Episode 8

full
Published on:

7th Aug 2025

EP 08 Another Roll Call

The Judgemental Podcast – EP 08: Another Roll Call

Hosts: Hugh & Christine

Episode Summary:

In this episode, Hugh and Christine return from a day in court to share their candid observations about judicial attendance, the realities of family and district court, and the ongoing challenges within the legal system. They dive deep into the roles and billing practices of Guardian ad Litems (GALs) and Friends of the Court (FOCs), discuss the impact of fee structures on attorneys and clients, and respond to listener questions about legal advice and court procedures.

Key Topics:

  • Court attendance: Observations on how many judges were present and what that means for accountability.
  • The transition of the Louisville Public Defender’s Office to the Department of Public Advocacy, and the implications for attorneys and clients.
  • The challenges and pitfalls of hourly billing, flat fees, and contingency fees in family law.
  • The evolving and sometimes problematic roles of GALs and FOCs, including billing practices and their impact on families.
  • The perception of collusion and hierarchy within the family court system.
  • Listener questions: Why attorneys can’t give free legal advice, and the nuances of attorney-client relationships.
  • Reflections on the emotional toll of family court for both lawyers and litigants.
  • Calls for more education and transparency in the legal process.

Memorable Moments:

  • Anecdotes from court, including being mistaken for media and interactions with attorneys and judges.
  • Stories about the challenges of keeping time sheets and the pressure of billable hours.
  • A spirited debate about the necessity and effectiveness of GALs and FOCs.
  • Listener shout-outs and the introduction of the “judge roll call” segment.

Calls to Action:

  • Listeners are encouraged to send in questions, feedback, and suggestions for future episodes.
  • Follow the podcast on YouTube, Spotify, Apple, and at judgey.com.

Next Episode Teaser:

The hosts will be conducting another “judge roll call” at the courthouse and tackling more listener questions, including a deep dive into the rules of evidence and courtroom strategies.

Transcript
Speaker:

You are listening to

The Judgemental Podcast.

2

:

We're Hugh and Christine, the Minds

Behind Judgy, the revolutionary app

3

:

that empowers you to judge the judges.

4

:

It's pastime for judicial accountability

and transparency within the courts.

5

:

Prepare for sharp insights, candid

critiques, and unshakable honesty from

6

:

two lawyers determined to save the system.

7

:

We need some justice.

8

:

Justice, my fine justice.

9

:

And I wanna ring, be in public.

10

:

I wanna ring, be in public crowd.

11

:

Yeah.

12

:

Christine: All right.

13

:

We were in court yesterday,

Monday at 11 o'clock.

14

:

Let's talk about it.

15

:

Hugh: Yeah.

16

:

What a big change,

17

:

Christine: right?

18

:

Hugh: Yeah.

19

:

I mean, it was kind of expected,

20

:

at Circuit Court and for the most

part, family court, full house.

21

:

Yeah.

22

:

District court, one floor was quite

busy, the other two were empty.

23

:

That was a little strange.

24

:

But

25

:

Christine: I think per usual, and

like we've talked about before,

26

:

I really think district court

is just set up to be like that.

27

:

But for reference, we had a little

more than 70% of the elected judges

28

:

that make six figure salaries in their

courtrooms at:

29

:

Hugh: Yep.

30

:

Christine: Which to us is like, yay.

31

:

But you know, generally speaking, think

about if you went to Ford on the line

32

:

and 70% of the paid employees were

there, how would you feel about that?

33

:

Hugh: Oh, that's true.

34

:

There were some that didn't have

a docket this week and it was,

35

:

Christine: I think there was one,

one actually, which is interesting.

36

:

, It was division 10, Derwin Webb.

37

:

He said, no docket, but remember

the last time we recorded his,

38

:

, court calendar said no docket.

39

:

So that's something to maybe follow.

40

:

Hypothetically.

41

:

It could be a coincidence.

42

:

I'm not here to make assumptions,

just asking questions.

43

:

Hugh: Yep.

44

:

Christine: But we did see two more

people, , in the courts, and we saw quite

45

:

a few attorneys over in family court.

46

:

Hugh: It was much busier.

47

:

Yeah.

48

:

It looked like how I remembered

it from back in the day.

49

:

Christine: Did you see any

friends or foes in , family court?

50

:

Hugh: Of

51

:

Christine: course, of course.

52

:

Hugh: Actually it was great.

53

:

Ran into some people that I

hadn't seen in a long time.

54

:

Christine: The attorneys, I mean,

for the most part, I try to, when I'm

55

:

going to court, not really interact

because I'm talking to so many of 'em.

56

:

I never wanna make them feel a certain

kind of way if I am talking to 'em or

57

:

I'm not talking to 'em because it's

already a stressful situation being

58

:

in front of, you know, those judges.

59

:

And we did have a lot of, , I saw at

least two or three Gs or FOCs and so,

60

:

you know, they're gonna go back and tell

the judge if any attorney talked to us.

61

:

Hugh: Right.

62

:

I would fully expect it, but I, I

was blown away when we were talking

63

:

to the attorneys, , overwhelmingly.

64

:

I heard that.

65

:

Thank you for saying what we're

thinking and what everyone else

66

:

always says, but doesn't say publicly.

67

:

And , I was expecting a lot more backlash.

68

:

I mean, certainly , there's been

some very critical comments online.

69

:

Mm-hmm.

70

:

And that's going to happen.

71

:

But amazingly, people were going out

of their way to tell us, , in person

72

:

at the courthouse that they were glad

that we were doing what we were doing.

73

:

And some people said that things

were worse than they had ever

74

:

been in their entire, , career.

75

:

Career.

76

:

And we're talking about people

that had practiced for decades.

77

:

Yep.

78

:

So,

79

:

, Christine: And I think too, a lot of

people thought maybe we were media.

80

:

I remember on the elevator

they were like, are we media?

81

:

And we are, we are media.

82

:

We're, we're telling the stories.

83

:

You know,

84

:

Hugh: that was funny.

85

:

It was overheard an attorney and

their client standing there, , in

86

:

the elevator and we were discussing

where, where we were going to go

87

:

next and what we were looking for.

88

:

And.

89

:

I overheard the attorney

whisper to her client.

90

:

Oh, they're media.

91

:

Christine: Oh, I know.

92

:

And those are public defenders?

93

:

, I'm not sure.

94

:

Are you familiar with the changeover

that happened with DPA and DPAs,

95

:

the Department of Public Advocacy?

96

:

, That's where I worked as a

public defender in the counties.

97

:

But are you aware that they took over

Louisville Public Defender's Office?

98

:

Hugh: No.

99

:

Christine: Okay.

100

:

So this was a major thing.

101

:

Wow.

102

:

Wow.

103

:

So for many, many, many years,

the Louisville Public Defender's

104

:

Office was separate from the

Department of Public Advocacy.

105

:

Hugh: Famously Good.

106

:

Christine: The Louisville

Public Defender's Office.

107

:

Yes.

108

:

Known

109

:

Hugh: throughout the

country as being good.

110

:

Christine: Well, yes.

111

:

I mean, that's certainly

how the higher up spun it.

112

:

Now, I, , worked with Damon Preston,

who's the head of Department of Public

113

:

Advocacy, and I get so many dms.

114

:

Everybody wants me to spill the T

on DPA and I will, but not today.

115

:

We'll get, we'll leave

you hooked for there.

116

:

But, , the Louisville public defenders

in Louisville actually tried to unionize.

117

:

, And the higher ups w wouldn't agree to

it, which is again, to me, the irony that

118

:

they are so quote unquote progressive.

119

:

, But they fought tooth and nail.

120

:

This happened during the pandemic.

121

:

I'm like, y'all, Hugh,

did you read a newspaper?

122

:

Did you read a local

newspaper in:

123

:

Hugh: Sure.

124

:

Yeah, I did.

125

:

Christine: No, I'm just kidding.

126

:

It was like all the local, I'm really into

like the local attorney gossip and I'm,

127

:

Hugh: I am, I'm, I read international

as much as possible during the pandemic.

128

:

I read a lot of national news, but I have,

I've moved from, so , I've lived in so

129

:

many different towns that I, I just no

longer get into the hyper-local stuff.

130

:

Christine: I know you're always trying to

talk to me about like, , national politics

131

:

and I've literally put blinders on and

I'm just like, only thing I care about

132

:

is local politics and state politics.

133

:

'cause I think that's what affects, I

mean, it's a great conversation, but,

134

:

so I digress and it was a major thing

and as far as the Louisville Public

135

:

Defender's Office wanting to unionize.

136

:

And so what ended up happening was

DPA, they made an agreement for

137

:

DPA to take over and now, like I

said, Damon Preston, , he went to

138

:

Harvard and I went to school in.

139

:

, Boston interned as a public

defender in Roxbury and Dorchester.

140

:

And I interviewed with Damon and I'll

never forget at the interview, , he

141

:

went, so he was on the red line, if

you're familiar with Boston and the

142

:

T and he did not know what the orange

line was, and that's how you get to,

143

:

I lived in the North end so I could

take it into Haymarket, but he did not

144

:

know where Dorchester and Roxbury were.

145

:

And this is now the head of the

Department of Public Advocacy.

146

:

So y'all do without what you will.

147

:

, But while I was there, they got a grant.

148

:

And did you know that public defenders

are required to keep time sheets?

149

:

Hugh: No, I didn't know that.

150

:

, Christine: Which, that was a huge change

right as I was leaving and they got

151

:

like a couple million dollar grant or

something like that from the legislature.

152

:

So now public defenders with

their heavy caseloads are

153

:

required to keep time sheets.

154

:

Hugh: And for those that aren't

familiar, it, that is one of the hardest

155

:

things to train an attorney to do.

156

:

We have, , in my prior firm when we

hired people from roles where they

157

:

didn't have to keep time sheets, , if

they were coming from contingency

158

:

fee or flat fee work, that was the

hardest thing to train someone to do.

159

:

And that's because it

changes your entire workflow.

160

:

It adds, it adds time into

every single thing that you do.

161

:

Mm-hmm.

162

:

And , it personally, one of the

most difficult things that I had

163

:

to do, and there were times where

I would just get very bad at it.

164

:

Same.

165

:

And then have to completely, you

know, reset and start, you know,

166

:

finding ways to, to get back in the

habit and , do a better job of it.

