Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Divorce & Family Law

Divorce & Family Law This forum is for discussing any of the legal issues involved in your divorce.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 05-25-2017, 11:20 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,472
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrleansLawyer View Post
The crux of the issue is this:
If the rules are too simple, there is a loss of procedural fairness. The rules are intended to ensure every case is dealt with fairly.
I am not sure who envoked Einstein in the conversation but to this quote I say:

Einstein: If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrleansLawyer View Post
If the rules are too complex, parties waste cost to jump through hoops and are unable to navigate them as self-represented litigants.
To this I say:

Einstein: Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrleansLawyer View Post
The process has been working to simplify over the last few decades. For example, civil matters have the simple procedures and expanded small claims court, and family matters have the FLR and a much shorter discovery process.
I think it can be simplified even more...

Einstein: Out of complexity, find simplicity!

How? Expert systems. With an expert system, we can bring new levels of simplicity to the complexity.

Einstein: Out of clutter, find simplicity. From discord, fined harmony. In the middle of difficulty, lies opportunity.

In addition...

Einstein: Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrleansLawyer View Post
Paralegals have become the main provider of services for small-dollar cases because they are more cost effective. This is a niche, similar to accountants preparing tax returns (a service that used to be the territory of lawyers).
Define: Niche
denoting or relating to products, services, or interests that appeal to a small, specialized section of the population.
When I ask Google how big the tax filing industry is (valuation) it tells me:

Quote:
Tax preparation is BIG business – there were 300k people employed at 109k firms in 2012 - generating $9 billion in revenue in 2012. The industry grew over 2% from 2010-2015, and is expected to speed up the pace of growth. Revenues of $11 billion are forecast for 2018. Tax preparation is unusual in that it provides a service to assist with a process that legally every American is required to do: submit an income tax return. Because it is required, tax preparation tends to be recession resistant.
Not sure if it is "niche" to do tax returns anymore. As well, every person is required to file taxes. Family law is "niche" in comparison to be frank. Not everyone will use the system of family law where as every has to file taxes... and dies.

The comparison is wrong in my humble opinion. In fact, I am of the opinion that your argument supports why changes need to be made to the system of family law and why.

Quote:
Family law is distinguished from these by two facts:

1 - There is no maximum value (either to your children or to a potential equalization or spousal support case)
Really? Justice Pazaratz disagrees...

Quote:
I made a fuss. I told them to stop wasting money. So they settled.
But why do we have a system in which so much tax money gets wasted, unless someone takes the time to make a fuss?
There is a maximum value in Family Law. Judges see it all the time...

Quote:
45. They can waste time, money and energy on more case conferences, motions, settlement conferences, trial management conferences, questioning, and a long trial.

46. Or, they can declare a truce; focus on their children; call in some therapeutic help (like social workers or mediators); make a few compromises; work out a plan everyone can live with – and take the kids on annual vacations to Disney World with the money they save.
If we apply the lean principals of waste to the process of family law there is a maximum value both to the system and the litigants. The system of famly law is a value chain. Sorry to say...

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrleansLawyer View Post
2 - The system is adversarial, and zero-sum, which encourages higher expenditures by a wrathful or vexatious party (and necessitates a response by the other party)
Better application of the hearsay rules could resolve a lot of the banter. Furthermore, much of the vexatious nonsense is patterned behavior that is now easily predictable with expert systems.

I know this smart person who uses Google Cloud Natural Language API combined with standard plagiarism checkers and other stuff that will not be disclosed as it is the true competitive advantage to that person's stuff, to defunk all sorts of "common crap" in affidavit wars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrleansLawyer View Post
A risk of throwing paralegals and lawyers into the same ring is that it will create a two-tier system.
More thought has to go into how to do it. Similar to the efforts the medical industry elevated the role of Nurses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrleansLawyer View Post
An option (and one that some firms utilize), is to use a paralegal-lawyer divide similar to the old solicitor-barrister divide. The paralegal meets with the client and drafts documents under the supervision of the lawyer, and the lawyer handles court appearances. Such a divide should reduce costs without reducing the quality of work.
Similar to how the medical system works. But, the difference is that the governing payment system (e.g. Family Health Team model) requires specific routing of clients through a value chain to reduce cost and resolve the "common" stuff without ever having to leverage the highest cost resource in the chain (Doctors) unless absolutely necessary.

"Family Legal Team" model needs to be figured out and made a repeatable pattern across all professionals operating in that space. Easier to do in the medical system as it is single payor system. But, a well run Family Health Care team is now more profitable than a "sole practice" family doctor.

