7 ms·

How To Handle Lawyers Threatening You

164 points by jason_tko 16y ago

juddw 16y ago
Glad there's some positive reaction to this article. I've been threatened over nonsense too many times
dhume 16y ago
Rather reminds me of The Pirate Bay's legal threat response archive.
davidu 16y ago
This is only effective if you are prepared to put up when they call your bluff. Two more points: 1) It's almost impossible for people to not be emotional when someone is threatening them with a lawsuit and that's why it's always better to have your lawyer communicate on your behalf. 2) The part I do agree with is (which he didn't say, but it came through loud and clear) DO NOT be a pussy when someone threatens you. And, DO NOT ignore them. If they are crazy or being irrational, a logical response from you won't help. If they found a lawyer dumb enough to represent them, you need to be ready to bring out the full nuclear assault in your response. I've been sued before, named in other people's suits, threatened hundreds (literally) of times with suits and while I often take his approach, I'm ready to put up if I have to. And I've learned that if I put up, you better be prepared for the full nuclear response that I will dole out. Once I'm being sued or named in a lawsuit, the handshakes are gone and only the swords remain. I will drag every email, text message, conversation, witness you have ever dealt with related to the matter. Of course, if I'm in the wrong, I'll settle immediately. And I hope I never have someone so upset with me over something legitimate that they feel a lawsuit is their best recourse. To date, I've never been sued over anything legitimate and I've never lost a suit against me. The other party has always either settled, withdrawn their complaint, or never moved to a full-blown lawsuit.
- grav1tas 16y ago
  I think the author makes it known that when you respond like that, you better not be bluffing at all. It's puffing out your feathers AND getting ready to do battle in court. The key is don't lie down and take it from somebody if you're not in the wrong (he qualified this at the end, unfortunately it should have been at the start methinks). I agree with the rest of your post, though.
noonespecial 16y ago
I'd add that lots of lawyers of the type described are emotional, irrational bullies. Don't give them a reason to have a personal vendetta against you. I think you just want to appear to them as a bind alley with no money at the end so they'll just move along to greener pastures. Better than just yelling profanity back at them might be a hard-core "we don't negotiate with terrorists" kind of stance.
- foobarbazoo 16y ago
  Wow, feel the fear. Grow a pair!
archangel_one 16y ago
I like his point that they are probably bluffing if they send a big wordy letter with lots of precedent cases etc. A friend of mine (who is a lawyer) told me something similar; when they see a letter like that they expect they're probably full of crap. His reply is normally much more curt: "Please confirm that you are authorised to receive proceedings on behalf of your client". If I got that, I'd be worried.
- rmc 16y ago
  I'm not sure I follow. How does asking "Please confirm that you are authorised to receive proceedings on behalf of your client" frighten people?
  - patrickyeon 16y ago
    It seems to suggest to me that you're getting ready to fire back, in a legal manner. Getting ready to call their bluff, as it were.
  - ZoFreX 16y ago
    It's unemotional, calm, collected, and the absolute right thing to do. You want to serve proceedings but are making sure first they go to the right people. There's no bluffing, bragging, intimidation, it's simply getting down to business. I can see why that would be a lot scarier than threats to some people.
rprasad 16y ago
I faced off against a guy with this sort of attitude once. The case did end up in front of a judge. The judge laughed at the guy, and threatened to hold him in contempt of court. The day before the contempt hearing, we settled for double what my client had been seeking. Another guy, a doctor, threatened to report me to the bar association. I responded by reporting him to the medical board. His license was suspended for making threats. Last I heard, he'd been forced to declare bankruptcy. Another guy simply refused to cooperate with a lawsuit. I guess he was trying to prevent the case from going to trial. Problem for him was that if the case had gone to trial, we wouldn't have won nearly as much as we ended up winning in the default judgment (which does not require the other party to show up). Most lawyers who handle litigation do so because they enjoy litigation. You try the stunts this guy recommends in his blog post, and they will eat you alive. So take his "advice" with a grain of salt.
- juddw 16y ago
  Depends on if the claim is valid or not. In my experience, most legal threats are vague at best, but bullshit most of the time. Legal threats don't get in front of a judge when they're backed by bullshit. I recommend people stand up against that and not get intimidated into buckling.
- jasonlotito 16y ago