167

:

Why were they having to

keep track of those hours?

168

:

Christine: Because it's all

bureaucratic and they were

169

:

trying to justify more money.

170

:

Now, if you were to go out and poll

the public ask the question, do public

171

:

defenders work hard or are public

defenders necessary for the system?

172

:

You're gonna have unanimous

bipartisan support for that, you know?

173

:

Sure, absolutely.

174

:

, And I think it was just, you know, this

is where I go down my rabbit hole of the

175

:

bureaucracies, destroyed all systems,

but the only thing that Damon cares

176

:

about is making a social media post that

you know, hey, I care about people and

177

:

going to the legislature and, you know,

probably going out afterwards with people

178

:

in Frankfort for, I don't even know if

he has a happy hour, but maybe, probably

179

:

afternoon tea or something like that.

180

:

Hmm.

181

:

But now you just talked

about contingency fees.

182

:

What are the fee structures?

183

:

And I know you have a very strong opinion

on how lawyers, what we could do to change

184

:

the family law system with hourly rates.

185

:

Hugh: Yeah, so I, I spent by 20 years

in family law, , doing hourly work

186

:

and running a firm that had armies of.

187

:

Staff and, and quite a few attorneys

all billing hourly, and the entire

188

:

model was built on the billable hour.

189

:

And from a business point

of view, it made sense.

190

:

It was sort of what we were trained

to think about in law school and then

191

:

in internships and then coming out.

192

:

And that's, that's how it worked,

193

:

unfortunately.

194

:

I, I would say that of all of the

pain points for clients outside of

195

:

what they were going through mm-hmm.

196

:

Naturally in the, in a family court

action, the billing was the biggest.

197

:

Yep.

198

:

The fact that you call to ask about

a simple update or a date, you

199

:

could billed a minimum time entry.

200

:

Mm-hmm.

201

:

And there's a billable rate to it.

202

:

And clients would, , regularly ask, oh, I

just called in to get one little piece of

203

:

information, am I gonna get billed for it?

204

:

Because that billable rate.

205

:

Would be anywhere between

$150 and $900 an hour.

206

:

Christine: Yeah.

207

:

Hugh: And if you're billing a 10th

of an hour, I mean, your minimum

208

:

bill's gonna be 15, 25 bucks

just , for making a phone call in.

209

:

Christine: Yeah.

210

:

And so lawyers, , that are on an hourly

rate, we bill in six minute increments.

211

:

There are very, very few

jurisdictions that still allow

212

:

the 15 minute billable increment.

213

:

And so, for example, it's really bizarre.

214

:

Like I could tell you without looking

at our recording where we are as far

215

:

as in this podcast, we're at a 0.2,

216

:

right?

217

:

So that means that we have talked more,

it's ingrained for more than six minutes,

218

:

but it is soul crushing to flip over

from the notion of billable hours to

219

:

just literally doing your job, you know?

220

:

Hugh: Yeah.

221

:

And then by 0.2,

222

:

what she means is like, as soon as

we hit six minutes , it goes from 0.1

223

:

to 0.2.

224

:

So six and a half minutes is a 0.2,

225

:

six and a half minutes, all the

way up to 13 minutes, which I mean.

226

:

Christine: Yeah.

227

:

Hugh: There, there has to be a logical,

in, in the world of hourly billing,

228

:

there has to be a logical breakdown

of how you break that hour down in

229

:

breaking it down in 10th increments.

230

:

Makes sense.

231

:

But it's still, when you

think about it mm-hmm.

232

:

You go one second over,

you have a timer running.

233

:

It's gonna be a 0.2.

234

:

Yeah.

235

:

, And most attorneys that are doing it

don't have a lot of control over it.

236

:

Especially in, in, I mean, if you're

a solo practitioner, you control it.

237

:

But if you're an employee , at

a firm, you have to keep it,

238

:

and it's not discretionary.

239

:

So, you know, when I spoke to my clients

about any billable entries when I was

240

:

practicing and, you know, would get

to hear about how an attorney billed

241

:

this or an attorney billed that, I say,

well, they have to, that's their job.

242

:

I make them do it.

243

:

I will, I will make adjustments

, for my clients and all but.

244

:

, My staff is required to bill for every

single bit of it, and they keep timers

245

:

and the phone has a timer on it.

246

:

, And it is just all it.

247

:

Your phone had a timer on it.

248

:

Well, the, yeah.

249

:

Everything we did had timers on it.

250

:

See, that's the, it capturing the time.

251

:

Once you get to, you

get to 40 or 50 people.

252

:

Yeah.

253

:

And everyone's billing hourly.

254

:

, It just compounds.

255

:

Missed, missed bill, you know, billables.

256

:

Christine: Thousands of hours.

257

:

I mean, dollars.

258

:

Yeah.

259

:

Yeah.

260

:

Hugh: Thousands of, oh yeah.

261

:

Tens of thousands.

262

:

Yeah.

263

:

At least.

264

:

And so my biggest gripe about

it, aside from the appearance for

265

:

the legal industry of nickel and

diming, is from a business point of

266

:

view, it incentivizes inefficiency.

267

:

Yep.

268

:

That's my biggest gripe is that

attorneys are generally not

269

:

a very innovative, , bunch.

270

:

And part of it is regulation.

271

:

We are regulation regulated

in such a way that adopting

272

:

new technologies is difficult.

273

:

But as a business model, you know, as long

as you are billing per hour, what is the

274

:

incentive to do things much more quickly

and to have routine tasks be automated

275

:

and, you know, spend the attorney billable

time, the, that, the higher billable

276

:

rate on only the very important things.

277

:

There's no incentive to do that

because you make less money

278

:

Christine: other than

just being a morally.

279

:

, Good person.

280

:

But yes, that is one of the big problems.

281

:

So there's three types of fee structures.

282

:

You got contingency fees, and think

of that, like personal injury stuff.

283

:

Everything you see on commercial,

I get 33% of your settlement.

284

:

I get nothing.

285

:

If you get nothing, then you have

flat rate, which is how the criminal

286

:

world works, and that'll be all right.

287

:

You gotta DUI, it's $5,000 and then you

can bifurcate in, criminal and most people

288

:

do it where it's $5,000 and if it goes

to trial, there's a trial fee of $5,000.

289

:

Sure.

290

:

And then for us.

291

:

, Monsters in family court

and insurance defense.

292

:

It is hourly rate.

293

:

Now, what are your thoughts?

294

:

And I agree, the hourly, the billable rate

is one, it's hell on earth for attorneys.

295

:

Okay.

296

:

It

297

:

Hugh: really is.

298

:

, Christine: It's like you, you

could have a mental breakdown

299

:

just thinking about like having to

keep track of it or all the time.

300

:

I didn't keep track of it when I was solo.

301

:

Hugh: How many times did you, while

you were falling asleep or in the

302

:

middle of the night wake up and worry

about, oh, did I put Uhhuh the time in?

303

:

Did I record this?

304

:

And you can't go to sleep

till you get up and check.

305

:

Yep.

306

:

And by that time, you,

you're awake and it happened.

307

:

All the time because it was so critical.

308

:

And when you're a solo

practitioner, it's life or death.

309

:

Christine: Well, and then the other

thing too, on the flip side of this,

310

:

like, you know, you think, oh, you

could be nice and not make an entry.

311

:

Okay.

312

:

But then if the client were to get

mad and complain and you didn't

313

:

keep track of your time, oh yeah.

314

:

There's no record that you kept

track of your time and the bar

315

:

association's gonna be like, you said

you worked, but you didn't bill them.

316

:

So it's really a system that's designed

to kind of keep everyone like fearful and

317

:

scared, you know, always on the defense.

318

:

I guess I'd say

319

:

Hugh: one of the things that I did like

about it, and that, that's an excellent

320

:

point, we would train people to be

super detailed in their time entries.

321

:

Mm-hmm.

322

:

Number one, it looked professional.

323

:

, When people were paying us the

big bucks, they deserved to

324

:

know exactly what work was done.

325

:

So if we had, if there was a phone

call, it said what the phone call was.

326

:

Later in discovery, if we had to disclose

our fees, it created a nightmare for

327

:

us to go in and redact all of that.

328

:

But that, , that's a different issue.

329

:

I loved the fact that

it was very detailed.

330

:

If somebody complained about something

or we filed a motion for attorney's

331

:

fees and we were asked to justify

, the other attorney would say, oh,

332

:

there's no way that amount of billing

was done for this specific motion.

333

:

We could detail it exact, we could

redact out anything that would be

334

:

privileged, but detail every single

thing that we did, it protected us.

335

:

It, it allowed me as a supervising

attorney and sort of a mentor

336

:

for people on my team to go back

through and see what had been

337

:

done so we could discuss it later.

338

:

And, yep, you develop, you know,

how attorneys practice their cases.

339

:

It had huge benefits internally for.

340

:

Me , as a, as someone , that managed

other people and worried about, you

341

:

know, the liability li of the firm

342

:

Christine: liability.

343

:

Mm-hmm.

344

:

Hugh: It was fantastic.

345

:

Christine: Well, and so what that

means is like if you get a phone,

346

:

like ring, ring, ring, hello, and

then you would do the billable entry.

347

:

It's like client called, discussed the

fact that significant other, , violated

348

:

the court order three times, but

the violations were very minimal.

349

:

You know, I told them, explained to them

what contempt was, but I also explained

350

:

that the judge likely wouldn't do

anything with these minor violations.

351

:

We'll make a note of it client, but

I tell the client, you obviously have

352

:

the option to file contempt if you

want, and then make a note of that.

353

:

So in six months when the client's

like you didn't file the contempt

354

:

motion, you've got that entry.

355

:

Hey, this is what I said.

356

:

Hugh: Yeah.

357

:

We had a conversation, it was on this

date, it was exactly this many minutes.

358

:

Mm-hmm.

359

:

And here are the things that we discussed.

360

:

So not only did we talk about it, but I

advised you against it because A, B and C.

361

:

Yep.

362

:

And boy, that really comes in handy.

363

:

But , we carried it on to.

364

:

Administrative tasks and things like that.

365

:

Like for instance, with billing, it

was phenomenal when you had all of

366

:

the entries of every communication

you had regarding billing or your

367

:

billing department had with the client.

368

:

So someone's could say, oh,

I never knew about this bill.

369

:

That's not true.