Good Luck!
Tayken

Last edited by Tayken; 05-25-2017 at 11:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 05-25-2017, 04:16 PM
trinton's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,542
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

You really liked my nurse analogy eh. Very interesting things you have posted Tayken. Sounds like the whole system is in for an overhaul - yes I am aware that there is a family law crisis in Canada. Speaking of nurses, this whole let's let paralegals help out is starting to sound a whole lot like hey let's put a band-aid on that cut that needs stitches.

Last edited by trinton; 05-25-2017 at 04:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 05-25-2017, 04:20 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,678
OrleansLawyer is a jewel in the roughOrleansLawyer is a jewel in the roughOrleansLawyer is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Want to reduce the case load in a courthouse by a major %? Simply integrate the tax system with the legal system.
It used to be possible to sign a direction to CRA to release tax information to the other party. This was discontinued because CRA routinely rejected the release.

Quote:
Not sure if it is "niche" to do tax returns anymore.
Tax returns are now a big business. Once upon a time, however, they were not; lawyers did them as part of general legal practice.

Quote:
Family law is "niche" in comparison
Agreed. Family law is a relatively new practice area. Traditionally, the lawyers arguing a divorce case would rarely be specialists. As the law has evolved (and divorce become more common), it generates enough work to sustain a niche for some lawyers (and other professionals).

Quote:
There is a maximum value in Family Law.
Are you willing to cap the amount you can sue for if someone bungles your case?

Paralegals pay approximately 10% of the premium for professional insurance as do lawyers, for comparable coverage. This is due to the value of the cases. If a paralegal fumbles your speeding ticket, the value of the claim is likely below $10k. If your lawyer fumbles your spousal support case, the value can easily be over $100k. This difference would increase costs for paralegals, consequently driving up costs of service.

I acknowledge that the majority of insurance for lawyers appears to be due to real estate - increased costs may be less than I expect.

Quote:
Better application of the hearsay rules could resolve a lot of the banter.
Judges are presented with a dilemma of having to either rely on untried evidence to make a decision, or leave parties flapping in the wind.

Depending on jurisdiction, the overload of the family system can see parties waiting half a year for a motion of less than an hour, to have interim certainty pending trial 2-4 years away.

The longer the delay until trial, the greater the importance of interim steps. A system starved of resources encourages unscrupulous behavior by participants.

Quote:
"Family Legal Team" model needs to be figured out and made a repeatable pattern across all professionals operating in that space.
A significant disincentive to this is that Legal Aid Ontario does not support it. The two most common service providers to LAO are junior lawyers and lawyers transitioning from a firm environment to solo practice to supplement their income.

Law firms are formed by lawyers either joining an existing firm (which will continue to operate under existing practices), or starting their own firm (which has limits to the overhead / starting expenses). Once people are established they become risk-adverse and will be generally less inclined to re-work their livelihood.
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 05-25-2017, 05:41 PM
Rioe's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,213
Rioe will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrleansLawyer View Post
It used to be possible to sign a direction to CRA to release tax information to the other party. This was discontinued because CRA routinely rejected the release.
The Privacy Act says
Quote:
The central privacy principle under the Act is that personal information under the control of a government institution shall not, without the consent of the individual to whom it relates, be used by the institution except for the purpose for which the information was obtained or compiled by the institution or for a use consistent with that purpose. The Act does, however, contain a list of 13 uses and disclosures that might be permissible without the consent of the individual (e.g., national security, law enforcement, public interest).
So in a nutshell, Canadians can expect that the information they provide to one section of the government will only be used by that section of the government, for the purpose for which it was collected.

So Canadians have the right to expect that the financial information they provide to Revenue Canada will ONLY be used for calculating their taxes, and not shared with other government agencies or used for any other reason. That would include determining child support.

I suspect Revenue Canada discontinued releasing tax information because they did not want to be in violation of the Privacy Act. Plus, if Canadians believed RCA would use their financial information against them, they would be less likely to file their taxes and the government would lose out on revenue.

The best we can do is to have Judges be less patient with people who refuse to provide financial disclosure, and immediately impute a generous income to them to give them incentive to do so, or make it a court order that they provide their taxes.
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old 05-25-2017, 11:12 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,656
WorkingDAD is on a distinguished road
Default

Access to Justice Crisis: Let Paralegals Represent Ontarians in Family Court
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 05-25-2017, 11:58 PM
trinton's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,542
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default



I vote YES. ANY change to our system is better than no change. It either improves things or puts more pressure on our system that hopefully leads to it being reformed and/or fixed - yes- I am saying it is broken.

On the other hand, it will allow Legal Aid Ontario to get their panties in a bunch and think that they are not contributing to the problem.