  > a doctor, threatened to report me to the bar association. I responded by reporting him to the medical board. His license was suspended for making threats. So, threatening to report a laywer to the bar association is not allowed by the medical board?
  - prodigal_erik 16y ago
    Even if you have the right to do something, you can't threaten to do it just for personal gain. That's extortion. Oddly, there's an exception for threatening a lawsuit unless you get a settlement (if it isn't clearly baseless).
  - somebear 16y ago
    I think the point was that threatening is not allowed by the medical board. If you have a legitimate complaint, I guess you are free to report the lawyer.
idlewords 16y ago
It's a not a good idea to speak to opposing counsel yourself. If you think the legal threat is baseless, send a brief polite email to that effect, and ignore everything afterwards. If you think they have a claim, talk to a lawyer. And have a plan for who to call if you get served. This is the approach I've used on the Bedbug Registry for about three years. We get about two intimidating letters a month from some fairly large hotel chains. Making legal threats directly to an attorney is about as good an idea as the lawyer threatening that he will hack your server. Resist the temptation to get in over your head.
- lionhearted 16y ago
  Context matters. In the author's context (disclaimer: I know him and think he's a good guy), the lawyer is representing a businessperson who is bankrolling them usually in order to help get the businessperson's way in business/money. In that case, forcing the businessperson to run their lawyer clock and lose money by hour and getting nothing pragmatically useful back goes a long ways. In your case, you're up against bureaucracies with deep pockets, so that strategy wouldn't work as well. Also, savvy businesspeople tend to recognize "intelligently crazy" and become a lot more wary when coming across that personality type. Someone at the HR/legal department might not flinch at at burning $20,000 in legal fees for a moral victory if they're antagonized, but in the commercial real estate world, they'd back off from that. You gotta understand the context and leverage and desires of everyone involved - in this article's case, it's not about antagonizing the lawyer so much as sending a clear message to their client ("I'm going to force you to pay lots of money in legal fees and not even flinch") - usually at that point it's not worth bringing a case, because the opportunity cost of many burnt hours and running your lawyer clock while the other side isn't running theirs is scary. And it doesn't even guarantee you'll get anything. Context, leverage, motivations - always gotta consider those. This advice is very good in the relevant contexts.
  - luffy 16y ago
    This article is so chock full of speculation and all around horrible advice it's hard to pick just one thing to criticize. If this guy's crap has worked in the past, its probably worked because he actually facts of the case in his favor, not because of these shenanigans. I feel sorry for those who take legal advice from people who are not lawyers.
mixmax 16y ago
This probably only applies to litigation lawyers, most, if not all of the lawyers I've worked with have been extremely polite and correct. They've also all had an excellent grasp of manipulation techniques and human psychology, and would see right through this bluffing behaviour in a second. Maybe it's because my experience has primarily been with M&A, contract and tax lawyers. Or maybe it's differen in Europe.
afshin 16y ago
This seems like a really easy way to dig yourself into a deep hole. Why not build a relationship with a decent attorney if you're in the habit of getting intimidating messages from lawyers regularly?
- Hubbert 16y ago
  Because it is an extremely expensive "relationship" if it happens "regularly." Even if his specific tactics are wrong, he is correct that it is very difficult to operate profitably in certain industries if you hire an attorney for every little routine legal matter.
trotsky 16y ago
It seems that this guy enjoys behaving this way foremost, and has spent some time coming up with reasons to justify his behavior as rational as a result. Some of this may in fact be good advice, but I wouldn't be inclined to trust his word on it. I highly doubt he only acts this way towards lawyers.
DanielBMarkham 16y ago
I wrote an article once for a regional magazine. The title was "Why everyone hates lawyers" As part of the gig, I got to interview some prominent lawyers at the regional level. I'll never forget the answer one gave me, "Look Daniel, lawyers are not like doctors. A doctor helps you fight a disease. Lawyers, on the other hand, fight other people. Every time you employ a lawyer in litigation, if he is successful, somebody else suffers. That means that there are going to be a lot of people out there who don't like lawyers" Lawyers exist to fight. That's their job. Even if they don't have a case ("If you have the law on your side, yell about the law, if you have the facts on your side, yell about the facts. If you have neither, just yell" I don't know if I would go making phone calls, but I would sure as hell poke back at a lawyer if he poked at me. I would like to think that folks like us with lots of ability to assimilate technical details could at least make some kind of showing -- perhaps enough to run them the ones off who are just bluffing.