370

:

Yeah.

371

:

We talked about it on three different

occasions and on, and then people

372

:

wouldn't say much after that.

373

:

Oh yeah.

374

:

Because they saw that you

had had the records of it.

375

:

So.

376

:

Those things are fantastic,

377

:

Christine: but also just think about

it for listeners, and again, we are

378

:

never gonna say that we are, quote

unquote, the victims of family court,

379

:

but just you could see the psychosis

that can come with the obsession of

380

:

having to, one, do your job in these

emotional standpoints, and then two,

381

:

try to protect yourself from liability.

382

:

And then three, just constantly be

like verbatim writing down everything

383

:

that you're doing all day every day.

384

:

Now there are downsize sides and

positive sides to flat rate models.

385

:

I am a proponent of flat rate models.

386

:

, Although I understand that there's

pitfalls, you know, and I think that's

387

:

something that we should talk about.

388

:

, The biggest pitfall to me is like

to hire you for a flat rate divorce

389

:

with two kids, that you get, the gut

feeling is gonna be pretty amicable,

390

:

but you're gonna have to do a little

discovery and you're gonna have to go

391

:

to a mediation or two at your firm.

392

:

I can't imagine that it would've been

in, , tell me if I'm wrong, but 15 to 20.

393

:

Hugh: Oh, it, it would've

depended on the case.

394

:

We, I mean, we did cases that

were a few thousand dollars.

395

:

Okay.

396

:

That, that would be huge asset

cases, but people are in agreement.

397

:

And we really did have, , we had

proprietary intellectual property that

398

:

we had developed software and systems

that would automate the data collection

399

:

and making sure we didn't miss anything

financially so we could do bigger cases.

400

:

And if we weren't fighting over

them and drafting a lot of pleadings

401

:

back and forth, do them very

quickly and very, but that's the

402

:

Christine: problem with

flat rate potentially.

403

:

Like, because you have to

make that judgment call at the

404

:

initial retainer agreement.

405

:

Well, that's, and you never know.

406

:

Hugh: Well, no, that's true.

407

:

And, and you can, you can plan out,

you know, , you have, I think the

408

:

only way you could do it, number

one, would be to break it down into

409

:

different segments of the case.

410

:

Mm-hmm.

411

:

In, in a family law case.

412

:

Other types of cases I

think would be different.

413

:

But I also think it's very daunting

for attorneys for two main reasons.

414

:

Number one, if you don't have a lot

of experience with the cases, you are

415

:

going to get it wrong and it's going

to cost you, you're going to do a lot

416

:

of free work until you get it right.

417

:

Mm-hmm.

418

:

Which I think is one of the biggest

barriers to adoption of the flat

419

:

fee model with a lot of attorneys.

420

:

Mm-hmm.

421

:

As you think, I have no idea.

422

:

I may have done a handful of cases.

423

:

There's no way for me to predict

what it's gonna be like to get

424

:

through to the mediation stage or

get through discovery on this case.

425

:

Whereas if you've been doing it 10, 20

years, it'd be much easier for you to make

426

:

those predictions and be accurate and Yep.

427

:

And not lose a lot of money.

428

:

So that's, that's one thing.

429

:

The other piece is regulation.

430

:

So attorneys are usually

regulated based on.

431

:

You can only bill for the

value of work that you've done.

432

:

You, you know it sort of like

when you're splitting fees.

433

:

There, there are all these

rules about splitting fees.

434

:

You can split fees, but the attorney

you're splitting with has to

435

:

have provided value on the case.

436

:

There are rules about.

437

:

Flat fees in a lot of jurisdictions.

438

:

Christine: Yeah.

439

:

I mean, I know what you're saying,

but I don't worry about that too much.

440

:

Like it's in criminal,

they've gotten around that.

441

:

Like, so if you hire, like,

let's say Steve Romans, who

442

:

everybody in Louisville's gonna

agree, probably like Louisville

443

:

litigator extraordinaire, right?

444

:

I mean, like he is the

who's who of who to hire.

445

:

But if he were to charge $15,000 for a

DUI and he walks in on the first court

446

:

appearance and gets it dismissed, there's

not gonna be a Bar Association member

447

:

that's gonna say that wasn't a reasonable

fee for one court of appearance.

448

:

Given his record, his experience.

449

:

I think that's how they would look at it.

450

:

Do you know what I'm saying?

451

:

Hugh: I, I agree, but I also

think that I, I wouldn't guarantee

452

:

that, I wouldn't bet on it.

453

:

I wouldn't, I wouldn't bet a lot of money.

454

:

You,

455

:

Christine: when, when is the last

time you won a bet that we've done?

456

:

Hugh: Oh, good Lord.,

457

:

I'm just saying that if, if.

458

:

If there was a clear, bright

line rule that would give me

459

:

Christine: lawyer speak.

460

:

Hugh: Yeah, well, if it was black

and white that after so many years of

461

:

experience your reputation was worth

something and you can charge a much

462

:

higher rate on flat fee and feel more

comfortable about it, then I would've

463

:

felt more comfortable about it.

464

:

Yeah.

465

:

But I, I worry that, , politics, there's

always politics in these things, and you

466

:

would be, if you made a big push for,

I, I fear if you made a big push for

467

:

flat fee and family law, you get a lot

of pushback from the bar and Oh, yeah.

468

:

Then when you get pushback from the bar.

469

:

Regulators tend to put up hurdles

to keep the change from happening.

470

:

Christine: Yeah, but I mean, you know,

my stance on that, I do not believe

471

:

that the Bar Association is really

there to protect the little man lawyer.

472

:

I mean, I'll say it, I'll say it, but

I think this is the perfect to segue

473

:

talking about like the hourly rates.

474

:

But one of the huge problems I see

throughout this country, and I know

475

:

this is like a hot topic for you

'cause you love guardian ad litem

476

:

in friends of the court so much,

that's your favorite part of a case.

477

:

But I get so many complaints

about them billing at an hourly

478

:

rate for just checking emails.

479

:

And it does feel different than

lawyers billing at an hourly rate

480

:

for check and emails, you know?

481

:

Well, I think

482

:

Hugh: When you're talking about

GAL, you're talking about an

483

:

attorney, a a guardian ad litem is.

484

:

Is an attorney representing a child

or someone who legally doesn't have

485

:

the capacity to represent themselves.

486

:

Yeah.

487

:

So a prisoner, someone who's,

488

:

, Christine: well, let's limit

it too for this conversation

489

:

children, because actually the

GS though for prisoners are flat.

490

:

Right?

491

:

Have you ever done that?

492

:

Hugh: Yeah, sure.

493

:

Christine: Yeah.

494

:

That's flat, right?

495

:

At least in my experience it was,

496

:

Hugh: it doesn't have to be

497

:

Christine: really.

498

:

No.

499

:

Well, then I got screwed.

500

:

Hugh: Well, generally, if it depends

on how much work you're gonna do, and

501

:

I think you file a motion and ask for

rate above the, the standard rate.

502

:

But you can, I mean, I've, I've

taken on those cases where I've

503

:

gone and had significant hearings on

behalf of them because, well, I, I

504

:

Christine: definitely got the

short end of the stick on that.

505

:

Hugh: Well, I think most of the

time attorneys are appointed as

506

:

guardian ad litems for prisoners,

and it's just to certify, okay.

507

:

I, the client's aware of this and it's

moved forward, but there have been

508

:

times where things were moving forward.

509

:

It was clear to me that someone

hadn't filed a proper motion.

510

:

They hadn't met the burden, they hadn't

requested the relief, or, , a hearing

511

:

has been set on an issue that was never

in the pleading that was filed, and it

512

:

was never raised because the, , inmate

or the prisoner didn't know to raise it.

513

:

Or maybe it was set for hearing

before they ever even got a chance to

514

:

read the mail and see the pleading.

515

:

And I would, I would file things and

I would ask for it to be changed,

516

:

and I'd go and have that hearing.

517

:

And I never had any issue with the

judge allowing me additional fees.

518

:

But I'll be honest, most of

the time I've been appointed.

519

:

On those cases.

520

:

I've never asked for, I

didn't ask for the fees.

521

:

Christine: And this kind of backs

up to the history of GALs FOCs.

522

:

So let's go down that rabbit

hole a little bit first.

523

:

So I get this a lot.

524

:

Like, so we have two types of lawyers that

are appointed for children or a child in

525

:

a circuit court divorce or custody action.

526

:

Both of these individuals, the

standard is the best interest

527

:

of the child or children, right?

528

:

But a GAL is actually appointed to

represent the child's best interest.

529

:

An FOC is an investigative body

to give a report about what's

530

:

in the child's best interest.

531

:

And they don't have

532

:

Hugh: to be an attorney.

533

:

Christine: They don't have

to be, I've never seen me

534

:

Hugh: either, but someone

535

:

Christine: that wasn't one.

536

:

, But that's a relatively new thing.

537

:

And I often say I see the benefit of gals.

538

:

becuase GALs have historically

been ingrained in the system.

539

:

IE this like prisoner.

540

:

So what he's saying is like he had

a case where he was appointed to

541

:

represent the prisoner prisoners,

essentially due process rights.

542

:

Yes.

543

:

Correct.

544

:

And he noticed a procedural

or a due process violation.

545

:

But your job as the GAL wasn't necessarily

to represent the interest in its

546

:

in entirety of the prisoner, right?

547

:

Hugh: No.

548

:

Christine: And so same thing with like,

549

:

Hugh: well, I, I don't think that's clear.

550

:

Yeah,

551

:

Christine: yeah, yeah.

552

:

You're,

553

:

Hugh: you're appointed as a

guardian ad litem for that person.

554

:

I always interpreted that meant I'm

their attorney until relieved of my

555

:

duties and if I'm representing them,

especially if it's a safeguard in those

556

:

cases so that the court can say, okay,

we've appointed someone independent, they

557

:

can make sure the person's been served.

558

:

Mm-hmm.

559

:

They know what's going on and

it's a really important one, but.

560

:

How do you have that conversation

with a, with a client that, okay,

561

:

you see this, you know what it means.

562

:

By the way, you know, as an attorney I

notice all these deficiencies in it, but

563

:

I'm not going to do anything about it.

564

:

Christine: Well, it gets, it gets weird

'cause I actually think you're probably

565

:

act acting outside the scope of the GAL

appointment, which could lead to immunity.

566

:

And have you ever met a jailhouse lawyer?

567

:

Oh yeah.

568

:

They're my favorite people

in the entire world.

569

:

Like there's literally, oh my, a jailhouse

lawyer right now that knows every single

570

:

statue better than I, and he combined,

they are like sometimes my favorite

571

:

people, but they can be cantankerous.

572

:

, But that's where we're going down like

a real high level, , conversation.

573

:

And I think we should do, I really think

we've gotten feedback that we need to

574

:

start doing like an education series.

575

:

And I think would you be open to that?

576

:

Me.

577

:

Hugh: Yeah.

578

:

Yeah, absolutely.

579

:

Christine: Because I think that there's

some stuff that like, we get a little

580

:

high level , and like in a way that

people don't understand the origins

581

:

of Guardian ad litems and they just

assume that they're all, all bad.

582

:

But I think family court has taken

the origins of what the intent of

583

:

Guardian ad litems were meant to do,

created this avenue for FOCs and to

584

:

talk about GAL and FOC billable hours.

585

:

I do feel a certain kind of way about,

first off, a child or children having

586

:

two lawyers for crying out loud.

587

:

That's insane in my opinion.

588

:

No, no.

589

:

Hugh: I, I agree.

590

:

But my, I mean, my understanding of

an FOC is you are a fact witness.

591

:

You're supposed to be investigating

and reporting what you have found

592

:

in your investigation to the court.

593

:

Yeah.

594

:

You are not.

595

:

So it's supposed to be limited in scope.

596

:

You're investigating X, Y, and Z.

597

:

You prepare that report.

598

:

You provide it to the attorneys and

all the parties in the case 10 days

599

:

prior to the hearing, and you get to

be cross-examined if someone wants to

600

:

actually ask you about the contents

of it and question you about it.

601

:

Christine: Yeah.

602

:

But I still think there's no question that

their legal obligation standard is to the

603

:

best interest of the child or children.

604

:

Hugh: Sure.

605

:

But they're not allowed to give

legal conclusions as a fact witness.

606

:

And that's, dude,

607

:

Christine: have you read

some of the FOC reports?

608

:

, Hugh: I've appealed them and had

cases overturned, , because of them.

609

:

They are just, and I think that goes

to your point of how it's been changed.

610

:

It's, it's become a judge.

611

:

Yeah.

612

:

They've become , a way for judges

to outsource their delegate

613

:

opinion and to delegate and they

don't have to follow the FOCs.

614

:

And there are some judges that,

to their credit, when the FOCs.

615

:

Have clearly been shown that

they didn't do a whole lot.

616

:

They get completely marginalized and

ignored by the judges because the

617

:

judge wants to hear it themselves

and make their own decision.

618

:

And I have greatly appreciated that,

especially toward the end of my time

619

:

in family court, because it was just

almost something that was rubber stamped.

620

:

Christine: I never saw a judge that I

can recall, , not agree with an FOC or

621

:

GAL, especially in the last two years

I have seen, I mean, maybe early on

622

:

Hugh: a division, division

one, , judge Johnson

623

:

Christine: yeah.

624

:

Hugh: Would regularly if, if

she didn't, if, if something

625

:

didn't smell right about it,

626

:

Christine: good for

627

:

Hugh: her, you could, you could

tell that it just, it wasn't gonna

628

:

make a difference after that.

629

:

And she would ask questions

and just make sure that.

630

:

The, the actual facts would get

covered at the hearing and wouldn't

631

:

just take it straight out of a

report , or, or anything like that.

632

:

And that was, that's how it should be.

633

:

Christine: That's how a

hundred percent should be.

634

:

But still, from a layperson's perspective

or just from a common sense perspective,

635

:

if you were to look at a file, you

have a judge appointing two lawyers to

636

:

represent the child's best interest.

637

:

That's two lawyers.

638

:

Yeah.

639

:

For the child or children.

640

:

I

641

:

Hugh: agree.

642

:

But they, they're at $300 an hour.

643

:

There's supposed to be different roles.

644

:

I know that they're not handled

that way, but you, you're supposed

645

:

to have this one investigatory role

where they report facts, and then

646

:

once that investigation's done, it's

not supposed to be an ongoing Yeah.

647

:

Thing that they're involved in

the case and making decisions.

648

:

And what they, it becomes is they become

an arbiter of every single dispute.

649

:

The attorneys, the clients directly

reach out to the front of the court.

650

:

They send out an email telling

people what to do when they

651

:

have no authority to do that.

652

:

Right, right.

653

:

And that's, it's sort of become this

proxy for the judge and people will be.

654

:

I see motions where people ask to

hold the other party in contempt

655

:

for not following the FOCs orders.

656

:

Oh my God.

657

:

And FOCs can't make orders.

658

:

No, they, no, but you'll file a motion.

659

:

The F ooc said to do this and they didn't,

so that you need to hold them in contempt.

660

:

Christine: You know what,

it's not a court order.

661

:

You're right.

662

:

I did have one judge

that said, no, no, no.

663

:

God bless.

664

:

I can't remember if he was acting

GAL or FOC, but he wanted to have a

665

:

client of mine take an alcohol test and

basically, I didn't think there was any

666

:

reason for it or something like that.

667

:

And the judge was like,

no, I'm not doing it.

668

:

I mean, he's allowed to do when

it's not his parenting time.

669

:

Nothing's been established

to the contrary.

670

:

I had forgotten about that, but, so

let's say you and I have a case, right?

671

:

Super contentious.

672

:

We got two kids involved.

673

:

Like you got mom, I got dad, two kids.

674

:

We get the court appoints the FOC at GAL.

675

:

So I send an email to Hugh like,

this is what I'm trying to work out.

676

:

I CC FOCI CC GAL.

677

:

My client is gonna get

a bill for me of a 0.2.

678

:

The FO C's gonna bill a 0.2

679

:

and the GA L's gonna bill a 0.2.

680

:

So you got attorneys triple

dipping on one email.

681

:

And I really think there's a problem

with the notion that GS and FOCs are

682

:

billing in the same way that the two

primary attorneys in the case are.

683

:

Hugh: Yeah, I agree.

684

:

I th I think GS are usually,

I mean it's usually at a lower

685

:

rate than the attorneys do.

686

:

I never took a case where I would've

even fathomed billing, but $200

687

:

Christine: is a shit ton of money

for a lot of people an hour.

688

:

Hugh: It is.

689

:

I agree.

690

:

, I agree and philosophically.

691

:

I I, I didn't go to school for in law

school in Kentucky and in some other bars

692

:

you get appointed to be GAL on cases.

693

:

Yeah.

694

:

And they could be cases that you're

not, , it's not in your subject matter

695

:

area that you're, that you're very

proficient with, but it's part of your

696

:

duty as an attorney, you serve that role.

697

:

And for be having the privilege of a

license to get to practice law, you got

698

:

appointed on things and of court ask

you to step in and do this and do that.

699

:

You did it.

700

:

Yeah.

701

:

That's, and you don't

necessarily get paid.

702

:

And when I would take these appointments,

I sort of just, unless it was something

703

:

where I had to go to like a full day

trial and sit through depositions and even

704

:

some, and I know my former partners will

probably want to puke when hearing that, I

705

:

just sort of figured that that was me pro

bono serving my, my, my duty to the bar.

706

:

And I would almost never.

707

:

Submit a bill on those cases just

because I just felt like I wanted

708

:

to do it the right way and I wanted

, to, it was sort of my duty to do

709

:

it 'cause the court asked me to.

710

:

Christine: But I think we're back in

that conversation of the old school

711

:

notion of gals and what family court has

done to the notion of a GAL and an FOC.

712

:

Sure.

713

:

They're so different and people listening

at home are, there's a massive distinction

714

:

with how people, , that are appointed as

these guardian ad litems or god bless.

715

:

What's the other appointment when

you're trying to get service?

716

:

I can't think of the verbiage.

717

:

Right.

718

:

Warning out, warning order.

719

:

Warning order attorney.

720

:

Those are massively different

and they aren't this lucrative

721

:

money job that you're gonna be

able to pay your mortgage on.

722

:

Okay.

723

:

Like there, this is like breadcrumbs,

but there are attorneys that

724

:

make a living with GAL and FOC

appointments in family court.

725

:

And that's what I mean, that's

what needs to be looked at.

726

:

Like we gotta follow the money.

727

:

Hugh: Yeah, I, I don't necessarily

have an issue with that.

728

:

If you're doing your job, if you are

amassing as many cases as you can

729

:

possibly do and taking on so many

cases, you can't possibly remember

730

:

one case from the other or actually

return an email or return a call for

731

:

months, I have a big problem with that.

732

:

Yeah.

733

:

If you are doing a phenomenal job

and the children of Kentucky can

734

:

rely on you to actually protect their

interests and pay attention to what's

735

:

going on in their case, or God forbid,

pronounce their name remotely correctly,

736

:

Christine: LOL, he's got

a personal story there.

737

:

Who did what, when, where, why

738

:

Hugh: all the time.

739

:

Christine: Who,

740

:

, Hugh: I am so used to, , GAL or FOCs

showing up and just mispronouncing

741

:

the name and I can, I'm looking at

my client, as often happens, you're

742

:

sitting next to 'em at a table or sort

of caddy corner to them at a table.

743

:

And you can see their reaction

when their children's names are

744

:

set incorrectly for someone.

745

:

They've written thousands of

dollars a check, , to Yeah,

746

:

Christine: yeah.

747

:

These guardian ad litems and FOCs.

748

:

They're not meeting with the kids.

749

:

They don't know the kids.

750

:

I mean, not all across the board, but I

would say the vast majority in Louisville.

751

:

And that's the complaint that I get

the most, is like, I've got one of my

752

:

followers right now, it's hysterical.

753

:

She started recording, , her guardian

ad litem, and this is in a different

754

:

jurisdiction, but she's like, he wrote

a full memorandum on her and he's

755

:

never met her or returned her call.

756

:

Hugh: Oh, yeah.

757

:

I, , I've had that in, in big hearings

and in some trials where , I will

758

:

have an FOC on the stand testifying.

759

:

About my client, and they've not

talked to them in a year and a

760

:

half, and they can't possibly have

any update whatsoever because they

761

:

haven't returned like 30 or 40 emails

and haven't returned a phone call.

