early to avoid embarrassment later. If you believe that his charges are higher than others (possibly because he is a renowned lawyer, or he works for a big law firm that tends to charge higher fees, but what you need can be taken care of by any general lawyer), you need not hesitate to find another lawyer and can be honest about it without feeling sorry. As a friend, this lawyer should try to help you and refer you to another reliable lawyer.

 

Section 6.  What happens when you have no money to hire a lawyer?

 

In the United States, where legal fees are expensive, the general American public with average income not only cannot afford to litigate, even the most common legal matters such as divorce, application for immigration, eviction of tenants, etc., are for them heavy financial burdens. There are two ways American lawyers charge their fees.  One way is to share in the compensation after winning a lawsuit, as we have discussed before. Choosing this method of sharing compensation has the advantage that the client needs not put up any money, but this method is not always available. If the evaluation is that the odds of winning are not high, or the amount of compensation may be too small, the lawyer will not accept the case. The contingency fee method has been heavily criticized in recent years. The critics believe that, because the client does not need to pay money, he can sue people for good or no reason at all. And some lawyers encourage litigations in order to make money, thus the flood of lawsuits. The former Vice President Gore once suggested a law to limit this kind of contingency fee, but the resistance was very strong. The most important reason is that if the contingency fee method is disallowed, the common folks cannot pursue litigations and the law becomes the monopoly of the rich.

　　

Under certain circumstances and under certain conditions, the government and private organizations would offer free or low fee legal services.

 

If a criminal matter is involved, the government has public defenders who represent those defendant who cannot afford private lawyer's fees. However, if the court discovers afterward that the defendant has the ability to pay part or all of the legal fees, it has a right to demand the client to refund the fees.

 

If civil matters are involved, the government has a legal aid department. Law organizations such as the lawyers association also have plans for pro bono or free services to help those people who truly cannot afford the legal fees. If needed, a person with Chinese descent can inquire at the state or local lawyers association. For example, there is a legal aid plan run by the California Bar Association in San Francisco to provide services to Asians. They provide for Asians preliminary interviews or make referrals to other services that have reduced fee or free services.  

 

If the issues involve racial discrimination, freedom of speech and other broad and socially meaningful circumstances, one can contact the American Civil Liberty Union, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and other organizations for assistance.  If a union member suffers unfair treatment in his job, the union has lawyers who can provide help.

 

But, truthfully, due to the government's continuing reduction of legal aid funding in recent years, and the free service provided by the civil society's legal organizations is quite limited, the amount of aid is negligible relative to number of people needing help. Often only the really poverty stricken people receive some legal assistance. Most of the middle class who cannot afford high legal fees have to look elsewhere to find relief.