- TotlolRon 16y ago
  > Lawyers exist to fight. That's their job. Lawyers fight? We are not from the same hood...
  - TotlolRon 16y ago
    Ah. That really hurts. Lawyers are fighting and downvoting is spanking. Naughty boy will not say bad things about honorable professions again. I promise.
    - TotlolRon 16y ago
      More. Please. Hurt me.
      - TotlolRon 16y ago
        MOAR fighting.
        TotlolRon 16y ago
imjoel 16y ago
Anyone else getting 403 Forbidden?
- sanjayparekh 16y ago
  Yeah, I'm getting that too.
- sean_b 16y ago
  Yup, Google Cache doesn't have the page, but Bing cache does: http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=http://hustlebear.com/2010/12/14/how-to-handle-lawyers-threatening-you/&d=549837276220&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=a5725f69,e0f1fba4 http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=http://hustlebear.com/2010/...
- DamonOehlman 16y ago
  Yep - but I figured that was the answer on how you are meant to handle things :)
- zaphar 16y ago
  Yep I'm getting the same. Guess his server wasn't prepared for publicity.
nostromo 16y ago
I once had a shady service provider that did a terrible job, so I canceled the service when about 1% of the service had been provided. (Legally, this is as specific as I should be.) They wanted payment for 100% of the service and sued me when I refused -- no joke. I suspect this is how they make a fair amount of money. So, rather than pay for my own attorney, I just bought Google AdWords for their name (which, luckily, was too general to be a real TM). I set up a simple page that explained how they behaved and how they were indeed suing me - complete with scanned documents. They took it up with Google, who just asked that I rephrase my ad. I did. Then they called me, saying they would sue me for slander. I laughed. Then they called me, asking what I wanted to take it down ASAP. I said: drop this nonsense. Never call me again. I'll do the same. Worked like a charm. If I had gone the traditional route of finding an attorney, it would have cost thousands. I think my total cost on Google was < $100.
- rorrr 16y ago
  > and sued me when I refused -- no joke So they sued you. Didn't that cost you?
  - nostromo 16y ago
    Nope. They served me, I had x amount of days to respond. I had the website up in just a few days. Meanwhile I had requested that the trial be moved to a different location, where the service was rendered, which if I remember would have taken a few months just to be considered by the court. Long before any court date they had dropped everything.
- Andys 16y ago
  Out of curiosity, how did Google ask you to word it?
  - nostromo 16y ago
    I had to change it from basically "Don't use company X; click here to read why not" to something like "Thinking of using Company X; click here to read my story". Google wants your add to promote your service/content, not demote someone else's. They also don't allow things like, "Pepsi tastes better than Coke" for what it's worth.
migpwr 16y ago
Wow! Tim Ferriss is on a roll today...
duffbeer703 16y ago
I laughed out loud when I read this, and taken at face value it is certainly not the best advice for most people. But, asserting yourself and calling people on BS is generally a smart thing to do.
grav1tas 16y ago
If you already have counsel, I was under the understanding (IANAL) that it is against conduct for the opposing counsel to talk to you directly. If they continue to call you while you're moving to get counsel and harass you, aren't they in violation of ethical standards or something? Naturally you have to retain counsel in a reasonable amount of time.
fmkamchatka 16y ago
aka How to Threaten Lawyers Handling You.
mmaunder 16y ago
Please do not follow this very bad advice. The best lawyers make an effort to keep the tone civil. If you go to trial you will see your own sarcasm presented and judges are human. Acting as.the OP suggests could get very expensive.
juddw 16y ago
I am Judd and I wrote this article. A few points I'd like to clarify: I'm not advocating bluffing, I'm advocating standing up for yourself. That's ultimately what this article is about, and perhaps why it's getting the reaction it has. Attorneys are smart to intimidate people into settling large amounts of money over absolute bullshit. Because too often it works. Most people who work hard to build their life and savings are too confused and afraid of the law to adequately fight back and defend themselves. Attorneys are hated because they're in a great position. They get to attack you with no repercussions. In fact the more fighting there is, the more they benefit. You will need to get creative to gain leverage and find their pressure points. Once someone is attacking you and you're in a fight, you either grow some balls and take some risks, or you bend over. I will repeat: If you've done someone wrong, you deserve to pay. This advice is not meant for someone in the wrong. This is about standing up to legal intimidation as a negotiating tool. From my experience that is