Originally posted by Kinso
View Post
Templates have very little value if you do not understand the terms both parties are agreeing to. This is a KEY service that is delivered by legal counsel that no template can provide properly.
The majority of separations are over-the-table agreements that never get filed or followed because both parents are reasonable. This is how it should be. Parents need to be reasonable... Even more reasonable when separating when kids are involved.
Where the chat 22 happens is when one (or both) parents disagree on the content of the agreement. Or when they go to file for a divorce and attach the table-top agreement to their paperwork and a judge rejects it.
As well, a judge can only enforce reasonable elements of the agreement that are properly worded. If a judge needs a roulette wheel, dart board, Ouija Board and a Magic 8 Ball to figure out your agreement its garbage and will be tossed.
First Right of Refusal (FRR) clauses are excellent examples where voodoo is required and are often thrown out by judges.
What a lawyer brings to the table is a wealth of knowledge of what a "judge" would be willing to and can enforce! As stated by Kinso doing an "agreement" doesn't take long... Getting to the simple language and agreement (or order) is the hard part.
My rules on agreements:
1. Written so a grade 8 educated person and read it and understand it.
2. What is agreed to is legally allowed. (For example, you can't put your own police enforcement clause into a table-top agreement.)
3. If children are involved it needs a proper access schedule and clearly define custody and how decisions are made.
There is an interesting software engineering "anti-pattern" that applies to legal templates. It is called "cut-and-paste programming".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copy-a...te_programming
https://sourcemaking.com/antipattern...te-programming
Basically, software developers who don't understand the software language will often seek out "examples" and cut-and-paste them together to arrive at what they think the solution is... Trying to develop a legal agreement in the similar anti-pattern results in the same issues.
There are a lot of anti-patterns that "self represented" litigants do to avoid costs which just increases their costs (personal frustration and $$$). Don't cut-and-paste what you don't understand.
Good Luck!
Tayken
Leave a comment: