Family law is definitely not for many attorneys, as sometimes just the knowledge of family law court will make many attorneys RUN!!! Many attorneys are not suited for Jerry Springer soap opera type things, or for a lot of emotional and often agitated combative litigants. Much of the fighting in hallways at the Sacramento downtown courthouse formerly, was not due to criminal cases, but rather, to Family law cases.
Much of the data that goes into family law cases will revolve around the claimed actions, or non actions of the parties. For example, shared legal and joint physical custody--there are laws on these subjects obviously, but the law alone is usually not going to make or break many cases. Judges are able to make huge decisions based upon their own personal application of what is or is not in the best interests of the "child" and sometimes, this can go horribly wrong, as most people know.
So then, how many years of litigating in this type of arena would end up being so helpful to clients? The years of courtroom experience is one thing, but the types of cases seen can really make a difference. Endless routine child support hearings does very little to teach one knowledge about custody except to extent that it points out issues in how support is tied to visitation percentages. On the other hand, handling many contested custody cases can start to become boring, if there are no different facts involved.
The most interesting cases with unique issues will usually prove to be the best teaching experience; and after being in large cities with many cases, one will have seen plenty of differing scenarios. (Attorney herein has done family law, criminal law, bankruptcy, civil cases, animal law cases and federal court cases- mostly on constitutional law issues.)
If an attorney is only in the game to earn a buck, he or she might not really care what type of cases they have. Some will always be more interesting than others. However, an attorney that really wants to win a case for clients might prefer certain types of cases over others. Attorney herein personally is not into running child support cases and arguing over timeshare. It gets done, but it is just one of those tasks that goes with the territory. Going to DCSS hearings is like pulling teeth. Not interesting.
Becoming adept at Family law usually requires an attorney that can easily talk to people, and not talk down to them. Judging clients is also not a good trait, but being responsive to how the client feels is required, and that is where many attorneys may not really think too hard, because they don't need to, or have too many clients. Or, maybe the attorney is making so much income he or she doesn't really care? You wouldn't be the first one to notice it.