what most legal action has been about. If you have ripped people off and they're suing you, I hope you get fucked, and I fully support the lawyer that will help do the fucking. I would never tell a moderately reasonable attorney to eat shit and go fuck yourself. I tell that to the hardcore condescending assholes. I've done it many times. It has NEVER defused the situation. They always get pissed and riled up. That's fine with me because they were already uncooperative and hostile to begin with. This is not a bluff technique, I'm making it clear that being a dick is not a productive way to deal with me. And since, in my experience, their cases have always been vague or based on bullshit, their ONLY options left after that are to pursue trial on a weak case, or become friendlier. If you're willing to look a monster in the eyes, you might find out he has no teeth.
judd_hustlebear 16y ago
I am Judd and I wrote this article. A few points I'd like to clarify: I'm not advocating bluffing, I'm advocating standing up for yourself. That's ultimately what this article is about, and perhaps why it's getting the reaction it has. Attorneys are smart to intimidate people into settling large amounts of money over absolute bullshit. Because too often it works. Most people who work hard to build their life and savings are too confused and afraid of the law to adequately fight back and defend themselves. Attorneys are hated because they're in a great position. They get to attack you with no repercussions. In fact the more fighting there is, the more they benefit. You will need to get creative to gain leverage and find their pressure points. Once someone is attacking you and you're in a fight, you either grow some balls and take some risks, or you bend over. I will repeat: If you've done someone wrong, you deserve to pay. This advice is not meant for someone in the wrong. This is about standing up to legal intimidation as a negotiating tool. From my experience that is what most legal action has been about. If you've ripped people off and they're suing you, I hope you get fucked, and I fully support the lawyer that will help do the fucking. I would never tell a moderately reasonable attorney to "eat shit and go fuck yourself". I tell that to the hardcore condescending assholes. I've done it many times. It has NEVER defused the situation. They always get pissed and riled up. That's fine with me because they were already uncooperative and hostile to begin with. This is not a bluff technique, I'm making it clear that being a dick is not a productive way to deal with me. And since, in my experience, their cases have always been vague or based on bullshit, their ONLY options left after that are to pursue trial on a weak case, or become friendlier. If you're willing to look a monster in the eyes, you just might find out he has no teeth.
- megamark16 16y ago
  Thanks for writing this, it was entertaining and somewhat educational. Mostly because to those of us who have never been sued, being sued is kind of a huge scary unknown, so hearing other's stories, even anecdotal ones, sheds a little bit of light on what to expect. The whole time I was reading your article I kept thinking about the recent stories and discussion about kids being bullied. I've tried to teach my kids not to pick fights, to play nice, but to always stand up for themselves and other kids who are being picked on. That's how I read your article; don't pick fights, but always stand up for yourself.
Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
Reminds me of the follow case involving British satirical magazine Private Eye (this quoted from Wikipedia): "An unlikely piece of British legal history occurred in the case Arkell v. Pressdram. The plaintiff was the subject of an article relating to illicit payments, and for a change the magazine Private Eye had ample evidence to back up the article. Arkell’s lawyers wrote a letter in which, unusually, they said: “Our client’s attitude to damages will depend on the nature of your reply”. The response consisted, in part, of the following: “We would be interested to know what your client’s attitude to damages would be if the nature of our reply were as follows : Fuck off”." In UK legal circles a polite way of telling someone to fuck off is to refer them to Arkell v. Pressdram.
joshuaheard 16y ago
As a lawyer, I can tell you that if you are getting a letter a week from lawyers threatening you with legal action, you are doing it wrong. Most likely, the lawyers in this article are dropping the case because the author has no money. Without "deep pockets", it's not worth it to sue. If you do get a letter from a lawyer, the first rule is never telephone. Do everything in writing. You basically have three choices: ignore the letter, respond to the letter in writing, or hire your own attorney to respond. A letter from a lawyer is usually a shot across the bow. Sometimes it ends there. If you get sued, you must hire an attorney right away. You can try writing your own letter, but it is better to hire an attorney. If you think the letter has no merits, ignore it and wait to see if they sue.
mybbor 16y ago
Great read, I leaving a comment so I don't loose track of this article!

