If you are in the legal profession how regular is it to ditch a client?

[OhioOhioOhio]

How readily would it be done and why?

To frightened to say too much but very very interested. Please?

The partners at my firm will not tolerate rude unpleasant clients.

I wish mine were the same!

If the relationship of trust and confidence breaks down then you can and should let that client go. That is the main criteria for being able to do so, as a solicitor.

So reading between the lines, he has done something, behaved in a certain way, or revealed something which has broken that trust and confidence and the firm cannot in good faith continue to act.

Oh Beach, no need. I found it helpful.

It cant be because hes rude. Theyd have ditched him long ago if it was that.

Weird to feel sorry for your estrabges abusive stbxh lawyer eh?

Also, in my profession there are loads of code words for speaking in between the lines without being too disloyal. Do lawyers do the same?

No, not really. Especially not during an ongoing case as we have to be so careful not to prejudice anything.

And would you take on a client who had a case onwards of 3 years olus with no conclusion? To me it stinks but as you all point out im a bit clutching at straws

Generally speaking the risk factor is having had more than 2 previous firms on the same matter, so if he has only engaged one solicitor then probably not an issue. 3 years is not unheard of and sometimes a change of solicitor is needed to get things moving again. Some people like taking on clients in that situation. I don’t get that particularly myelf.

Beach, whats the 'third sector'

Third sector is not for profit/community/voluntary. They would most likely be ongoing advice clients who can be ditched. It’s much harder when litigation is half way through as with a family case.

Solicitor here.

Have only once had to apply to come off the record and give reasons to the court. There were lots of reasons but focussed in unpaid bills as that in itself is a good enough reason. Avoided getting into hot water with making un-evidence remakes about client's relationship with the truth...

Usually when there is trouble, client will go somewhere else of their own accord.

Court will not read anything into it. Specially in divorce, people run out of money and got it alone. Different in crime, when the accused ditches their (sometimes free) solicitor midway through trial or even worse, the solicitor/barrister resigns half way through.

Well he has told so, so, so many lies i do hope it is finally about to bite him hard on the bum.

Charities/non-commercial organisations and such like.

Yes, they were on-going advice clients.

Interesting thread -

Lots saying it's rare, my ex was ditched twice! The lawyer he had at the end did not have a good reputation.

I'd switched lawyer as first one was so slow!

Went to another firm on recommendation by a paralegal friend (didn't know her when I'd started) my new lawyer was spot on!

Friend found out ex was indeed ditched for continually lying to them!

It wasn't divorce but contact with dd that was the issue - here's the thing he was claiming I was preventing contact but I was actually doing the opposite. Very frustrating time for me. I took way too long to twig that I needed to make sure I had proof of when he was late or showed up pissed thinking I'd let him drive dd.

So then when my lawyer got a letter from his lawyer saying "contact was denied on X date at X time" I was able to show through various means that actually I had made dd available.

Apparently first 2 lawyers got fed up being left to make fools of themselves. 3rd lawyer my lawyer & paralegal friend said she was basically who you ended up with when nobody else would have you!

I think you're probably pinning too much on this OP. The judge is highly unlikely to speculate, even privately, as why representation status has changed. It happens all the time, for multiple reasons.
Certainly he shouldn't be obtaining documents illegally - your solicitor will know about the Imerman case. But please don't think that if the court finds him guilty of some misdemeanour or that he's lied, his whole case falls apart. It won't. He's still got entitlement according to the statutory criteria. Your solicitor will obviously give specific advice.

If he plans on using evidence illegally obtained by hacking it literally won’t make it into the court room.
All evidence used has to be put into a “bundle” which is assembled by the Applicant for the hearing. This is mutually agreed by the parties before being submitted to the court in advance of the hearing. Your solicitor may write in your position statement that it has been an arduous process preparing the bundle due to the viability of the evidence submitted by the husband.
He can’t just pull a bit of paper out during the hearing that you haven’t seen. The court won’t allow it, so he may be in a position of turning up with no evidence.
If he is the applicant and is now without representation the onus is on you to get your legal team to prepare the bundle.
I represented myself as the respondent and still ended up doing the bundle as his representative dropped him at the last minute- he wouldn’t provide the information they needed (bank statements etc) so he was also unrepresented on the day despite affording legal advice throughout.
The judge made mincemeat of him. It was glorious!

Patchy I am very lucky at work in that respect. Backed up every time. I have to say that in my experience it is quite rare. Most firms are too scared of losing clients and the loss of potential income.