762

:

Yeah.

763

:

And it's just, , and in those cases, the

court basically rubber stamped to the

764

:

report, even though admittedly they hadn't

talked to important people in the case.

765

:

, And I think the one case that I'm thinking

of had not even talked to the children.

766

:

They had talked to the therapist and the

therapist told them what they thought

767

:

the children felt, but they didn't

even bother to talk to the children.

768

:

And this was, oh, over a

year into the appointment.

769

:

Christine: Well, and that's what you

get a lot of people that are like,

770

:

it's all, it's one big club, but you

have guardian ad litems friend of the

771

:

courts, they're doing these referral

services to different types of therapists

772

:

or therapy treatments, and they're

all talking, they're all socializing,

773

:

they're all going to happy hour.

774

:

And it's like if you get one person

in there to feel a certain kind of

775

:

way, or potentially maybe believe an

abuser, because we know how manipulative

776

:

people on the antisocial spectrum

can be, that can just take your case

777

:

down, a devastating consequence.

778

:

And then you have all of these

alleged checks and balances to

779

:

protect the child or do what's in

the best interest of the child.

780

:

But you can't even get the GAL

or the FOC to meet the kid.

781

:

Yeah.

782

:

You know, like that's, and

no wonder people are at home

783

:

watching the family court system

saying, y'all are all in on it.

784

:

Like, I get it.

785

:

I get why they have become so quote

unquote radicalized to believe

786

:

that the system is colluding with

one another to take their kids.

787

:

Hugh: Well, I, to a certain extent,

I mean, there are these groups that,

788

:

you know, you have attorneys that just

work with the judges so frequently

789

:

that some of them, you'll be sitting

in the hearing waiting for them to

790

:

show up, and they come out of the

back, like out of the judge's chambers.

791

:

Instead of coming through the front in

the courtroom like all other attorneys do.

792

:

And how can the people sitting in

that courtroom not have the impression

793

:

that you're all part of one system and

there's some collusion going on there.

794

:

When you're coming out of the back, the

judge comes out of the back from her,

795

:

his or her chambers, and then you come

out of the back where only the judge

796

:

and the judicial staff comes from.

797

:

And you are a court

appointed private attorney.

798

:

Christine: Yeah.

799

:

I thought about this last night.

800

:

It's like there's a

hierarchy in family court.

801

:

You've got the judges, then you've

got the court appointed attorneys, and

802

:

then you have all the other attorneys.

803

:

Yeah.

804

:

And there's like a system.

805

:

And so these court appointed attorneys

have gotten the god-like complex

806

:

or the power, like perceived power,

because we have one in particular in

807

:

Louisville, and he sits in every class,

every classroom, LOL, every courtroom.

808

:

And the judge will just

be like, all right, Mr.

809

:

So-and-so, you know what I mean?

810

:

Tell us what's going on today.

811

:

All right, Mr.

812

:

So-and-so tell us what's going on today.

813

:

And half the times he

doesn't know what's going on.

814

:

Hugh: Oh, sure, sure.

815

:

I, I was, I was impressed though when

we were over there yesterday, , Jim

816

:

Murphy was sitting out in the

lobby with the actual attorneys.

817

:

He wasn't coming into the motion hours

from the back where the judges are.

818

:

I that, I didn't recall

seeing that in a long time.

819

:

Oh my

820

:

Christine: word.

821

:

I mean, bless his heart.

822

:

And Jim Murphy is a GAL FOC that

we get a lot of complaints about.

823

:

I believe there have been five, if

not six court of appeals opinions

824

:

that have come down where he is

a common denominator on the case.

825

:

It may be more, , to segue a little bit.

826

:

Y'all know, I'm, you know, you know,

I'm like, these judges are retaliatory.

827

:

You feel like that , if you step outta

bounds like they're gonna retaliate

828

:

and we're lawyers, like we have defense

mechanisms I think that are stronger.

829

:

Not always, but like.

830

:

And we're not, we're not

talking about our kids.

831

:

But, , they retaliated against

me when I started speaking out.

832

:

And Jim was one of the big ones actually.

833

:

Did, you know, I think I told you

that, , he went up to a pro se litigant

834

:

in court when I was there observing.

835

:

And this is the guardian ad litem.

836

:

So he's appointed, you know, to

represent the best interest of the

837

:

child, a child, and warned this

pro se person that I was dangerous

838

:

and it made it in a court pleading

839

:

Hugh: Yeah, I, that,

that doesn't surprise me.

840

:

I, I've, , I've been told by multiple

people when I've taken someone on, or,

841

:

you know, appealed something or filed a

motion because an FOC didn't file their

842

:

report, or a guardian ad litem filed

something with a court that should not,

843

:

and could, you know, would not meet the

rules of evidence, should not be admitted.

844

:

, You filed a report as a GAL, which is

for the longest time not been allowed.

845

:

The roles are separate and they will tell

mutual colleagues things about me or say

846

:

things and it gets back to me immediately.

847

:

Yeah.

848

:

And it's just, ah, it's, it's, I guess,

the way people work, but , I've seen it,

849

:

you know, same thing happens with judges.

850

:

Yeah.

851

:

I mean, I have.

852

:

I have videos of motion hour appearances

after court of appeals opinions have come

853

:

out where I've had judges overturned in

the very next motion hour appearance I

854

:

make in front of them snarky comments

about it and treat it a totally

855

:

different way than opposing counsel.

856

:

So that happens.

857

:

Christine: But so imagine if they're

gonna retaliate against us, what they're

858

:

gonna do potentially to pro se litigants.

859

:

Also, on top of it, , I don't care if

Jim Murphy, I wish Jim Murphy well.,

860

:

I knew, you know, I've known him for

many, many years and I don't care if

861

:

they wanna get on Reddit and say all

kinds of crazy stuff about me or if

862

:

they wanna come after me personally.

863

:

But I just think it goes to

show that they have a complete.

864

:

Lack of understanding of how traumatic

the family court experience is to try to

865

:

go and get a pro se litigant fighting for

his or her child to somehow get involved

866

:

in lawyer drama like it's next level,

lack of empathy, lack of common sense.

867

:

, Also thank you Jim, for proving my

point that y'all are retaliatory.

868

:

I appreciate so much.

869

:

I will tag you in this and I will

also tag all of the 10 judges.

870

:

I think this is a great place to

say, wait, we got some questions.

871

:

. Oh, y'all, please, please, please,

please, please, please keep sending me

872

:

questions, keep , commenting, tagging us.

873

:

And first we are starting a new thing.

874

:

So we were at the courthouse yesterday

when we were doing our little like to see

875

:

how many judges were working and we had a

guy come up to me and be like, thank you.

876

:

I love you.

877

:

Are you doing the judge roll call?

878

:

And I'm like, that's genius.

879

:

So for now, that's where it's now?

880

:

Yep.

881

:

It's the judge roll call.

882

:

But Michael c Sternberg out of Nevada,

he is on YouTube at Father and Exile.

883

:

He picked a time for us to go next week.

884

:

We will be going next

week, Thursday at 10 45.

885

:

Alright.

886

:

Am how many judges of the 39

will be there on a Thursday?

887

:

Hugh: That's a, that's a good question.

888

:

, The mornings I, in my experience were a

little bit different than the afternoons.

889

:

Yep.

890

:

You would find more in the

mornings, but that's a good time.

891

:

That's still sort of midweek.

892

:

You wouldn't expect, you

wouldn't expect people to be.

893

:

Finished for the week by that point.

894

:

So I'm, I'm curious to know.

895

:

I'm ready to be shocked again.

896

:

Christine: I'm trying

to think of Thursday.

897

:

It's not a holiday week, 10 45.

898

:

You got no excuse to still be

at breakfast and you got no

899

:

excuse to still be at lunch.

900

:

Well,

901

:

Hugh: even when you have some of those

district court dockets that we've

902

:

discussed , on previous episodes, the

dependency, neglect and abuse, , paternity

903

:

domestic violence, if you go in the

afternoon and someone is on a day where

904

:

they might have a domestic violence

docket, if they just don't have a lot

905

:

of cases that are allotted to them and

they may be finished by the afternoon and

906

:

, that's, they just went through their cases

and got done in the morning by 10 45, no

907

:

one's going to be done with that docket.

908

:

So there'll be multiple judges with

some kind of docket that day, presumably

909

:

that should be there when we go.

910

:

Christine: All right.

911

:

I got some questions.

912

:

This is a really good one.

913

:

, Why can't attorneys give free

legal advice if they are properly

914

:

educated and pass the bar?

915

:

I see a lot of quote, not legal advice,

end quote on websites and social media.

916

:

Hugh: That's a good question.

917

:

, Boy, that's a, I know

that's a rabbit hole.

918

:

Christine: Well, the big answer, and the

big reason I won't do it is because I

919

:

think it creates, it has the potential to

create an attorney-client relationship.

920

:

Hugh: Oh, yes.

921

:

Christine: And I can't answer, if I

had the ability to tell you how your

922

:

case was gonna go in a five minute

phone call, I'd bill a thousand dollars

923

:

a second and everybody would pay me.

924

:

You know what I mean?

925

:

It's because it's nuanced,

it's more complicated.

926

:

, And so, well, it

927

:

Hugh: gets down to that

great, , attorney answer.

928

:

It depends.

929

:

Christine: Yeah, always.

930

:

And, , I think we can kinda give a

general, like courtroom demeanor advice.

931

:

We can do education, but.

932

:

It just gets, if it's not

hypothetical, it gets hairy.

933

:

Right?

934

:

Hugh: Sure.

935

:

Well, I, I, from my point of

view, , coming from the firm life,

936

:

it's liability, liability, liability.

937

:

Christine: Mm-hmm.

938

:

Hugh: You give someone advice, especially

if you were giving advice most of the

939

:

time where you would be offering general

legal advice or free legal advice, it

940

:

would be based on very limited facts

or hearing, you know, just answering

941

:

a basic question where you may get.

942

:

You know, one, 1000th of a

percent of the facts that are

943

:

actually relevant to the case.

944

:

Yep.

945

:

Christine: Yep.

946

:

Hugh: And then someone's gonna take that

advice and go do something, run with it.

947

:

And you gave them the advice and you as

an attorney would be liable for that.

948

:

Yep.

949

:

And you, your insurance

would be on the line.

950

:

Christine: Also, it would just

be like an injustice, really.