164 points by jason_tko 16y ago

juddw 16y ago

Glad there's some positive reaction to this article. I've been threatened over nonsense too many times

dhume 16y ago

Rather reminds me of The Pirate Bay's legal threat response archive.

davidu 16y ago

This is only effective if you are prepared to put up when they call your bluff. Two more points: 1) It's almost impossible for people to not be emotional when someone is threatening them with a lawsuit and that's why it's always better to have your lawyer communicate on your behalf. 2) The part I do agree with is (which he didn't say, but it came through loud and clear) DO NOT be a pussy when someone threatens you. And, DO NOT ignore them. If they are crazy or being irrational, a logical response from you won't help. If they found a lawyer dumb enough to represent them, you need to be ready to bring out the full nuclear assault in your response. I've been sued before, named in other people's suits, threatened hundreds (literally) of times with suits and while I often take his approach, I'm ready to put up if I have to. And I've learned that if I put up, you better be prepared for the full nuclear response that I will dole out. Once I'm being sued or named in a lawsuit, the handshakes are gone and only the swords remain. I will drag every email, text message, conversation, witness you have ever dealt with related to the matter. Of course, if I'm in the wrong, I'll settle immediately. And I hope I never have someone so upset with me over something legitimate that they feel a lawsuit is their best recourse. To date, I've never been sued over anything legitimate and I've never lost a suit against me. The other party has always either settled, withdrawn their complaint, or never moved to a full-blown lawsuit.

grav1tas 16y ago
I think the author makes it known that when you respond like that, you better not be bluffing at all. It's puffing out your feathers AND getting ready to do battle in court. The key is don't lie down and take it from somebody if you're not in the wrong (he qualified this at the end, unfortunately it should have been at the start methinks). I agree with the rest of your post, though.

noonespecial 16y ago

I'd add that lots of lawyers of the type described are emotional, irrational bullies. Don't give them a reason to have a personal vendetta against you. I think you just want to appear to them as a bind alley with no money at the end so they'll just move along to greener pastures. Better than just yelling profanity back at them might be a hard-core "we don't negotiate with terrorists" kind of stance.

foobarbazoo 16y ago
Wow, feel the fear. Grow a pair!

archangel_one 16y ago

I like his point that they are probably bluffing if they send a big wordy letter with lots of precedent cases etc. A friend of mine (who is a lawyer) told me something similar; when they see a letter like that they expect they're probably full of crap. His reply is normally much more curt: "Please confirm that you are authorised to receive proceedings on behalf of your client". If I got that, I'd be worried.

rmc 16y ago
I'm not sure I follow. How does asking "Please confirm that you are authorised to receive proceedings on behalf of your client" frighten people?
- patrickyeon 16y ago
  It seems to suggest to me that you're getting ready to fire back, in a legal manner. Getting ready to call their bluff, as it were.
- ZoFreX 16y ago
  It's unemotional, calm, collected, and the absolute right thing to do. You want to serve proceedings but are making sure first they go to the right people. There's no bluffing, bragging, intimidation, it's simply getting down to business. I can see why that would be a lot scarier than threats to some people.

rprasad 16y ago

I faced off against a guy with this sort of attitude once. The case did end up in front of a judge. The judge laughed at the guy, and threatened to hold him in contempt of court. The day before the contempt hearing, we settled for double what my client had been seeking. Another guy, a doctor, threatened to report me to the bar association. I responded by reporting him to the medical board. His license was suspended for making threats. Last I heard, he'd been forced to declare bankruptcy. Another guy simply refused to cooperate with a lawsuit. I guess he was trying to prevent the case from going to trial. Problem for him was that if the case had gone to trial, we wouldn't have won nearly as much as we ended up winning in the default judgment (which does not require the other party to show up). Most lawyers who handle litigation do so because they enjoy litigation. You try the stunts this guy recommends in his blog post, and they will eat you alive. So take his "advice" with a grain of salt.

