Legal Question in Business Law in Massachusetts
attorney
I have a situation where a lawyer was helping a friend and I form a partnership, he is her friend, that partnership is no longer. She said he was giving us a deal. I am still going ahead with the business, when I got his bill, it was for 100%, no discount. He seeks the $$ from me, not my ex partner. HE continues to support her requesting updates through email. IS he allowed to work with both of us, and then just with one. I am sure he is not billing her anything for his time, and I got stuck with a gross bill and she was responsible for requesting his help, I would never had his look over things she had him due, and I need to pay for it. It seems as though he is charging full price to get me for the break in partnership. The bills do not detail any of the harrassing emails she sent to me with his name on copied. Also, I know this sounds so petty, but he is tucking it to me, I know he is owed $$ for a service, but how can he charge full price to me and then nothing to her, and should he even be allowed to work with her like that. I view him as our lawyer since I got stuck with the bill. HELP
5 Answers from Attorneys
Re: attorney
Although the circumstances surrounding the break-down of the partnership may influence the analysis, probably the lawyer is acting in appropriately based on your description. Generally, you are correct that as counsel to the partnership (as well as its partners) the lawyer owed (and probably still owes) equal obligations to both partners, and is prohibited from preferring one partner's interests above another. This is generally true even though he was conducting the representation "for a friend," even if he was purportedly helping "for free," and even though a dispute arose between the partners. Once the dispute arose (or could have reasonably been foreseen), the lawyer probably had an obligation to withdraw as counsel to the partnership and partners, and advise both partners to obtain their own counsel; then do nothing more. Given his apparent missteps, you might have reasonable grounds to object to payment of his invoices, depending, of course, on the surrounding circumstances.
Re: attorney
Although the circumstances surrounding the break-down of the partnership may influence the analysis, probably the lawyer is acting in appropriately based on your description. Generally, you are correct that as counsel to the partnership (as well as its partners) the lawyer owed (and probably still owes) equal obligations to both partners, and is prohibited from preferring one partner's interests above another. This is generally true even though he was conducting the representation "for a friend," even if he was purportedly helping "for free," and even though a dispute arose between the partners. Once the dispute arose (or could have reasonably been foreseen), the lawyer probably had an obligation to withdraw as counsel to the partnership and partners, and advise both partners to obtain their own counsel; then do nothing more. Given his apparent missteps, you might have reasonable grounds to object to payment of his invoices, depending, of course, on the surrounding circumstances.
Re: attorney
Although the circumstances surrounding the break-down of the partnership may influence the analysis, probably the lawyer is acting in appropriately based on your description. Generally, you are correct that as counsel to the partnership (as well as its partners) the lawyer owed (and probably still owes) equal obligations to both partners, and is prohibited from preferring one partner's interests above another. This is generally true even though he was conducting the representation "for a friend," even if he was purportedly helping "for free," and even though a dispute arose between the partners. Once the dispute arose (or could have reasonably been foreseen), the lawyer probably had an obligation to withdraw as counsel to the partnership and partners, and advise both partners to obtain their own counsel; then do nothing more. Given his apparent missteps, you might have reasonable grounds to object to payment of his invoices, depending, of course, on the surrounding circumstances.
Re: attorney
Although the circumstances surrounding the break-down of the partnership may influence the analysis, probably the lawyer is acting in appropriately based on your description. Generally, you are correct that as counsel to the partnership (as well as its partners) the lawyer owed (and probably still owes) equal obligations to both partners, and is prohibited from preferring one partner's interests above another. This is generally true even though he was conducting the representation "for a friend," even if he was purportedly helping "for free," and even though a dispute arose between the partners. Once the dispute arose (or could have reasonably been foreseen), the lawyer probably had an obligation to withdraw as counsel to the partnership and partners, and advise both partners to obtain their own counsel; then do nothing more. Given his apparent missteps, you might have reasonable grounds to object to payment of his invoices, depending, of course, on the surrounding circumstances.
Re: attorney
Although the circumstances surrounding the break-down of the partnership may influence the analysis, probably the lawyer is acting in appropriately based on your description. Generally, you are correct that as counsel to the partnership (as well as its partners) the lawyer owed (and probably still owes) equal obligations to both partners, and is prohibited from preferring one partner's interests above another. This is generally true even though he was conducting the representation "for a friend," even if he was purportedly helping "for free," and even though a dispute arose between the partners. Once the dispute arose (or could have reasonably been foreseen), the lawyer probably had an obligation to withdraw as counsel to the partnership and partners, and advise both partners to obtain their own counsel; then do nothing more. Given his apparent missteps, you might have reasonable grounds to object to payment of his invoices, depending, of course, on the surrounding circumstances.
Related Questions & Answers
Looking for something else?
10,200 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Featured Attorneys
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