951

:

I mean, certainly we have to make a living

like, , it would be, I wish I could just

952

:

represent all of y'all that have been

wronged for free, but I still have a

953

:

mortgage and bills and things like that.

954

:

And all lawyers do, , this is just

how we make money our legal mind.

955

:

But on top of it, I would never

put a client, it would be like if

956

:

someone called me on the telephone

and said, Christine, this is

957

:

exactly how you change a brake line.

958

:

And then I was like, okay, I got this.

959

:

You know what I mean?

960

:

And then went and changed my brake

line, which I don't even know if you

961

:

can change brake lines, but Sure.

962

:

You can.

963

:

You get the point.

964

:

Yeah.

965

:

Yeah.

966

:

Yeah.

967

:

I mean, that would be insane.

968

:

Like, I'm a good person, well

intentioned, but I would likely

969

:

create a death trap for my vehicle.

970

:

You know,

971

:

Hugh: break brake lines.

972

:

Brake lines are, yeah, well maybe

brake lines are pretty easy.

973

:

The, , I, I look at it as if

you went and posted a question

974

:

on a medical website Yeah.

975

:

And said My toe hurts really bad if

a surgeon got on there and gave you

976

:

specific advice on how to cut it open.

977

:

And make it feel better just knowing that

it hurt and knowing very little else.

978

:

Yeah.

979

:

You just, you, , if you ask a question

online or a simple question on a

980

:

phone call and you actually get a

detailed answer from an attorney,

981

:

I probably wouldn't trust it.

982

:

Christine: Right.

983

:

Right.

984

:

I mean, it's just, we can't know

the answer to all those things

985

:

and it's just a huge liability.

986

:

It's just , a shit show to be honest.

987

:

Yes.

988

:

But it is a great question and it

also shows the fact that lawyers

989

:

are constantly, our job is, you

know, a lot of people think that

990

:

we just like memorize statues.

991

:

Like I don't know any, I know very few

statues off the top of my head, but we are

992

:

trained to think of, not even just worst

case scenario, but every possible scenario

993

:

that could come from one instance.

994

:

And it's enough to make you crazy.

995

:

Right.

996

:

Hugh: Yeah, no, I agree.

997

:

Other than there were

certain statutes and.

998

:

Rules of procedure and evidentiary

rules and family court rules

999

:

of procedure that I memorized.

:

00:44:32,562 --> 00:44:35,832

Oh, I know the rules of evidence, like

Bible verses, because you had to bring

:

00:44:35,832 --> 00:44:39,672

them up so often and you get into

fights over them and it was just easier

:

00:44:39,672 --> 00:44:43,152

to say, well actually it says, and

then just cite it verbatim than having

:

00:44:43,152 --> 00:44:44,232

to pull it out of a book every time.

:

00:44:44,232 --> 00:44:46,062

Christine: Well, we should have a

competition on the rules of evidence

:

00:44:46,062 --> 00:44:49,422

that I'm good at, but I know none of,

the local rules, you know, there's

:

00:44:49,422 --> 00:44:53,052

only one statute that I have absolutely

memorized, and this just kind of

:

00:44:53,052 --> 00:44:54,372

tells you what a terrible person I am.

:

00:44:54,372 --> 00:44:55,212

A KRS statute.

:

00:44:55,212 --> 00:44:55,752

Can you guess it?

:

00:44:58,422 --> 00:44:58,812

Hugh: No, it

:

00:44:58,812 --> 00:44:59,502

Christine: involves money.

:

00:45:00,762 --> 00:45:01,332

Hugh: Money

:

00:45:01,512 --> 00:45:03,072

Christine: 4 0 3, 2 20.

:

00:45:03,072 --> 00:45:03,976

Hugh: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

:

00:45:04,092 --> 00:45:04,957

Two 20 it needs

:

00:45:05,142 --> 00:45:07,752

Christine: of attorney's fees

and disparity in income cases.

:

00:45:07,752 --> 00:45:08,022

Yes.

:

00:45:08,022 --> 00:45:10,782

That's the probably, I mean, granted

I know the other ones, but that

:

00:45:10,782 --> 00:45:11,622

one is just like, although it's

:

00:45:11,622 --> 00:45:15,402

Hugh: virtually irrelevant given the case

law that basically expanded it well beyond

:

00:45:15,402 --> 00:45:17,162

the language , in the actual statute.

:

00:45:17,162 --> 00:45:17,312

But,

:

00:45:17,312 --> 00:45:19,292

Christine: and plus the fact

that these judges are like,

:

00:45:19,682 --> 00:45:20,792

whatever, that's, I digress.

:

00:45:20,792 --> 00:45:21,872

We can't go down that rabbit hole.

:

00:45:22,272 --> 00:45:24,042

, Hugh: I actually, a

better challenge would be.

:

00:45:24,417 --> 00:45:29,517

We should do an episode where you

name a rule of evidence and tell

:

00:45:29,517 --> 00:45:31,467

me what you know about it and I'll

tell you how to get around it.

:

00:45:31,677 --> 00:45:32,067

Christine: Okay.

:

00:45:33,177 --> 00:45:33,627

Oh my gosh.

:

00:45:33,627 --> 00:45:36,057

I could, we could do something

too on the challenge.

:

00:45:36,087 --> 00:45:36,567

Yeah.

:

00:45:36,617 --> 00:45:40,097

, How to trick a family court judge

by using big words because they know

:

00:45:40,097 --> 00:45:41,777

little to nothing about evidence.

:

00:45:41,927 --> 00:45:43,547

And I will, I've got a

great one for hearsay.

:

00:45:43,547 --> 00:45:44,447

We'll do that next time.

:

00:45:44,447 --> 00:45:46,997

'cause I mean, I could get

these judges to admit shit.

:

00:45:46,997 --> 00:45:47,000

Wait a second.

:

00:45:47,000 --> 00:45:47,001

Shit.

:

00:45:47,006 --> 00:45:47,117

If it

:

00:45:47,117 --> 00:45:49,427

Hugh: was said out of court, isn't

it just automatically hearsay?

:

00:45:50,087 --> 00:45:50,567

Christine: Duh.

:

00:45:50,837 --> 00:45:51,107

Hugh: Yeah.

:

00:45:51,107 --> 00:45:51,108

Yeah.

:

00:45:51,527 --> 00:45:51,587

Christine: All.

:

00:45:51,587 --> 00:45:53,027

And that's the whole,

that goes to my point.

:

00:45:53,027 --> 00:45:53,537

Oh my gosh.

:

00:45:53,537 --> 00:45:55,457

I had so much fun with

Goodwin on one of these.

:

00:45:55,607 --> 00:45:57,077

I swear I'm gonna tell

the story next time.

:

00:45:57,137 --> 00:45:57,437

Okay.

:

00:45:58,037 --> 00:45:58,907

And this is a good one.

:

00:45:58,907 --> 00:46:00,617

This is on par for what we said today.

:

00:46:00,917 --> 00:46:04,307

, How would they make you pay

GAL parenting coordinator fees?

:

00:46:04,307 --> 00:46:07,607

FOC fees When the judge knows

you have no money available.

:

00:46:09,737 --> 00:46:10,847

It's sad.

:

00:46:11,357 --> 00:46:12,077

Hugh: It is true.

:

00:46:12,377 --> 00:46:13,127

It is true.

:

00:46:13,232 --> 00:46:13,472

I think.

:

00:46:14,792 --> 00:46:19,562

It puts a court in a tough situation

because, well, the statute requires them

:

00:46:19,562 --> 00:46:21,362

to do what's in the child's best interest.

:

00:46:21,362 --> 00:46:27,392

And honestly, there are situations

where a child needs a voice, but you

:

00:46:27,392 --> 00:46:31,922

don't want necessarily to put the

child in the position to be in court.

:

00:46:31,922 --> 00:46:32,072

Why?

:

00:46:33,347 --> 00:46:35,702

Christine: This is where, I don't

understand why this ISS traumatic,

:

00:46:35,702 --> 00:46:36,992

what, what you talking about?

:

00:46:36,992 --> 00:46:37,622

It's traumatic.

:

00:46:37,622 --> 00:46:40,112

What's traumatic is not

having a divo, a voice.

:

00:46:40,142 --> 00:46:40,442

Hugh: Okay.

:

00:46:40,442 --> 00:46:42,782

But, okay, so how about

the procedural things?

:

00:46:42,782 --> 00:46:47,222

A court, a child cannot come to

motion hour to make sure that

:

00:46:47,222 --> 00:46:50,492

something procedural has happened

or a statute's being followed

:

00:46:50,492 --> 00:46:51,872

in somebody else's pleading.

:

00:46:51,992 --> 00:46:56,012

Well, no, there A GAL can absolutely

do that, and that was 90% of

:

00:46:56,012 --> 00:46:57,722

what I did on the cases I got.

:

00:46:58,127 --> 00:46:59,657

I got appointed on GAL.

:

00:46:59,777 --> 00:47:01,007

It wasn't going in.

:

00:47:01,007 --> 00:47:04,247

And yes, I went and talked to my client,

but most of the time it was making

:

00:47:04,247 --> 00:47:05,927

people actually follow the rules.

:

00:47:06,497 --> 00:47:06,590

And but you're talking

:

00:47:06,602 --> 00:47:07,352

Christine: about adults.

:

00:47:07,667 --> 00:47:08,327

You're talking about adults.

:

00:47:08,327 --> 00:47:11,867

This is where, so if this were the

case, all my criminal lawyers out there,

:

00:47:12,077 --> 00:47:18,227

how has the system survived for 200

years where we have victims of horrific

:

00:47:18,257 --> 00:47:22,517

crimes, alleged victims of horrific

essay crimes, children that have been

:

00:47:22,517 --> 00:47:26,417

abused, they don't get appointed guardian

ad litems, and there's not a criminal

:

00:47:26,417 --> 00:47:29,717

judge in the world out there that

would think that would be a good idea.

:

00:47:30,167 --> 00:47:33,017

No, they, they, you could,

you do in-camera reviews, you

:

00:47:33,017 --> 00:47:34,607

submit your questions before.

:

00:47:34,757 --> 00:47:36,377

I've done it many, many times.