juddw 16y ago
Depends on if the claim is valid or not. In my experience, most legal threats are vague at best, but bullshit most of the time. Legal threats don't get in front of a judge when they're backed by bullshit. I recommend people stand up against that and not get intimidated into buckling.
jasonlotito 16y ago
> a doctor, threatened to report me to the bar association. I responded by reporting him to the medical board. His license was suspended for making threats. So, threatening to report a laywer to the bar association is not allowed by the medical board?
- prodigal_erik 16y ago
  Even if you have the right to do something, you can't threaten to do it just for personal gain. That's extortion. Oddly, there's an exception for threatening a lawsuit unless you get a settlement (if it isn't clearly baseless).
- somebear 16y ago
  I think the point was that threatening is not allowed by the medical board. If you have a legitimate complaint, I guess you are free to report the lawyer.

idlewords 16y ago

It's a not a good idea to speak to opposing counsel yourself. If you think the legal threat is baseless, send a brief polite email to that effect, and ignore everything afterwards. If you think they have a claim, talk to a lawyer. And have a plan for who to call if you get served. This is the approach I've used on the Bedbug Registry for about three years. We get about two intimidating letters a month from some fairly large hotel chains. Making legal threats directly to an attorney is about as good an idea as the lawyer threatening that he will hack your server. Resist the temptation to get in over your head.

lionhearted 16y ago
Context matters. In the author's context (disclaimer: I know him and think he's a good guy), the lawyer is representing a businessperson who is bankrolling them usually in order to help get the businessperson's way in business/money. In that case, forcing the businessperson to run their lawyer clock and lose money by hour and getting nothing pragmatically useful back goes a long ways. In your case, you're up against bureaucracies with deep pockets, so that strategy wouldn't work as well. Also, savvy businesspeople tend to recognize "intelligently crazy" and become a lot more wary when coming across that personality type. Someone at the HR/legal department might not flinch at at burning $20,000 in legal fees for a moral victory if they're antagonized, but in the commercial real estate world, they'd back off from that. You gotta understand the context and leverage and desires of everyone involved - in this article's case, it's not about antagonizing the lawyer so much as sending a clear message to their client ("I'm going to force you to pay lots of money in legal fees and not even flinch") - usually at that point it's not worth bringing a case, because the opportunity cost of many burnt hours and running your lawyer clock while the other side isn't running theirs is scary. And it doesn't even guarantee you'll get anything. Context, leverage, motivations - always gotta consider those. This advice is very good in the relevant contexts.
- luffy 16y ago
  This article is so chock full of speculation and all around horrible advice it's hard to pick just one thing to criticize. If this guy's crap has worked in the past, its probably worked because he actually facts of the case in his favor, not because of these shenanigans. I feel sorry for those who take legal advice from people who are not lawyers.

mixmax 16y ago

This probably only applies to litigation lawyers, most, if not all of the lawyers I've worked with have been extremely polite and correct. They've also all had an excellent grasp of manipulation techniques and human psychology, and would see right through this bluffing behaviour in a second. Maybe it's because my experience has primarily been with M&A, contract and tax lawyers. Or maybe it's differen in Europe.

afshin 16y ago

This seems like a really easy way to dig yourself into a deep hole. Why not build a relationship with a decent attorney if you're in the habit of getting intimidating messages from lawyers regularly?

Hubbert 16y ago
Because it is an extremely expensive "relationship" if it happens "regularly." Even if his specific tactics are wrong, he is correct that it is very difficult to operate profitably in certain industries if you hire an attorney for every little routine legal matter.

trotsky 16y ago

It seems that this guy enjoys behaving this way foremost, and has spent some time coming up with reasons to justify his behavior as rational as a result. Some of this may in fact be good advice, but I wouldn't be inclined to trust his word on it. I highly doubt he only acts this way towards lawyers.

DanielBMarkham 16y ago

I wrote an article once for a regional magazine. The title was "Why everyone hates lawyers" As part of the gig, I got to interview some prominent lawyers at the regional level. I'll never forget the answer one gave me, "Look Daniel, lawyers are not like doctors. A doctor helps you fight a disease. Lawyers, on the other hand, fight other people. Every time you employ a lawyer in litigation, if he is successful, somebody else suffers. That means that there are going to be a lot of people out there who don't like lawyers" Lawyers exist to fight. That's their job. Even if they don't have a case ("If you have the law on your side, yell about the law, if you have the facts on your side, yell about the facts. If you have neither, just yell" I don't know if I would go making phone calls, but I would sure as hell poke back at a lawyer if he poked at me. I would like to think that folks like us with lots of ability to assimilate technical details could at least make some kind of showing -- perhaps enough to run them the ones off who are just bluffing.