Last edited by trinton; 05-26-2017 at 12:09 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 05-26-2017, 03:45 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Some where, out there.
Posts: 699
involveddad75 will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrleansLawyer View Post
Cases settle because people are prepared for trial, understand the risks and the range of likely results, and then settle. If you have different expectations in results then you are much less likely to settle. Experience and expertise therefore help bring about settlements.
I disagree OL, I think the vast majority of cases settle or end for one of three reasons.
1. They are emotionally spent and can't carry on the process of family court
2. They are financially spent and can't afford to keep a lawyer on retainer anymore and settle for something that they can live with rather than what is best for the child.
3. The are afraid of the aftermath be it cost consequences, that the judge will not see their truth and will reduce their access, or that they are bullied into settling either by their own lawyer, the other lawyer or the judge themselves.

I personally was subjected to all three things, I had my own lawyer tell me I was going to lose, and I had a judge at our settlement conference tell me that if he was the trial judge we would reduce my access and stick me with costs.

I proceeded to trial self-represented, I know in my hearth I couldn't settle and had to be able to hold my head high when I look into their eyes and say to them that I did everything I could to remain in their lives.

Thank goodness I did for now I have them 50% of the time. And make all the educational decisions.
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 05-26-2017, 06:40 PM
arabian's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 9,845
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

Something to consider is that an experienced lawyer may have been in front of the judge before (previous case). An experienced lawyer may have developed a relationship with the opposing counsel (previous cases). The lawyer will therefore have an idea of what the judge likes/dislikes in terms of presentation/materials. If the lawyer has a working relationship with opposing counsel it can be beneficial when it comes to negotiation. An unrepresented individual does not have any courtroom war wounds so-to-speak.

If I need to figure out forms I can go online and do my own research (which I have done in the past and it turned out just fine... now that I have observed my lawyer over many years and have examined all the various documents he produced on my behalf). I can see someone hiring a paralegal to assist them in perhaps explaining the court administrative process to them and how to fill out forms but this is information one can get for free at a courthouse or a legal aid clinic is it not?

I respect people who study hard and complete university to excel in their respective professions. Lawyers are no different. What people seem to forget is that they are business people and have operating expenses... .so that 500.00/hr lawyer is likely paying hefty insurance, a triple-net which would include office space, parking spot, clerical assistance, use of boardroom, etc. The costs can escalate, particularly for a lawyer located in prime location down-town (which they usually are in close proximity to courthouse). The overhead is pretty high. Also I would add that many people assume that all lawyers are rich. This is simply not true. They have personal expenses just like everyone else (mortgage, student loans, child/spousal support, etc.).

I believe the onus is on the client to be as organized as possible and be realistic. w.r.t. expectations (which of course should be discussed frequently throughout time lawyer or paralegal is retained.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 05-26-2017, 07:19 PM
trinton's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,542
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian View Post
The lawyer will therefore have an idea of what the judge likes/dislikes in terms of presentation/materials.

I think one thing we're missing out here is that an experienced paralegal can also become familiar with the judges and lawyers and develop relationships.

Off the bat, yes, you will likely have a better chance in suceeding with experienced counsel as opposed to a new paralegal (or a newly licensed lawyer) This can change once the paralegals become experienced, learn the game and make the necessary connections.

The lawyer doesn't automatically become a smarter person because they finished their degree and wrote their exams. Bill Gates dropped out of school to start Microsoft. I wouldn't be surprised if a paralegal recieved an honorary law degree / license.

Last edited by trinton; 05-26-2017 at 07:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old 05-26-2017, 07:56 PM
arabian's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 9,845
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

Paralegals don't go into a courtroom and go head-to-head with opposing counsel - that's the sort of experience I'm referring to.... certainly not the same thing as saying hello to a judge in the coffee room.

Paralegals don't negotiate settlements between two parties. Paralegals don't have that sort of relationship built-up with opposing counsel(s).

Actually, formally studying law at a university does indeed make you "smarter" in that field IMO. Take a look at the course content.

Sorry if my post was vague. Why have you retained a lawyer if you don't endorse their education and experience? Why haven't you merely hired a paralegal?

Last edited by arabian; 05-26-2017 at 07:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Criminal vs family court trial time lines Stillbreathing Political Issues 15 03-25-2017 12:03 PM
"Don't Panic" - What Defines Urgency Before the Court? Tayken Reference 85 11-13-2012 10:08 PM
Occupy Family Court karmaseeker Political Issues 15 10-08-2011 03:22 PM
Uttering threats allegations and its impact on Family Court. wretchedotis Divorce & Family Law 29 08-17-2011 05:27 PM
Mother frustrated with family court Grover Divorce & Family Law 14 11-09-2009 12:30 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:37 AM.