:

00:47:36,437 --> 00:47:39,827

And the judge gets to, and this is

for competency hearings type things

:

00:47:39,827 --> 00:47:42,077

like that's what we would typically

do to see whether or not a child

:

00:47:42,077 --> 00:47:44,957

was competent to testify in front of

the jury if there were allegations

:

00:47:44,957 --> 00:47:46,527

of abuse or sex, , allegations.

:

00:47:46,737 --> 00:47:50,067

But, and I understand that it's

criminal, so you have the right to

:

00:47:50,067 --> 00:47:52,377

cross confront and cross examinee, but.

:

00:47:52,862 --> 00:47:57,752

If you don't actually see the

child, the judge, the finder

:

00:47:57,752 --> 00:48:00,512

of fact, how can you ascertain?

:

00:48:00,512 --> 00:48:00,757

Hugh: You do who?

:

00:48:00,917 --> 00:48:05,422

I mean, if you were you, I had

clients that were on the stand.

:

00:48:05,422 --> 00:48:06,862

We would try to do it in chambers.

:

00:48:06,862 --> 00:48:10,132

We'd do it in a way that was,

that's what, that's what I'm saying.

:

00:48:10,162 --> 00:48:10,312

Yeah.

:

00:48:10,312 --> 00:48:15,622

You, but you wouldn't, most of the cases,

you're not dealing with sa , allegations

:

00:48:15,622 --> 00:48:19,252

or things like that, but , the, the

statutes require the judge to do

:

00:48:19,252 --> 00:48:20,932

what's in a child's best interest.

:

00:48:20,932 --> 00:48:21,202

Right.

:

00:48:21,262 --> 00:48:25,222

Not which client is most convinced or

which, which party is most convincing.

:

00:48:25,612 --> 00:48:31,102

Being in that position as a judge

and not having somebody making the

:

00:48:31,102 --> 00:48:32,782

argument for the child's best interest.

:

00:48:33,647 --> 00:48:36,967

Christine: Dude, we did that for 200

years and we didn't have this this,

:

00:48:37,017 --> 00:48:39,267

, scenario like before family court.

:

00:48:39,267 --> 00:48:43,647

The notion that you have someone like

Jim Murphy that is so revered by the

:

00:48:43,647 --> 00:48:46,857

family court that gets to come in and

say what's in the child's best interest

:

00:48:46,857 --> 00:48:48,237

when he hasn't spoken with the child.

:

00:48:48,447 --> 00:48:51,387

Just imagine, I think of this all the

time, y'all, and I'm not even to pick

:

00:48:51,387 --> 00:48:56,077

on him in particular, every GAL and

FOC out there, , in 10 years, you're

:

00:48:56,077 --> 00:48:58,597

gonna be sitting in your office and

you're gonna have your client knock

:

00:48:58,597 --> 00:49:02,487

on your fucking door and you gotta be

prepared to answer those questions.

:

00:49:02,667 --> 00:49:03,387

Like, seriously.

:

00:49:03,447 --> 00:49:04,077

Oh well when,

:

00:49:04,082 --> 00:49:06,177

Hugh: when the child is an

adult and they come and say, why

:

00:49:06,177 --> 00:49:07,287

didn't you protect me from this?

:

00:49:07,287 --> 00:49:08,397

Or Why didn't you do your job?

:

00:49:08,637 --> 00:49:10,062

Christine: I mean, why didn't

I always wonder about that?

:

00:49:10,062 --> 00:49:11,637

Why did you keep my dad from me?

:

00:49:11,637 --> 00:49:12,357

You know what I mean?

:

00:49:12,357 --> 00:49:14,187

Because my mom made these allegations.

:

00:49:14,397 --> 00:49:17,757

Or didn't you realize that

like my dad was hurting me?

:

00:49:17,757 --> 00:49:20,337

And just because mom made allegations

of abuse, she was trying to

:

00:49:20,337 --> 00:49:22,627

protect us like these FOCs and GAL.

:

00:49:22,977 --> 00:49:23,427

, But just

:

00:49:23,427 --> 00:49:25,797

Hugh: because somebody

does a shitty job, doesn't.

:

00:49:26,132 --> 00:49:28,862

That's not the fault of the role itself,

:

00:49:28,982 --> 00:49:29,282

Christine: dude.

:

00:49:29,402 --> 00:49:30,152

Okay, let's take it out.

:

00:49:30,152 --> 00:49:31,082

I got a different scenario.

:

00:49:31,172 --> 00:49:32,102

Let's just imagine.

:

00:49:32,192 --> 00:49:34,112

Oh, poor little **** victims.

:

00:49:34,112 --> 00:49:34,352

Okay.

:

00:49:34,352 --> 00:49:36,602

It's just too traumatizing

for them to go to court.

:

00:49:36,602 --> 00:49:39,932

So what we're gonna do, instead of

hearing from the **** victims themself,

:

00:49:40,142 --> 00:49:44,642

we're gonna appoint a guardian ad litem

that's paid hourly by this **** victim.

:

00:49:44,732 --> 00:49:45,182

Okay.

:

00:49:45,242 --> 00:49:45,902

You know what I mean?

:

00:49:46,052 --> 00:49:48,212

And that's gonna cost them $10,000.

:

00:49:48,212 --> 00:49:51,572

And this **** victim is gonna meet

with them once or twice and then come

:

00:49:51,572 --> 00:49:55,052

to court and make a determination

for the final outcome of a case.

:

00:49:55,082 --> 00:49:55,232

Yeah.

:

00:49:55,262 --> 00:49:56,042

It's insane.

:

00:49:56,102 --> 00:49:57,932

Hugh: But that's not the way

that it should be handled.

:

00:49:57,932 --> 00:50:00,872

And that's not the way the statutes

and the rules are set up for gals.

:

00:50:00,962 --> 00:50:01,082

Ugh.

:

00:50:01,502 --> 00:50:02,942

It's the way it works.

:

00:50:03,182 --> 00:50:07,142

It's the way that it happens both

with FOCs and gals, but that's

:

00:50:07,142 --> 00:50:08,102

not the way it's supposed to be.

:

00:50:08,102 --> 00:50:13,202

It's not supposed to be the actual

voice of fact finding A GAL, in fact

:

00:50:13,202 --> 00:50:17,042

can't testify and should not be filing

reports or telling the judges anything.

:

00:50:17,042 --> 00:50:18,392

In Kentucky, actually.

:

00:50:18,542 --> 00:50:19,952

In Kentucky, that's correct.

:

00:50:20,102 --> 00:50:20,882

Absolutely.

:

00:50:21,212 --> 00:50:22,922

But it is happening.

:

00:50:22,982 --> 00:50:23,282

Mm-hmm.

:

00:50:23,522 --> 00:50:28,922

When things have to be done for a child's

best interest, someone that has a legal

:

00:50:28,922 --> 00:50:33,002

knowledge and can file pleadings on the

child's behalf, I think becomes important.

:

00:50:33,002 --> 00:50:38,282

And we're talking about kids that are,

both parents treat the kid very well.

:

00:50:38,342 --> 00:50:42,272

It's neither party is going to argue

:

00:50:44,672 --> 00:50:46,922

objectively about the

child's best interest.

:

00:50:47,042 --> 00:50:48,212

It's not going to happen.

:

00:50:48,452 --> 00:50:49,622

They're gonna think they do.

:

00:50:49,652 --> 00:50:52,722

They each parent knows what thinks,

they know what's best for the kids.

:

00:50:52,722 --> 00:50:55,422

And maybe both of them do, but

they have different opinions.

:

00:50:55,662 --> 00:51:00,312

From a judge's point of view,

having someone procedurally argue

:

00:51:00,312 --> 00:51:04,422

as an attorney for the for, for the

child can be beneficial in cases.

:

00:51:04,452 --> 00:51:07,092

I don't think it, it's

not mandatory anywhere.

:

00:51:07,122 --> 00:51:08,292

Well, okay.

:

00:51:08,412 --> 00:51:12,672

It's not mandatory in the

general practice for custody and,

:

00:51:12,912 --> 00:51:14,802

. Custody and divorce litigation.

:

00:51:14,802 --> 00:51:18,012

There are some in instances

in termination cases.

:

00:51:18,012 --> 00:51:18,013

Yeah.

:

00:51:18,018 --> 00:51:18,072

Yeah.

:

00:51:18,072 --> 00:51:19,572

And things where it is necessary.

:

00:51:19,907 --> 00:51:19,987

Adoption.

:

00:51:19,987 --> 00:51:20,267

Termination

:

00:51:20,267 --> 00:51:20,428

Christine: means adoption.

:

00:51:20,747 --> 00:51:20,907

Yeah.

:

00:51:20,907 --> 00:51:21,282

Like a, well,

:

00:51:21,282 --> 00:51:21,827

Hugh: some, yeah.

:

00:51:21,837 --> 00:51:24,147

Termination would be terminating

someone's parental rights.

:

00:51:24,152 --> 00:51:24,172

Yeah.

:

00:51:24,177 --> 00:51:27,177

, Generally for an adoption where

someone else is getting the rights,

:

00:51:27,377 --> 00:51:28,607

parental rights to that child.

:

00:51:28,877 --> 00:51:32,747

But there are some instances in those

cases where a GAL is required, but in

:

00:51:32,747 --> 00:51:34,787

your normal family practice, it's not.

:

00:51:35,117 --> 00:51:40,727

So, the fact that it gets used far

too often when people can't afford it,

:

00:51:40,727 --> 00:51:42,797

where the case might not warrant it.

:

00:51:42,857 --> 00:51:46,457

I think that's just an

abuse of, of the, in actual.

:

00:51:47,282 --> 00:51:50,732

Piece of the process that I I

feel is, is essential if used

:

00:51:50,732 --> 00:51:53,042

correctly is, is very important.

:

00:51:53,042 --> 00:51:57,212

, Christine: I can't wait for the internet

to get mad at you on this conversation.

:

00:51:57,422 --> 00:51:58,052

Yeah, no, I'm just kidding.

:

00:51:58,262 --> 00:52:02,252

But I do think that, you know,

the bring it on LOL, the fact that

:

00:52:02,252 --> 00:52:06,392

you have so many, I was in court

yesterday, I saw that there was a GAL

:

00:52:06,392 --> 00:52:08,642

and an FOC with two pro se parties.

:

00:52:08,702 --> 00:52:12,392

And you also have the

notion of like your parental

:

00:52:12,392 --> 00:52:14,552

constitutionally protected rights.