TotlolRon 16y ago
> Lawyers exist to fight. That's their job. Lawyers fight? We are not from the same hood...
- TotlolRon 16y ago
  Ah. That really hurts. Lawyers are fighting and downvoting is spanking. Naughty boy will not say bad things about honorable professions again. I promise.
  - TotlolRon 16y ago
    More. Please. Hurt me.
    - TotlolRon 16y ago
      MOAR fighting.
      - TotlolRon 16y ago

imjoel 16y ago

Anyone else getting 403 Forbidden?

sanjayparekh 16y ago
Yeah, I'm getting that too.
sean_b 16y ago
Yup, Google Cache doesn't have the page, but Bing cache does: http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=http://hustlebear.com/2010/12/14/how-to-handle-lawyers-threatening-you/&d=549837276220&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=a5725f69,e0f1fba4 http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=http://hustlebear.com/2010/...
DamonOehlman 16y ago
Yep - but I figured that was the answer on how you are meant to handle things :)
zaphar 16y ago
Yep I'm getting the same. Guess his server wasn't prepared for publicity.

nostromo 16y ago

I once had a shady service provider that did a terrible job, so I canceled the service when about 1% of the service had been provided. (Legally, this is as specific as I should be.) They wanted payment for 100% of the service and sued me when I refused -- no joke. I suspect this is how they make a fair amount of money. So, rather than pay for my own attorney, I just bought Google AdWords for their name (which, luckily, was too general to be a real TM). I set up a simple page that explained how they behaved and how they were indeed suing me - complete with scanned documents. They took it up with Google, who just asked that I rephrase my ad. I did. Then they called me, saying they would sue me for slander. I laughed. Then they called me, asking what I wanted to take it down ASAP. I said: drop this nonsense. Never call me again. I'll do the same. Worked like a charm. If I had gone the traditional route of finding an attorney, it would have cost thousands. I think my total cost on Google was < $100.

rorrr 16y ago
> and sued me when I refused -- no joke So they sued you. Didn't that cost you?
- nostromo 16y ago
  Nope. They served me, I had x amount of days to respond. I had the website up in just a few days. Meanwhile I had requested that the trial be moved to a different location, where the service was rendered, which if I remember would have taken a few months just to be considered by the court. Long before any court date they had dropped everything.
Andys 16y ago
Out of curiosity, how did Google ask you to word it?
- nostromo 16y ago
  I had to change it from basically "Don't use company X; click here to read why not" to something like "Thinking of using Company X; click here to read my story". Google wants your add to promote your service/content, not demote someone else's. They also don't allow things like, "Pepsi tastes better than Coke" for what it's worth.

migpwr 16y ago

Wow! Tim Ferriss is on a roll today...

duffbeer703 16y ago

I laughed out loud when I read this, and taken at face value it is certainly not the best advice for most people. But, asserting yourself and calling people on BS is generally a smart thing to do.

grav1tas 16y ago

If you already have counsel, I was under the understanding (IANAL) that it is against conduct for the opposing counsel to talk to you directly. If they continue to call you while you're moving to get counsel and harass you, aren't they in violation of ethical standards or something? Naturally you have to retain counsel in a reasonable amount of time.

fmkamchatka 16y ago

aka How to Threaten Lawyers Handling You.

mmaunder 16y ago

Please do not follow this very bad advice. The best lawyers make an effort to keep the tone civil. If you go to trial you will see your own sarcasm presented and judges are human. Acting as.the OP suggests could get very expensive.

