Many people going through a divorce feel that they need an aggressive attorney to represent them, or the outcome will end up being unfair to them. At certain times during a divorce case, aggressively advocating for a client is appropriate, however constant aggression can backfire and end up costing the client a lot more financially and emotionally.
Aggression is appropriate:
- When there is a piece of legislation that resolves an issue in your favor, and the other side is ignorant of it.
- If a client is willing to spend money defending a position because it is important to his principles, even after being informed of the probability of losing.
- When the other side is using bullying tactics, it is appropriate to take an aggressive stance to demonstrate that intimidation will not work.
An attorney that is in the habit of always taking an aggressive stance can have a negative impact on the case if during settlement negotiations the lawyer persists in arguing rather than negotiating.
An illustration of this type of aggressive behavior would be during mediation when a lawyer rejects an offer and exclaims, "What a stupid offer, stop wasting everybody's time and bring something better to the table", instead of countering with another offer and allowing the negotiation process to move forward and increasing the likeliness of reaching a settlement.
The behavior in the first example does nothing to help the negotiation process and decreases the likeliness of settling. The aggression can escalate negative emotions and encourage an atmosphere of conflict rather than problem solving. A case that should be quickly settled can be drawn into an extended legal battle, costing the client an extensive amount of time and expense while potentially ending up with a worse court-ordered decision than the offers that were dismissed during negotiations. - 31397
Aggression is appropriate:
- When there is a piece of legislation that resolves an issue in your favor, and the other side is ignorant of it.
- If a client is willing to spend money defending a position because it is important to his principles, even after being informed of the probability of losing.
- When the other side is using bullying tactics, it is appropriate to take an aggressive stance to demonstrate that intimidation will not work.
An attorney that is in the habit of always taking an aggressive stance can have a negative impact on the case if during settlement negotiations the lawyer persists in arguing rather than negotiating.
An illustration of this type of aggressive behavior would be during mediation when a lawyer rejects an offer and exclaims, "What a stupid offer, stop wasting everybody's time and bring something better to the table", instead of countering with another offer and allowing the negotiation process to move forward and increasing the likeliness of reaching a settlement.
The behavior in the first example does nothing to help the negotiation process and decreases the likeliness of settling. The aggression can escalate negative emotions and encourage an atmosphere of conflict rather than problem solving. A case that should be quickly settled can be drawn into an extended legal battle, costing the client an extensive amount of time and expense while potentially ending up with a worse court-ordered decision than the offers that were dismissed during negotiations. - 31397
About the Author:
Rebecca Long Okura is a divorce attorney who also offers divorce mediation in Utah.