:

00:52:14,552 --> 00:52:17,532

You can't even afford to pay

for , an attorney to represent

:

00:52:17,532 --> 00:52:20,772

those, but then you're paying

for a court appointed attorney.

:

00:52:20,922 --> 00:52:20,982

Yeah.

:

00:52:20,982 --> 00:52:21,882

It's just a shit show.

:

00:52:21,882 --> 00:52:24,882

But I think it's egregious that they're

appointing pointing them so much.

:

00:52:24,912 --> 00:52:29,322

And I think that there has to be something

done as far as, , what's the word?

:

00:52:29,322 --> 00:52:30,192

I can't find it.

:

00:52:30,222 --> 00:52:30,582

When you.

:

00:52:31,437 --> 00:52:34,767

The legal word affidavit

of Indi Indi Say it.

:

00:52:34,767 --> 00:52:35,097

Oh my God.

:

00:52:35,102 --> 00:52:35,502

Hugh: Indigency,

:

00:52:35,732 --> 00:52:36,342

Christine: indigency,

:

00:52:36,717 --> 00:52:37,317

Hugh: indigency.

:

00:52:37,377 --> 00:52:39,297

Well, I mean they have a

sliding scale for mediators.

:

00:52:39,327 --> 00:52:43,137

We could have a sliding scale for,

for guardian ad litem appointments.

:

00:52:43,347 --> 00:52:43,767

Christine: Oh my gosh.

:

00:52:43,767 --> 00:52:45,597

Could you imagine the people

that would sign up for that?

:

00:52:45,807 --> 00:52:46,707

Actually, I would.

:

00:52:46,707 --> 00:52:46,948

The same people.

:

00:52:47,022 --> 00:52:48,297

I would, no.

:

00:52:48,897 --> 00:52:49,077

Well,

:

00:52:49,077 --> 00:52:49,857

Hugh: I mean, I would,

:

00:52:50,007 --> 00:52:52,302

Christine: yeah, I would do it

for pro bono or something like

:

00:52:52,302 --> 00:52:52,497

that, but I think different

:

00:52:52,497 --> 00:52:53,547

Hugh: philosophical argument.

:

00:52:53,547 --> 00:52:58,527

Should we have everyone having to serve

a certain amount on cases like that?

:

00:52:58,527 --> 00:53:03,747

But I will say there, there is a

flip side to this where I saw cases

:

00:53:03,747 --> 00:53:07,137

where the clients probably hated

writing the checks for 'em, but where

:

00:53:07,137 --> 00:53:09,477

the GAL saved them a ton of money.

:

00:53:09,477 --> 00:53:16,017

And this is back where before, at least

in my experience, the FOC and the GAL

:

00:53:16,017 --> 00:53:19,857

got conflated again, where yeah, they

started acting the same way, but GS

:

00:53:20,397 --> 00:53:21,837

would be able to come to mediation.

:

00:53:22,317 --> 00:53:27,537

They were representing a

party in a disputed issue.

:

00:53:27,777 --> 00:53:31,142

Whereas , a fact witness like

an FOC, in my opinion, shouldn't

:

00:53:31,352 --> 00:53:35,372

be anywhere near a mediation,

but they oftentimes participate.

:

00:53:35,492 --> 00:53:36,782

Christine: We need to

do a deep dive on that.

:

00:53:36,782 --> 00:53:36,962

You're right.

:

00:53:36,962 --> 00:53:37,202

Hugh: Yeah.

:

00:53:37,292 --> 00:53:39,482

But when the GAL would come.

:

00:53:40,307 --> 00:53:46,217

Argue at mediation actively like a

party on behalf of the child when

:

00:53:46,217 --> 00:53:52,127

done correctly, really made a huge

difference to the bringing the

:

00:53:52,127 --> 00:53:53,807

parents together to the same side.

:

00:53:53,837 --> 00:53:58,607

I have seen it settle cases that would

have been easily, and this is when I

:

00:53:58,607 --> 00:54:03,017

billed much lower hourly rate earlier in

my career, there would've been a $20,000

:

00:54:03,047 --> 00:54:07,822

trial , easily, and got it resolved at

mediation, and it never would've happened

:

00:54:07,822 --> 00:54:12,112

in a million years if we did not have a

dedicated GAL who was there that could

:

00:54:12,112 --> 00:54:16,792

speak on behalf of the child in a way

that the parents got to sort of put aside

:

00:54:16,792 --> 00:54:20,572

their differences and their petty wishes,

or, I'm not saying petty, I'm a parent.

:

00:54:20,572 --> 00:54:24,502

I would be, I can't imagine how I

would act in those circumstances,

:

00:54:24,502 --> 00:54:26,512

but their self-interest.

:

00:54:27,172 --> 00:54:30,802

Look and hear someone articulate it

very well from the child's point of

:

00:54:30,802 --> 00:54:35,032

view that isn't interested, , doesn't

work for their soon to be ex-spouse.

:

00:54:35,482 --> 00:54:38,212

And it would make a huge difference

and it would get things settled.

:

00:54:38,212 --> 00:54:43,702

And the mediators were very good at

involving the GAL knowing, , a trained

:

00:54:43,792 --> 00:54:49,432

mediator can know whether a party

is going to be able to be swayed by

:

00:54:49,432 --> 00:54:52,162

something like that or moved by that

and then they'll incorporate them

:

00:54:52,162 --> 00:54:53,752

into a conversation and it made a

:

00:54:53,752 --> 00:54:54,802

Christine: huge difference.

:

00:54:54,922 --> 00:54:57,862

I know, but this is exactly goes

to the attorney that we talked to

:

00:54:57,862 --> 00:54:59,422

outside that will keep anonymous.

:

00:54:59,722 --> 00:55:02,992

But all of your positive

stories, Hugh, do you realize

:

00:55:02,992 --> 00:55:05,602

they're all 5, 10, 15 years old?

:

00:55:06,862 --> 00:55:07,462

Hugh: I wouldn't say that.

:

00:55:07,852 --> 00:55:10,432

Christine: The one you just

told was at least that old.

:

00:55:10,852 --> 00:55:11,302

Oh,

:

00:55:11,392 --> 00:55:12,652

Hugh: I can think of one.

:

00:55:12,712 --> 00:55:14,392

Christine: The one you

just told, how old was it?

:

00:55:14,752 --> 00:55:16,582

It was more, it was pre COVID for sure.

:

00:55:17,287 --> 00:55:20,407

Hugh: It was 'cause we were

in David's office mediating.

:

00:55:20,407 --> 00:55:21,877

So, but we were there in person.

:

00:55:21,877 --> 00:55:22,807

So it was pre COVID.

:

00:55:22,807 --> 00:55:25,982

Christine: But I think that's the whole

point, is that the notion of how bad

:

00:55:25,982 --> 00:55:28,382

it's gotten in the last five years.

:

00:55:28,412 --> 00:55:32,262

Hugh: My, the last year of practice I

had one, , who, a person you're familiar

:

00:55:32,262 --> 00:55:35,202

with saved the clients a ton of money.

:

00:55:35,202 --> 00:55:38,172

And there were people that

couldn't stand each other.

:

00:55:38,172 --> 00:55:41,802

I mean, one of the most, I

contentious, I'm glad situations and

:

00:55:42,582 --> 00:55:46,602

part of it is there's another good

attorney on the other side who would

:

00:55:46,812 --> 00:55:47,652

Christine: wanted a resolution.

:

00:55:47,652 --> 00:55:47,712

Yeah.

:

00:55:47,712 --> 00:55:48,132

Well one

:

00:55:48,132 --> 00:55:50,802

Hugh: of, we knew what was, they

were seeing things from a higher

:

00:55:50,802 --> 00:55:53,112

level and not just , the more

we fight, the more money I make.

:

00:55:53,112 --> 00:55:56,982

This is somebody that would fight

damn hard, was really good in court,

:

00:55:56,982 --> 00:55:59,262

but knew it was in the client's

best interest to work on things.

:

00:55:59,682 --> 00:55:59,742

Yeah.

:

00:55:59,742 --> 00:55:59,744

And worked.

:

00:56:00,192 --> 00:56:03,852

As I did with the GAL and we got things

resolved in a way that if you would've

:

00:56:03,852 --> 00:56:07,272

told me at the beginning of that case,

I would've bet you every penny that

:

00:56:07,272 --> 00:56:08,227

I own that couldn't have happened.

:

00:56:08,347 --> 00:56:08,677

Christine: Yeah.

:

00:56:08,917 --> 00:56:10,297

Well, that's a good positive story.

:

00:56:10,577 --> 00:56:13,097

, Remember, we are now on YouTube.

:

00:56:13,097 --> 00:56:17,687

Follow us on YouTube, Spotify,

apple YouTube, judge y.com.

:

00:56:17,957 --> 00:56:19,127

Can't wait for next week.

:

00:56:19,127 --> 00:56:19,882

We love your feedback.

:

00:56:20,027 --> 00:56:21,947

Be nice to Hugh after today, please.

:

00:56:23,687 --> 00:56:24,077

Hugh: Cheers.

:

00:56:24,107 --> 00:56:24,527

Bye.

:

00:56:25,127 --> 00:56:25,487

Peace.

:

00:56:29,367 --> 00:56:29,847

Next call.

:

00:56:29,847 --> 00:56:32,052

We need some justice, justice, justice.

:

00:56:32,487 --> 00:56:33,867

And I wanna ring bells in public.

:

00:56:34,227 --> 00:56:36,597

I wanna ring bes in public nor crowd.

:

00:56:36,657 --> 00:56:38,492

Yeah, but I To the fo Yeah.

:

00:56:38,692 --> 00:56:40,252

I To the fo Yeah.

:

00:56:40,332 --> 00:56:43,972

I to the fo fo teaser.

Next Episode All Episodes Previous Episode

Listen for free

Show artwork for The JudgeMental Podcast

About the Podcast

The JudgeMental Podcast
From the Creators of Judge-y
The JudgeMental Podcast features two attorneys, Hugh and Christine, who bring over three decades of combined litigation experience to the mic. Now venturing into a bold new initiative—"Judge-y", a website and soon-to-be app—they aim to give lawyers and litigants a platform to evaluate judges and promote accountability within the judiciary.

About your host

Profile picture for Hugh Barrow

Hugh Barrow