juddw 16y ago

I am Judd and I wrote this article. A few points I'd like to clarify: I'm not advocating bluffing, I'm advocating standing up for yourself. That's ultimately what this article is about, and perhaps why it's getting the reaction it has. Attorneys are smart to intimidate people into settling large amounts of money over absolute bullshit. Because too often it works. Most people who work hard to build their life and savings are too confused and afraid of the law to adequately fight back and defend themselves. Attorneys are hated because they're in a great position. They get to attack you with no repercussions. In fact the more fighting there is, the more they benefit. You will need to get creative to gain leverage and find their pressure points. Once someone is attacking you and you're in a fight, you either grow some balls and take some risks, or you bend over. I will repeat: If you've done someone wrong, you deserve to pay. This advice is not meant for someone in the wrong. This is about standing up to legal intimidation as a negotiating tool. From my experience that is what most legal action has been about. If you have ripped people off and they're suing you, I hope you get fucked, and I fully support the lawyer that will help do the fucking. I would never tell a moderately reasonable attorney to eat shit and go fuck yourself. I tell that to the hardcore condescending assholes. I've done it many times. It has NEVER defused the situation. They always get pissed and riled up. That's fine with me because they were already uncooperative and hostile to begin with. This is not a bluff technique, I'm making it clear that being a dick is not a productive way to deal with me. And since, in my experience, their cases have always been vague or based on bullshit, their ONLY options left after that are to pursue trial on a weak case, or become friendlier. If you're willing to look a monster in the eyes, you might find out he has no teeth.

judd_hustlebear 16y ago

I am Judd and I wrote this article. A few points I'd like to clarify: I'm not advocating bluffing, I'm advocating standing up for yourself. That's ultimately what this article is about, and perhaps why it's getting the reaction it has. Attorneys are smart to intimidate people into settling large amounts of money over absolute bullshit. Because too often it works. Most people who work hard to build their life and savings are too confused and afraid of the law to adequately fight back and defend themselves. Attorneys are hated because they're in a great position. They get to attack you with no repercussions. In fact the more fighting there is, the more they benefit. You will need to get creative to gain leverage and find their pressure points. Once someone is attacking you and you're in a fight, you either grow some balls and take some risks, or you bend over. I will repeat: If you've done someone wrong, you deserve to pay. This advice is not meant for someone in the wrong. This is about standing up to legal intimidation as a negotiating tool. From my experience that is what most legal action has been about. If you've ripped people off and they're suing you, I hope you get fucked, and I fully support the lawyer that will help do the fucking. I would never tell a moderately reasonable attorney to "eat shit and go fuck yourself". I tell that to the hardcore condescending assholes. I've done it many times. It has NEVER defused the situation. They always get pissed and riled up. That's fine with me because they were already uncooperative and hostile to begin with. This is not a bluff technique, I'm making it clear that being a dick is not a productive way to deal with me. And since, in my experience, their cases have always been vague or based on bullshit, their ONLY options left after that are to pursue trial on a weak case, or become friendlier. If you're willing to look a monster in the eyes, you just might find out he has no teeth.

megamark16 16y ago
Thanks for writing this, it was entertaining and somewhat educational. Mostly because to those of us who have never been sued, being sued is kind of a huge scary unknown, so hearing other's stories, even anecdotal ones, sheds a little bit of light on what to expect. The whole time I was reading your article I kept thinking about the recent stories and discussion about kids being bullied. I've tried to teach my kids not to pick fights, to play nice, but to always stand up for themselves and other kids who are being picked on. That's how I read your article; don't pick fights, but always stand up for yourself.

Tyrannosaurs 16y ago

Reminds me of the follow case involving British satirical magazine Private Eye (this quoted from Wikipedia): "An unlikely piece of British legal history occurred in the case Arkell v. Pressdram. The plaintiff was the subject of an article relating to illicit payments, and for a change the magazine Private Eye had ample evidence to back up the article. Arkell’s lawyers wrote a letter in which, unusually, they said: “Our client’s attitude to damages will depend on the nature of your reply”. The response consisted, in part, of the following: “We would be interested to know what your client’s attitude to damages would be if the nature of our reply were as follows : Fuck off”." In UK legal circles a polite way of telling someone to fuck off is to refer them to Arkell v. Pressdram.

joshuaheard 16y ago

As a lawyer, I can tell you that if you are getting a letter a week from lawyers threatening you with legal action, you are doing it wrong. Most likely, the lawyers in this article are dropping the case because the author has no money. Without "deep pockets", it's not worth it to sue. If you do get a letter from a lawyer, the first rule is never telephone. Do everything in writing. You basically have three choices: ignore the letter, respond to the letter in writing, or hire your own attorney to respond. A letter from a lawyer is usually a shot across the bow. Sometimes it ends there. If you get sued, you must hire an attorney right away. You can try writing your own letter, but it is better to hire an attorney. If you think the letter has no merits, ignore it and wait to see if they sue.

mybbor 16y ago

Great read, I leaving a comment so I don't loose track of this article!